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-322

CADRP-322

 

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)

Under existing law, parents in England and Wales are allowed to ‘reasonably chastise’ their children. This is set out in Section 58 of the Children Act 2004. Smacking is not child abuse. Smacking is used by loving parents to discipline their children in a controlled loving way in order to teach their child the difference between right and wrong. The child understands that their parent loves them and wants to teach them obedience which will help them grow into a caring, disciplined adult. It is completely wrong and misleading to confuse child abuse with smacking. Loving, caring parents who choose smacking when needed find child abuse abhorrent.

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)

There is already legislation in place to safeguard children. All this bill will do is criminalise loving parents. However, if the political arena insist in exploring this further, there  needs to be open, honest conversation between political leaders and the public discussing evidence based research. A bill cannot and must not be changed for the sake of it!

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)

-

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)

-

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)

Absolutely! Those calling for the ban fail to take into account the unique relationship between parents and their children. Criminalising smacking would represent a fundamental shift in the legal relationship between parents and children. Children depend on their parents to teach and guide them morale codes; what is right and wrong, how to behave at home, schools, play time, this leads to life skills and how to interact with other human beings offering respect and dignity. The consequences of not providing proper discipline may lead to the child getting into trouble with law from an early age just because their parents were not allowed to use reasonable chastisement from an age of understanding. Furthermore, there is potential significance on the police force whereby their workload will increase in investigating loving parents and their vital time and resources will be taken from serious issues. This has an impact on the public purse as well as police valuable time. Healthcare staff will be overwhelmed with completing reports should they hear/see a parent smacking a child despite the staff member recognising that this will have been done in a loving controlled manner. Healthcare staff already have a duty of care to recognise and report child abuse, this is part of “safeguarding children ‘ module in mandatory training. Furthermore there is research from Sweden to show that child on child violence increased by 1,791% between 1984 and 2010 since their government introduced the smacking ban. A serious unintended consequence!!

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)

Whilst watching the debate on Senedd TV, It was completely transparent that Julie Morgan has done no research into the financial implications. As a tax payer, I would expect a full breakdown of how this would be costed and where the money would be allocated from! Our financial situation in our healthcare in Wales And Education in Wales is at breaking point and would object most emphatically that the money there is protected. But also, Julie Morgan must provide a clear proposal of projected costs for public scrutiny!

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)

-