Smacking ban is needed to protect children, health experts say
According to the Children Act 2004, it is unlawful to hit your child, except where it is 'reasonable punishment', and this is judged on a case-by-case basis.
But experts said these laws are 'vague and dangerous'.
Now 13 health organisations are calling on the Government to back an amendment to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill which would remove the 'reasonable punishment' defence from law in England.
They said that the Bill reaching committee stage in the House of Lords is a 'pivotal moment' in the smacking ban campaign.
Baroness Finlay has proposed an amendment to eliminate the 'reasonable punishment' defence.
In an open letter, the organisations said this defence is 'archaic' and 'allows for the physical punishment of children'.
'This leaves them with less protection from assault than adults, an unacceptable disparity in our modern society,' they wrote.
'The evidence is clear: physical punishment is harmful, ineffective, and has no place in a society that values the well-being of its children.'
The organisations called on the Government to 'stand on the side of our children and ensure their fundamental right to safety and protection', adding: 'By removing this archaic defence, we can send a clear message that violence against children is never acceptable.'
Professor Andrew Rowland, child protection officer at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and a consultant paediatrician, said: 'There is now strong agreement from health and social care professionals that the current laws around physical punishment of children, including smacking, are unjust, vague and ultimately dangerous.
'It is time to bring protection from physical assault for children in line with the protection afforded to adults.
'Every child deserves the best possible start to life, and eradicating physical punishment of children is a key part of that aim.'
Dr Elaine Lockhart, head of the Child and Adolescent Faculty at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, added: 'The physical punishment of children is not just cruel, it is dangerous: the practice has been shown to be detrimental to children's mental health and leads to poor developmental outcomes.'
Dr Tamasin Knight, from the British Medical Association's public health medicine committee, added: 'We believe that children should have full legal protection from all forms of physical punishment.'
The full list of signatories on the letter are: Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health; Faculty of Public Health; Royal Society of Medicine; School and Public Health Nurses Association; Institute of Health Promotion and Education; Institute of Health Visitors; Royal Society for Public Health; British Association for Child and Adolescent Public Health; British Medical Association; Royal College of Psychiatrists; Aldey Hey Hospital Charity; Alliance 4 Children and Barnardo's.
The Government has been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
Covid Inquiry: Care home manager who lost three residents in one day details 'hardest day of career'
A care home manager in the Vale of Glamorgan has described the day she lost three residents to Covid-19 as the "hardest day" of her career. Springbank Care Home manager Navjit Kaur, who was then working as the home's Clinical Lead, said staff were given "no support" and "no guidance" at the start of the pandemic. It comes as the Covid-19 Inquiry has been hearing from experts in the care sector and bereaved families from Wales. Professor Stephen Barclay, an expert in end-of-life and palliative care, told the Inquiry that care home managers "struggled with the almost daily changes in guidance and advice and regulations". The Inquiry is coming to the end of its current module, which has focussed on the pandemic's impact on the adult care sector. Reflecting on the start of the pandemic, Ms Kaur said it was a "scary" and "traumatic" experience for colleagues and residents said: "We didn't know what to do. There was no guidance, there was no advice. We didn't have enough PPE. We had only gloves and aprons, but we didn't have provision of masks. "Every day was a challenge," Ms Kaur added. Prof. Stephen Barclay also told the Inquiry that his research found that a failure to prioritise end-of-life care may have contributed to shortages of equipment, medicines, and staff. He said the result was that many dying people did not receive the care that they needed, and "died with avoidable symptoms and distress". Ms Kaur went on to discuss the "mental trauma" she experienced upon learning a friend, who was also a care home worker and the same age as her, had passed away from Covid. She added: "The emotional impact that we all have had, I don't think I can get over all my life." Ms Kaur said that guidance did improve after a couple of months when local government and Public Health Wales started getting more involved and issuing further advice to care homes. Wednesday's (30 July) Inquiry discussions come after the former First Minister of Wales, Mark Drakeford, previously admitted Wales was 'not as prepared as it could have been' for a pandemic. Mr Drakeford gave evidence to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry in 2023, during which he said that the UK-wide strategy for dealing with a civil emergency – which the Welsh Government relied on – was 'inadequate' and 'did not stand up to its major test'. He had also echoed the evidence of other Welsh Government officials, saying resources seemed to have been diverted away from pandemic planning because of the need to prepare for the threat of a no-deal Brexit. However, he went on to defend the devolved administration's position when asked if there were 'significant failings' to address gaps in pandemic preparedness, claiming such an assessment was 'unduly bleak'.
