Doctors support complete ban on smacking children in England

Leading child health professionals have intensified calls for a complete ban on smacking children in England, arguing that there is no evidence to support any positive effects of physical punishment on children’s wellbeing. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) has urged lawmakers to remove the legal defence of “reasonable punishment,” which currently allows smacking under specific circumstances.

Under the existing law in England, smacking is unlawful if it causes visible bruising, scratches, or other injuries, but parents can use the “reasonable punishment” defence to justify mild physical discipline.

The RCPCH is pushing for an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, introduced by Labour MP Jess Asato in January, to eliminate this legal loophole. If passed, the amendment would bring England in line with Scotland and Wales, where smacking is already illegal.

Professor Andrew Rowland, RCPCH officer for child protection, emphasized the urgency of the reform, stating that it is time to end what he described as a “Victorian-era punishment.” He pointed out that 67 countries worldwide have already implemented smacking bans, with another 20 committed to following suit.

Despite the growing momentum for reform, the UK government has no immediate plans to change the law. A Department for Education spokesperson stated that while the government is “looking closely” at the impact of smacking bans in Scotland and Wales, it remains focused on broader child protection reforms rather than outlawing smacking at this stage.

The government insists that the current bill is the “single biggest piece of child protection legislation in a generation,” prioritizing child welfare through enhanced social care and better coordination among education, health, and social work professionals.

Public opinion on the proposed ban remains divided. Parents attending a baby sensory group in Sale, Greater Manchester, expressed mixed views on government intervention in parenting practices. While most opposed smacking, some questioned whether a legal ban was necessary.

One mother, Leanne Casey, argued that parents should have the right to discipline their children as they see fit, though she acknowledged that if a ban was necessary to protect children, she would support it. Meanwhile, father Oli Harrison suggested that a ban could help remove ambiguity around the issue, preventing smacking from remaining a “grey area”, according to sources.

Professor Rowland reinforced the medical community’s stance by citing scientific research that links physical punishment to negative outcomes, including increased aggression, anxiety, and antisocial behavior. He stressed that there is no robust evidence supporting the idea that smacking has any benefits for children’s development.

The call for a ban has gained further urgency following the case of 10-year-old Sara Sharif, who was murdered in 2023 after suffering prolonged abuse from her father and stepmother. Her father later claimed he had “legally punished” her before her death. Professor Rowland noted that studies indicate children who experience physical punishment are at greater risk of serious harm, and a blanket ban would provide clearer legal protection for all children.

Several child protection organizations, including the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) and Barnardo’s, have also endorsed the amendment. Joanna Barrett from the NSPCC stressed the urgent need for legal change, stating that physical punishment is still a reality for too many children in England.