Hitting rights on the head

By Adam, aged 15

You might think that, when a body like the UN recommends a course of action to any government, including that of the UK, politicians would rush to ensure something was done. Sadly, in past years, this has not been so.

Back in 2002, a group of children – meaning, in this context, anyone under the age of 18 – compiled and presented a report on children’s rights to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, in Geneva. The UN Committee asked the Government for its response to the report, and it gave it. The Committee then produced a set of ‘concluding observations’, recommending a clear course of action to the Government of the time.

Five or six years down the line, you might expect things to be cleaned up; the less cynical of us would expect action to have been taken, and children’s rights in the UK to be pretty much as they should be. Are they? To put it bluntly, no.

Some of you may remember the cafuffle back in 2005, with regards to the issue of smacking. You may even remember the 47 Labour MPs rebelling against the Government’s decision, which was essentially to do nothing, the November before.

The UN Committee recommended a ban on smacking in 2002. So, was that the first time? Again, no. They first recommended it in 1995. This October, when the Committee is expected to release its next observations, may well be the third time the recommendation is made.

The Government claims it’s done what it needs to. Does that mean it’s finally banned smacking, as the Committee recommended? Of course not. Apparently, smacking is a form of self-defence, though how a 4 year-old can rationally be seen as a physical threat to their parents I can’t imagine.

Imagine you were a child. Perhaps you got a bit upset, and ‘threw a tantrum’. If you were an adult, then, providing an offence had actually been committed, you’d have to be taken to court, and tried fairly by a jury of your peers. Even then, they still can’t ‘smack’ you. A poor, defenceless and essentially harmless child can be beaten without reason, providing the smacking ‘doesn’t leave a mark’.

You might think that means they’re safe. If they can’t be marked, then you obviously can’t hit them to hard. The first objection to this was that even when you hit a dark-skinned child hard, no mark is visible. But, to conclude, there’s another, perhaps more shocking issue. Let me explain. I was told a story about a mother who wanted to know whether or not she could legally smack her child. She was given the answer: yes, as long as there is no visible mark.

Her response? “So I am allowed to hit her as hard as I want, providing it’s on the head? No one would notice it under her hair.”

Adam will be reporting to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in June, as part of the Get ready for change! delegation.

(Any views expressed in this article should be taken as solely the views of the author as an individual)

Posted on Friday, May 09, 2008