New Children's Commissioner backs proposed smacking ban
The new Children's Commissioner fully supports the Council of Europe's proposed ban on smacking children and is lobbying for every form of violence against them to be abolished from legislation and common practice.
Following in the footsteps of her predecessor, Carmen Zammit, who had echoed the call for a ban on smacking, the recently-appointed Helen D'Amato is promoting the adoption of a zero-tolerance approach.
She is urging full compliance with the UN Convention, which states that "no child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".
Given the zero tolerance of violence between adults, particularly within a family context, with protection in place through the Domestic Violence Act, she questioned why children deserved any less.
In addition to abolishing corporal punishment in legislation, however, the parents themselves must play a pivotal role in eliminating this practice, she said.
So far, 21 countries have abolished corporal punishment against children but the CoE is seeking a Europe-wide spanking ban in view of opposition in France and Britain, for example, where parents consider such measures an invasion of privacy.
Maltese legislation allows for "reasonable chastisement" in the home, possibly blurring the line between physical abuse and the mere restraining of children. The clause means Malta is in breach of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Social Charter.
Unfortunately, Ms D'Amato said, violence as a means of discipline was deeply ingrained and accepted in Maltese culture, with many parents resorting to smacking their children as if it were the only effective way of bringing them up disciplined and respectful.
She said it was crucial that the abolishment of corporal punishment went hand in hand with campaigns on positive parenting, as Aġenzija Appoġġ was undertaking. Through such programmes, parents could be supported in their parental duties, bringing up children in a non-violent way.
"It is crucial that children are disciplined and taught responsibility and respect for others, including their parents. However, such discipline should be in the form of guidance and direction rather than violence and humiliation," Ms D'Amato said.
However, the issue is not that clear cut and some may feel that smacking a child is not abuse and banning it would be taking the issue too far.
A British lawyer, specialising in children's rights, who recently suggested Malta remove the clause of reasonable chastisement from the Criminal Code, was met with a barrage of criticism from the public, who wrote in to say they saw nothing wrong with a slap, which they themselves had experienced, and that children were getting out of control.
According to psychotherapists, who were asked whether the proposed ban was excessive, smacking was never a positive thing.
Clinical psychologist and psychotherapist Edward Curmi maintained that, while smacking should never be resorted to because, unconsciously, it could invite the children to do the same when they felt frustrated, parents were also human beings and, at times, could lose their patience.
"What is crucial is that such behaviour should not be repetitive and constant," he said. "We shouldn't verge on the ridiculous and call a little tap on the bottom violence. Although, obviously, too much of anything is never good."
Dott. Curmi said hitting children for no obvious reason was never advisable and parents had to learn how to be more intelligent when it came to controlling their emotions.
"Smacking is an exertion of control, or an expression of frustration and anger. Smacking adults is illegal, so the same should be said for children," said psychotherapist Mariella Balzan.
She added that, if smacking was banned in Malta, it should be done in line with planning to effectively inform parents of alternative ways of disciplining their children. Authority could be feared, or respected, and children needed to be taught the latter, Ms Dimech said.
"Children will not obey because they are smacked. They will either get angry, humiliated or afraid."
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Eric Gahn
May 28th 2010, 11:00
I would rather see parents be educated what 'reasonable chastisement' is than putting an outright ban. Everyone knows about the carrot and the stick. That is so if the carrot does nto work, the stick can always be resorted to. And no, I am NOT saying to beat children with a stick. What I am saying is that when the good ways fails, a little corporal punishment is good.
This is a case were the State is clearly interfering in the lives of people.
Maria Caruana
May 28th 2010, 11:20
Where do you draw the line in what is reasonable chastisement and what is not? The law leaves it too open to interpretation.
S. Fenech
May 28th 2010, 11:42
I know it is difficult to find the line. However, I remember myself getting afraid of my father by his slightest look...and he never smacked me. But I knew he could, and the fact that there was the possibility was enough for me to built my respect towards his authority. I vouch on this...my parents he never resorted to smacking or corporal punishment and always discussed with my brother and me anything which had to be straightened out.
Today's children have become aware at a much earlier age of these impositions on parents and what we are getting are kids who are not afraid of any kind of authority. Teachers at primary schools are indicating that kids are becoming very difficult to control.
I try to speak to my children, and as much as possible I try to teach them how to respect others. When it comes to punishment I normally resort to some kind of grounding. But there are times where it is very to find punishments to resort to as you stop them from doing something and they quickly resort to something else to do.
Am I failing as a parent?
Paul Vella
May 28th 2010, 13:25
Whatever these commissioners try to impose upon me, I would always bring up my children the way I believe to be the best. I expect that everyone will do the same and not buckle under this mediocrity. When a parent comes to decide what form of punishment shall be applied to an incorrigible child (like I used to be were it not for my mother, God bless her) they should always keep in mind that it is much better to be strict with your own children yourself than having them face CCF and drug rehabiliation programmes later on in life because they are not capable to exert control upon themselves when they are udults. Keep that in mind and shut out everything which these Mr. & Mrs. know-it-all are trying to get through to us. At the end parents are the only ones who shall be blessed or cursed by their own children when these grow up. Commissioners just come and go with no possibility of remaining accountable for what they are trying to 'teach' us.
DVella
May 28th 2010, 15:47
THe old adage 'Spare the rod and spoil the child' is still as true as the day it was first coined . . . it is painfully obvious in some of the younger generation in their obnoxious 'spoilt brat' attitude and the way they expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter without having to work for it . . . of course I am not saying a rod should be used . . . nor any sort of hard object but then again, corporal punishment is necessary at times and I am sure I am not alone in resenting this 'Taliban' style approach . . . why do we have to try and appear holier than the pope??? Why are parents now being placed at the full mercy of children with the blessing of the law . . . leaving them open to all sorts of blackmail and coercion by children trying to get whatever they want??? The way we're going it will be illegal to even correct a child in a few years!!!!!!