The Sun
3 hours ago
- The Sun
The nine health conditions most at risk of being hit by Universal Credit and PIP cuts
SOME disabled Universal Credit claimants face cuts to their payments when new Government rules come in, campaigners have warned. Labour is planning to bring in major reforms to the benefits system that will see Universal Credit payments slashed for new claimants. 1 A bill intended to cut back on welfare spending was heavily watered down last month following a rebellion by backbench MPs. But some MPs and disability campaigners are still warning benefit claimants with serious, lifelong illnesses could see their out-of-work benefits halved under the reforms. They are worried people with degenerative conditions such as Parkinson's and multiple sclerosis (MS) could be affected, as well as those with serious mental health conditions such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. The campaigners say people with these conditions could miss out on the Universal Credit health element, which is worth about £3,000 a year. MPs on the Work and Pensions Committee have called for the cut to be paused until an independent impact assessment on the changes can be carried out. Andy McDonald, Labour MP for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East, told The i newspaper that ministers should look again at the criteria for the higher rate of Universal Credit. "The bill creates a two-tier system which will result in people with identical conditions being treated entirely differently, based on an arbitrary cut-off point. "There is no justice or equity in that. It's simply not the right thing to do," he said. Ian Byrne, Labour MP for Liverpool West Derby, said it was "reckless to go ahead with the planned cuts" without an impact assessment. Meanwhile James Taylor, head of strategy at disability equality charity Scope, said: "We are concerned that the changes to the health component of Universal Credit will create a two-tier system where some disabled people receive more support than others. "We believe this approach is unfair and that it does not reflect the realities of disabled people's lives." What is Universal Credit and what changes are being made? Universal Credit is a monthly payment given out to those who are struggling to make ends meet. Changes to UC & PIP payments in full as Labour reveals bruising welfare bill concessions in bid to quell rebellion More than three million recipients of Universal Credit don't have to find work due to their poor health. A single person who is aged 25 or over can receive the basic level of Universal Credit, which comes in at £400.14 every month. But you can get a further £422.37 by claiming the incapacity top-up if you have a disability or long-term condition. This more than doubles the original payment. People who currently receive Universal Credit will be protected from changes to the Welfare Reform Bill. But new claimants will have their payment halved to £217.26. Only new claimants who meet a "severe conditions criteria" will get the full amount - so those with severe, lifelong conditions will remain protected. However, disability groups have warned that those with degenerative illnesses or fluctuating conditions, which can vary day to day, might still have their payments slashed. This is because the new criteria demands a health condition be constant. Which conditions could be affected? There is no full or official list of conditions that could be affected by the change as the "severe conditions" criteria hasn't yet been fully decided. But anti-poverty charity Z2K has said there are at least six health conditions it believes could be affected by the change. They are: Parkinson's Schizophrenia Multiple sclerosis Bipolar disorder Autism Dementia A select committee report on the matter also mentions ME, Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD) and eating disorders. Its understood claimants will not be assessed on what their condition is but on how it impacts them. No conditions are excluded from the "severe conditions" criteria and it will be considered for all health conditions and disabilities. Ayla Ozmen, director of policy and campaigns at Z2K, told The Sun: "Disabled people with conditions like Parkinsons, schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis are at risk of losing out on over £200 per month as a result of cuts to the Universal Credit health element which have been approved by parliament. "Contrary to government claims, we fear that many of the disabled people affected will never be able to work because of their conditions. "We're calling on the government to clarify how it will ensure that disabled people with severe conditions will be protected under these plans." A Government spokesperson said: "Our welfare reforms will support those who can work into jobs and ensure there is always a safety net for those that need it. The impact assessment shows our reforms will lift 50,000 children out of poverty – and our additional employment support will lift even more families out of poverty. "The reforms will rebalance Universal Credit rates to reduce the perverse incentives that trap people out of work, alongside genuinely helping disabled people and those with long-term health conditions into good, secure work – backed by £3.8billion in employment support over this parliament. "We are also tackling poverty by extending free school meals to all households on Universal Credit, helping