Liberals Set To Repeal Spanking Law In Canada

"Liberals Vow To Scrap 'Spanking' Law" is the headline in this morning's Toronto Star.

The Liberal government plans to repeal a law that protects parents who include spanking in their disciplinary tool kits, which child advocates say would send a strong message that physical punishment - even when well intentioned - is harmful to children.

I don't think this is a good idea, myself. I think it is a little unrealistic in the sense that it places too much of a burden on parents to come up with alternative forms of insistence that willful children behave, when a swat on the butt is often the quickest and most effective way of making the point.

Busy parents don't always have time for "time outs" and negotiating processes.

I think that if parents are going to be prevented by law from physically disciplining children, there is a danger that forms of psychological and emotional discipline will be employed as alternatives. I think that an emotionally neutral swat on the posterior is much preferable to a verbally delivered swat on the psyche.

Words really can hurt worse than blows. I think the intention to ban spankings is ill considered and could lead to all manner of mental health issues among children and among parents.

How does the government intend to prevent parents from strategizing on a psychological level in preparation for the next time they have to verbally discipline a child?

I would like the Liberal government to come up with a pro forma statement to be read by parents to children in need of correction. The idea is ridiculous, of course, but it hints at the sort of mischief that can start when the State oversteps its mandate and begins to interfere in family life.

The spanking law should be left alone.

a reply to: ipsedixit

I would like the liberal government to stay the hell out of my parenting. My kids received a slap on the head and a good slap on the bum as children when they deserved it.

It was not child abuse. It was more a scare tactic than anything else. Like hell we were going to do the whole count to 3 nonsense and then just go to your room where all your toys are.

I get that the law is there to protect against zealots who would literally beat their children into submission, but still.

This is not a huge issue. Canadians aren't discussing disciplinary actions with each other in relation to how hard it is to do.

Raising kids is like one of the oldest professions in the world, I think we have a handle on it, without any form of government getting involved.

~Tenth

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I agree.

Because of my living situation "in a spiritual community" I have had a ringside seat to some of the parenting styles being advocated by the Liberal government. In both cases I have seen "new age" parents systematically drilling holes in their children's psyches.

Both of the parents involved were single mothers.

In one instance the mother involved spent the whole day patiently "dealing verbally" with her son's behavior problems with no resort to physical correction. Late in the day they were sitting at the dinner table and he made some whiny comment and without a word spoken, the mother snapped and bloodied his nose with one blow.

'Tenth said pretty much what I was thinking. Every time government steps in and makes a law concerning parents, it always turns out bad. Now, some 10 year old who got his butt smacked for setting fire to the shed is going to scream abuse. I've seen it here in the U.S., so get ready for it.

My old man whacked me on the bottom with his belt a couple of times when I was a little #. It only took a couple times. More often I was halted in my tracks by the sound of his belt coming off. The man was brilliant. He managed to discipline me with sound. Don't spare the rod. The line between discipline and abuse is not thin and easy to cross, its a wide chasm one must make an effort to leap across.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Urgh, the new age Guppie parents are starting to annoy me.

Raising special snow flakes who end up part of that Tumblr SJW crowd.

Don't' get wrong, I like that our governments every now and then put a focus on parenting and are at least trying to help.

But this isn't helping. It just encourages a whole generation of kids to do whatever they want cause there are no consequences.

~Tenth

a reply to: tothetenthpower

I think it is laying the ground work for a whole new set of problems. There are legal mechanisms for dealing with physical abuse of children. Extending the reach of the legal system into an area that is outside the scope of what people regard as "criminal conduct", on the basis of a parenting style that must be virtually non-existent in nature, is frivolous and dangerous, I think.

If it were a movie it would be called, "Sociology Dweebs Unleashed!"

Well, look what has happened to America. Kids parent the parents. You can't discipline kids by sticking them in a corner, or banning TV. I'm not saying to haul off and wail on your kid with a two by four, but spanking isn't a terrible thing. It actually teaches consequences.


