Pros And Cons Of Smacking

Peter Inson does not consider smacking to be corporal punishment, and it is nothing else than a method for parents to discipline their children. He insists that smacking, when used appropriately, simply is fleeting pain, discomfort or embarrassment, nothing that brings harm to children. Mr. Inson positions freedom as a keyword in the discussion about whether smacking should be banned or not. He compares the MPs’ freedom to vote according to their consciences with the freedom, he believes parents ought to have, and that the parents in that way will have the freedom to choose how to discipline their children according to their consciences. Mr. Inson criticizes the moves to outlaw smacking, because it will make it more difficult for parents to bring their children up. The next step, if smacking is outlawed, is to license parents, or the other alternative Peter Inson comes up with, to abolish the concept we know today as family.
Inson’s statement about what smacking is considered as. All punishment that involves something being done to the body is corporal punishment, therefore there is no doubt in my mind, that smacking is, in fact, corporal punishment. As Mr. Inson mentions in his article “Smacking usually occurs within a home and within a family.” which enables parents to punish their children by smacking in a much more severe way, than what is allowed. When that happens the children’s chances of getting away from the abuse, minimizes with the parents’ legal right to use corporal punishment such as