THE introduction of a ban on smacking children in Ireland was a “lightbulb moment”, a politician behind the move has told MSPs.
Jillian van Turnhout, a former Irish senator, had campaigned to remove the defence of reasonable chastisement in Irish law – which had remained in place following the repeal in 2000 of a law which allowed force to be used against children. The campaign was a success, leading to the ban being brought in in December 2015.
MSPs in Scotland are currently considering taking similar action which would remove the defence of “justifiable assault” in Scots law.
“When we changed the law in Ireland, we realised that it was the law catching up with how parents were parenting their children today,” said van Turnhout, speaking at the Scottish Parliament’s equalties committee yesterday.
“The day I walked into the chamber (in Ireland’s national parliament), I didn’t know if I had a single colleague with me in the change of law.
“But I went in knowing that even if I was the only person who said ‘it is not ok to hit a child’, children would know that somebody believed it is not ok for them to be hit.
“Much to my surprise, every single member of the Irish Parliament chose to support the law by not calling for a vote at any stage on it. For me, it was really a collectively powerful moment.”
She said the process was not easy, with some members of Parliament, as well as some civil society organisations and members of the public, telling her the “time was not right” for a change in the law.
She added: “What was fascinating for me, it was really a lightbulb moment – the second we changed our law, the same colleagues looked me in the face without any irony and said: ‘Why didn’t we do this years ago? This makes so much sense’.”
Critics of the proposals say a ban on smacking would be an invasion of family life and could lead to an increase in the number of parents being prosecuted.
However, Police Scotland chief superintendent John McKenzie said there was no evidence of a rise in the number of prosecutions after legislation was introduced elsewhere.
He said: “The evidence seems to suggest that there is no indication that it results in increased prosecutions. There is a suggestion that it results in increased reporting.
“The bill is a removal of a statutory defence of justifiable assault. So I cannot see how that then in itself would criminalise parents.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here