The repeal of section 59 of the crimes act relating to child abuse in my opinion is greatly flawed, and came to be law through somewhat deceptive means (i will explain what i mean by this later on in other postings).
Personally I am a bit conflicted in terms of my opinions on this issue, while I in no way condone child abuse in any way, I have never really had a problem with a child being punished with a smack. I had never really thought of a smack as abuse, I can understand that given the physical nature of the act that it can definitely lead to abuse, but lighting a match can start a fire, should we burn matches? The comparison is a little crude but you get my point. The only confliction I have is that making it illegal to smack may stop the odd parent from smacking, by extension it could stop that smacking turning to abuse and eventually leading to the death of a child (as of yet the changes to the law haven’t changed any statistics relating to the deaths of children caused by child abuse).
2 comments:
Good topic!
i agree with you.
My brothers and i were smacked as discipline growing up and we're all perfectly fine.
Smacking is discipline.
But open fists and using other things to hit the child with is abuse.
so they definetly have to clear that up.
because in general most parents don't do get to physical.by bringing this in it's making criminals of our parents.
Nice to see serious topic like this.
Melissa I am agree with you about smacking is discipline. yes i smacked too as a disipline but some parents do smack not in a way what we think they are addicted what i mean is when they cannot cope with children they choose easy way which is smacking or other things like that..
if it is just for dicipline i think they should but otherwise its abuse.
As you said they absolutely need to clear that up..
Post a Comment