News

Smacking ban is 'inevitable'

A ban on the smacking of children is inevitable because of human rights legislation, the joint committee on human rights has said.

The ban is expected to come into force because the European Court of Human Rights is placing increasing emphasis on the protection of children.

According to the law, which was changed when the Bill was in the Lords in July, parents can avoid an assault conviction by using the defense of 'reasonable chastisement'. The Government did not impose a total ban at this time because they did not want to 'criminalise' parents.

The law allows parents to smack their children as long as the hit was mild and did not leave any marks.

Labour backbenchers have welcomed the news and will attempt to totally outlaw smacking. The Committee pointed out that Britain was supposed to ban smacking under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which outlaws all physical punishment in the family.

It went on to pressure Britain to justify its decision not to give children and adults the same protection. "Children, who are more vulnerable to violence for the most part than adults, would generally be assumed to deserve greater, rather than lesser, protection.

"We think it likely, given the near-universal acceptance of the standards contained in the CRC, that . . . the continued availability of the defence of reasonable chastisement may be held to be incompatible with convention rights."

David Hinchliffe, the Labour chairman of the Commons health committee, wants to amend the Children Bill further to include a total smacking ban.

He said, "We do not want to criminalise parents nor do we want to interfere with the legitimate and necessary rights of parents to create a supportive environment for their own families in their own way."

• To smack or not to smack?Join the debate in Discuss, Debate and Deliberate