I used to get spanked when I was a kid. Yes it hurts, but eventually you learn quickly to stop #ing up.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Wait, your argument against this is that it is too hard to come up with effective ways to discipline your child and you just want to be lazy and use the most harmful and destructive one? Not saying I agree or disagree with this law, but that sounds REALLY selfish of you. Especially in regards to your child.

I think hitting these little creatures you made, that love you and look up to you and want nothing more than the same in return, is lazy parenting.

If you can't make yourself be seen as in charge and can't make them listen to you without hitting your kids, you don't deserve to have them.

Can't wait for that generation to grow up and their expectations.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, you are overstating it.

Of course parents should discipline their children in appropriate ways. Most often verbal instructions will suffice. Parents should reason with their children when possible, when they will listen to reason. When children won't listen to reason or won't heed parental injunctions delivered verbally, corporal punishment may be necessary. Physical punishment shouldn't be the automatic response to every infraction committed by a child.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, you are overstating it.

Of course parents should discipline their children in appropriate ways. Most often verbal instructions will suffice. Parents should reason with their children when possible, when they will listen to reason. When children won't listen to reason or won't heed parental injunctions delivered verbally, corporal punishment may be necessary. Physical punishment shouldn't be the automatic response to every infraction committed by a child.

Would you smack your partner if they did something inappropriate though?

Genuine question as the assumption is it acceptable and ensures the recipient is unlikley to repeat the offence.

a reply to: ipsedixit

If you say so. Just pointing out that your OP sounded awfully selfish the way you worded it.

ETA: By the way, Drill Sergents in the Army have figured out ways to instill discipline in new recruits without hitting them. Not saying that parenting should reflect Basic Training, but hitting your child really is the easy way out.

a reply to: superman2012

Have you ever tried to reason with a 4 year old?

OR a 13 year old who thinks it's okay to call his father a little bitch? That's the sort of thing that deserves a swift slap because that's what happens to you in public when you do that crap.

~Tenth

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: superman2012

Have you ever tried to reason with a 4 year old?

OR a 13 year old who thinks it's okay to call his father a little bitch? That's the sort of thing that deserves a swift slap because that's what happens to you in public when you do that crap.

~Tenth

I have never hit my child, when he acted up relentlessly I would sit on the floor facing the wall and simply hold him until he stopped. No talking no responses just held him firmly.

It is amazing how quickly this worked when he realised how boring it is looking at a wall.

originally posted by: superman2012
I think hitting these little creatures you made, that love you and look up to you and want nothing more than the same in return, is lazy parenting.

Often children do want more in return. Sometimes they insist on more and the more that they are insisting on isn't good for them.

If you can't make yourself be seen as in charge and can't make them listen to you without hitting your kids, you don't deserve to have them.

I agree with what you are saying, as stated, but I think the statement doesn't really apply to any but the most extreme cases of parental ineptitude. I think it is not practical to deal with every issue of a child's behavior exclusively verbally.

a reply to: nonspecific

I've also done this with my other children who were of a more mild temperament. I would argue that forcible confinement isn't really any better than a spanking.

That doesn't mean that I abused my children, or somehow did a worse job than anybody else did, because I chose to slap my 13 year old for disrespecting his father among other things. And when I say slap, I don't mean I left a mark on the kid, I mean I shocked the hell out of him with a swift slap across the head and a severe grounding.

I would never tell parents who to raise their children outside of them actually harming them be it physical or emotional. We did neither of those things to our children, they've grown up quite wonderfully, I still have 2 at home but only for a few more years really.

I just think the government should be very careful about what they consider to be proper parenting.

a reply to: nonspecific

Becareful they'll call that false imprisonment.

Its a touchy subject. Especially with spanking, there can be such a fine line between discipline, and abuse from anger or lack of control.

As a mother, who was a child who was beaten left and right for anything from disciplinary reasons to for the hell of it because dad is a a-hole drunk, I have decided I'm not going to put my hands on my son unless he does something that puts his life in danger, or potentially puts him in harms way. That's my own choice and no one can tell me otherwise, not the left government, not the right government, or any government in between. I'm not going to tell any other parent how to do it either.



-Alee