Paediatrician challenge to Davidson: 'Would you hit your child?'

Dr Lucy Reynolds, a consultant paediatrician in Glasgow, has pressed the Scottish Conservative leader on whether she would physically punish the child after her party voted to oppose a change in the law to outlaw smacking.

Reynolds suggested that by opposing the proposed ban Davidson condoned parents hitting their children.

READ MORE: Green MSP John Finnie rejects smacking ban claim

“As a paediatrician, I fully support this bill, and was already campaigning to change the law before the bill was introduced. I know there is no good reason to hit a child. Hitting of any sort doesn’t work to improve behaviour in the long term,” she said.

“I know there are lots of good reasons not to hit a child. It hurts, they learn to copy what happens to them, it increases the chances they will develop aggressive behaviours, or have problems with low self-esteem, anxiety or depression... and under stress, a parent may hit harder than they meant to, and injure the child.”

She added: “Ruth Davidson’s son Finn is now seven-months-old. When does she think it would be a good idea to start smacking him? Will she, like the parents of some of my patients, be biting him ‘to teach him what it feels like’? And if she doesn’t plan to bite, smack, whack, tap, thump, kick or hit Finn, why does she think other parents’ ‘right’ to do those things to their children should be preserved?”

Reynolds pointed to a wide range of professional bodies in favour of the ban proposed in the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) Bill, including the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Scottish Directors of Public Health.

MSPs passed the Bill at its crucial stage last month, with only the Tories voting against.

It will now continue its parliamentary journey with further votes this month and after the summer recess. Reynolds appealed to Scots Tories to change tack and back the legislation.

READ MORE: Smacking ban impact ‘remains to be seen’ says top prosecutor

She added: “The law in Scotland now protects adults from assault, but for those caring for children there is a defence of ‘justifiable assault’. The only actions specifically prohibited are blows to the head, shaking, and the ‘use of an implement’. There is no specification in terms of age, so a child can be hit at seven months. There is no specification in terms of disability, so children with Down’s syndrome, cerebral palsy, autism and learning disabilities can all be smacked and bitten as well. The peak age at which children are hit is three-years-old.

“Often at that age the child would not yet have been diagnosed with their autism or learning disability – and their behaviour can be very challenging. There is public outcry when people with learning disabilities are hit when they are adults, but when they are children our law says it can be justifiable.

“We have failed to get the message across to parents that smacking doesn’t work, can make things worse, and can cause long-term difficulties for the child. We can’t effectively get that message across whilst our law clearly states that hitting a child can be justifiable. It isn’t justifiable. I hope Ruth Davidson can be convinced of that for Finn’s sake, for the sake of my patients, and for the sake of all children (and future children) across Scotland.”

The bill was lodged by the Scottish Green MSP John Finnie and supported by the Scottish Government following a long campaign against physical punishment by children’s charities and doctors.

As the bill passed its stage one vote by 80 votes to 29, Finnie said he wanted to send a clear message that physical punishment of children is not acceptable.

LEADING the debate, the former police officer described it as an “international imperative” to bring Scotland into line with best practice across the world, noting that 54 countries already prohibit the physical punishment of children, “with all the evidence showing that this is a positive and necessary step”.

Supporting Finnie, the Scottish Government’s Children’s Minister, Maree Todd, underlined that the intention was not to criminalise parents, adding that in other countries where similar legislation had been enacted there had been no increase in prosecutions.

READ MORE: Maree Todd: Smacking ban 'would send clear message to parents'

Responding to the vote in Parliament last month, Mary Glasgow, chief executive of Children 1st, Scotland’s national children’s charity, described the passing of the bill at stage one as a “momentous step”, and evidence of a wholesale shift in attitudes to child-rearing and children’s rights over the past few decades.

Glasgow said: “This is not about blaming or shaming parents. Acknowledging that family life is better when hitting and violence is off the table helps with that cultural shift and brings legislation up to date with where most people already area.”

Last week the Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC told MSPs that parents who use physical punishment against their children could be given informal recorded or police warnings rather than face criminal prosecution.

Davidson refused to say whether she would use physical punishment on her own child.

A Scottish Conservative spokesman said: “Ruth keeps her baby as far away from party politics as possible.”