Consultation on the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill

Tystiolaeth i’r Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl Ifanc ac Addysg ar gyfer craffu Cyfnod 1 Bil Plant (Diddymu Amddiffyniad Cosb Resymol) (Cymru)

Evidence submitted to the Children, Young People and Education Committee for Stage 1 scrutiny of the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill

CADRP-161

CADRP-161

 

About you

Individual

1      The Bill’s general principles

1.1     Do you support the principles of the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill?

— No

1.2     Please outline your reasons for your answer to question 1.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

Loving parents demonstrate their love by teaching their children right from wrong. This process involves several methods that are appropriate to individual circumstances and the seriousness of the lesson to be learnt. Every child is an individual and it should not be forgotten that what works for one child does not work for the next. Smacking is never to be the expression of anger but is the considered response of the parent or guardian to a situation where it is the only way to make the point that the child has behaved dangerously or unacceptably. Loving and reasonable discipline IS NOT ABUSE! On the contrary to fail to teach a child right from wrong is an act of neglect.

1.3     Do you think there is a need for legislation to deliver what this Bill is trying to achieve?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

CERTAINLY NOT! The existing law speaks of "reasonable chastisement" whereas the proposed bill would equate loving parents acting in their child's best interest with those who for a variety of unacceptable reasons abuse children.

2      The Bill’s implementation

2.1     Do you have any comments about any potential barriers to  implementing the Bill? If no, go to question 3.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

We all agree that child abuse is totally unacceptable and that resources must be available to protect vulnerable children. As stated above correct and judicial use of smacking is not abuse and to detract resources from the protection from real abuse would be criminally negligent, while at the same time it would lead to the criminalising of devoted parents and could result in removal of children from a loving and caring home. This would increase the burden on child care services and cause an unnecessarily disrupted childhood for those concerned.

2.2     Do you think the Bill takes account of these potential barriers?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

How can it when it starts from the premiss that smacking is abuse? It is of a fixed position which does not acknowledge that the 2017 Com Res poll found that 76% were against the Bill and only 11% in favour of this issue.

3      Unintended consequences

3.1     Do you think there are there any unintended consequences arising from the Bill? If no, go to question 4.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

Do you really want to see children put into the care system when their parents are those best placed to bring them up even if their views differ from yours and when their of family life demonstrates loving care?

4      Financial implications

4.1     Do you have any comments on the financial implications of the Bill (as set out in Part 2 of the Explanatory Memorandum)? If no, go to question 5.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

5      Other considerations

5.1     Do you have any other points you wish to raise about this Bill?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

The current law protects children from abuse. Governments are to serve the people and not to undermine the family which is the most important element of society. Government should support the family and not impose minority views on the majority.