Physical Abuse
Journalist briefing, May 2007
NSPCC policy calls
The NSPCC is calling on the Government to give children the same legal protection from assault as adults already enjoy - no more, no less. Children are currently denied this.
The law on hitting children was recently amended with the Children Act. However, the new law continues to give parents a legal defence of 'reasonable punishment' for some minor forms of common assault of their children. This means that the law still accepts that parents can hit their children.
The NSPCC believes this new law is full of holes and it fails to meet our human rights obligations.
We need a clear law that says violence towards children is wrong.
Key points
The Children Act 2004
As before, any parent who causes wounding or grievous or actual bodily harm cannot use this new law to justify their actions. ABH and GBH of children by their parents continue to remain illegal.
The new law continues to give parents a legal defence of 'reasonable punishment' for some minor forms of common assault of their children.
New charging standards now say that injuries which are considered as common assault where the victim is an adult, will be charged as ABH in the case of children, "although prosecutors must bear in mind that the definition of common assault occasioning actual bodily harm requires the injury to be more than transient and trifling." These are as follows:
- Grazes
- Scratches
- Abrasions
- Minor bruising
- Swelling
- Superficial cuts
- Black eye
- Reddening of the skin which stays for hours or days
There could, potentially, be a huge increase in the number of ABH charges, as a result of broadening the definition of ABH. The maximum sentence for ABH is five years.
Why is the NSPCC opposed to the new law?
It fails to give children equal legal protection from assault
We want the law to recognise that assaulting children should be just as unlawful as assaulting adults - no more, no less.
If the assault of children were treated in the same way as the assault of adults, then mild hitting would not normally be prosecuted because - as with mild hitting between adults at present - prosecuting such matters is considered to be a waste of police and prosecution services' time. (This is known as the de minimus principle.)
It is unfair on parents and children
There is a risk that parents and children will not be treated equally. It will be hard for there to be a consistent interpretation of the law across the country.
Some children bruise more easily than others. Also, bruising shows in different ways on black children and white children.
Both these factors make the law discriminatory, in potentially offering more protection to some children than others
It will not work to change the culture governing how we treat children
The primary purpose of the law reform we seek is to change the culture and establish a standard for non-violence in family life. Section 58 cannot achieve this.
Under section 58, if a common assault is deemed to constitute ABH, the de minimus principle will not apply.
Law reform on physical punishment should be combined with a clear programme of education and support for parents.
It fails to satisfy our human rights obligations
What are the UK's human rights obligations?
The UK is party to many international and European human rights' treaties which oblige us to stop children from being legally hit. This means that sooner or later, the UK will have to amend its law.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has twice called on the UK Government to take such action.
The European Committee of Social Rights has said that UK law must be reformed to comply with the European Social Charter, to which the UK is signed up. The charter requires the abolition of all corporal punishment across Europe.
In 1998, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that UK law does not provide adequate protection for children from assault and the Council of Europe monitors are pressing the British Government to act to reform this inequity.
In 2003, two parliamentary committees recommended removal of the defence from the law - the Health Select Committee of MPs and the Joint Committee on Human Rights of MPs and Peers (JCHR).
The JCHR reiterated the need for law reform in its report on the Children Bill in September 2004.
But hitting is an effective way of disciplining children, isn't it?
Research shows that although hitting might get an immediate result, it is linked with negative behaviours. These include childhood aggression and lower levels of understanding about why certain actions are unacceptable1.
Hitting can be both emotionally and physically harmful. Hits can get harder, sometimes involving implements, and things can get out of control, especially when families are under pressure2. Shaking can and does kill babies.
Violence can breed violence. Teaching children that hitting is an appropriate way of resolving conflict can contribute towards a more violent society3.
Reforms abroad
Fourteen countries already give children equal protection from assault in the home: Austria (1989), Bulgaria (2000) Croatia (1999), Cyprus (1994), Denmark (1997), Finland (1983), Germany (2000), Greece (2006), Hungary (2004) Iceland (2003), Israel (2000), Latvia (1998), The Netherlands (2007) Norway (1987), Romania (2004) and Sweden (1979) Ukraine (2004)
Positive parenting alternatives:
- rewarding children's efforts with praise, companionship and respect
- ignoring undesirable behaviour
- clear and consistent limits that prevent bad behaviour from occurring
- adults modelling, explaining and encouraging the behaviour they prefer.
The NSPCC believes the Government should lead a mass public education initiative to help parents adopt helpful parenting practices and find alternatives to hitting.
The NSPCC also believes that widespread parenting programmes are needed to increase parents' understanding of why their children behave in the way they do, and how to respond to such behaviour.
1.ET Gershoff, Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviours and Experiences: A Meta-Analytical and Theoretical Review, Psychological Bulletin, Volume 1 - 8, Number 4, 2002.
2. Of two-thirds of parents who hit their babies when they were aged one, nine out of ten were hitting their four year-olds weekly or more often, and more severely. By age seven, almost a quarter of those parents were hitting their children with implements and another 53% were threatening to do so. J Newson & E Newson, The Extent of Physical Punishment in the UK, APPROACH, 1989.
3.The Gulbenkian Foundation Commission on Children and Violence (1995) found that physical punishment is a significant factor in children developing violent attitudes and actions. Children and Violence, Gulbenkian Foundation Commission, 1995.
Copyright © 2006 NSPCC - All rights reserved. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, Weston House, 42
Curtain Road, London EC2A 3NH. Incorporated by Royal Charter. Registered charity number 216401. NSPCC, charity registered in Scotland, charity number SC037717.