to address holiday hunger with our Crisis and Resilience Fund, supporting over a million households by introducing a Fair Repayment Rate on Universal Credit deductions, and delivering the biggest increase in social and affordable housebuilding in a generation, as part of our Plan for Change." What other changes are being made? The Government had hoped to bring in even tougher measures to stop the increasing cost of welfare from spiralling out of control. It previously projected the number of working-age claimants of Personal Independence Payments (PIP) will rise from 2.7million in 2023-24 to 4.3million in 2029-30. Meanwhile the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimated the overall cost of the working-age benefit system would rise from £48.5billion last year to £75.7billion by 2030. As part of its Welform Reform Bill, the Government had planned to introduce stricter qualifying measures for those claiming PIP and freezing the extra health payments available to those on Universal Credit who are unable to work. An FOI carried out by advice website Benefits and Work showed a staggering 154,000 people with back pain as their main health issue were likely to lose their PIP under Labour's stricter rules. Some of the other conditions at risk included arthritis, chronic pain, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, anxiety and depression. But following the backlash from MPs, it's unclear so far how PIP could change as a review is now going to be carried out by disability minister Sir Stephen Timms. The paper, which will not be published until the end of next year, will set out recommendations for the Government.
The Independent
7 hours ago
- The Independent
NHS lessens impact of doctors' strike as fewer take to picket lines
Fewer patients were affected by the five-day walkout by resident doctors compared with previous strikes, officials have said. Hospitals were ordered to press ahead with as much pre-planned care as possible during the walkout across England, which ended at 7am on Wednesday. And hospital leaders said that fewer resident doctors, formerly known as junior doctors, took to picket lines compared with previous walkouts. Details on the number of appointments, procedures and operations postponed as a result are expected to be published later this week. Both the Government and the British Medical Association (BMA) have said they are prepared to continue negotiations with a view to avert further strike action. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has said talks could lead to improvements in the working lives of resident doctors but he has repeatedly said there is no more money for pay. But BMA leaders have insisted that there must be some pay discussions during talks. The BMA has also launched a 'linked dispute' with the Government over a lack of places for doctors in training, which could lead to common ground during future talks. Mr Streeting said: 'We made the decision to cancel as little planned care as possible this year, and thanks to their tireless work it's clear that far more patients have got the care they need than in previous years. 'That said, all industrial action comes with a level of disruption, and I feel angry and frustrated on behalf of those patients who didn't get the service they expect due to these strikes. 'That is why my door is open to the BMA leadership to resume the talks we were having last week, before they walked out. 'After a 28.9% pay rise over the last three years, we simply cannot go further on pay this year, but there are real improvements to resident doctors' working lives we can work hand-in-hand to make – from training positions to career progression and beyond.' He went on: 'After over a decade of being let down, resident doctors deserve better than their current working conditions, ebbing support from the public, and a seemingly intractable position from the BMA leadership, especially given a majority of them didn't vote for this strike action. 'I stand ready to continue our discussions. Our shared ambitions will reap rewards for both patients and staff but they can only be achieved if we work together.' Rory Deighton, from the NHS Confederation, which represents NHS organisations, said: 'Many patients will not have experienced any disruption whatsoever to their care and that is thanks to the NHS doing its best to keep the show on the road. 'It is welcome to hear from members that in many places fewer resident doctors have gone on strike and the impact has been less severe than previous walkouts. 'This does not take away from the frustration and inconvenience of patients who have had their vital care delayed and are now facing even longer waits in pain and discomfort.' Dr Tom Dolphin, chairman of the BMA's council, told Times Radio: 'What's happened this time is that NHS England has been a little bit reckless, to some extent, about insisting that hospitals try to continue as much planned elective care as possible. 'Hospitals need to make sure that emergency and urgent care goes ahead (and) patients on the wards get looked after. 'To do that safely on strike days, when you're going to have potentially up to half of your medical workforce not there, you've got to release those senior doctors from the planned care to go and do emergency and urgent care, because they can't be in two places at once. 'If you try and do the other work, if you're asking those senior doctors to be in two places at once, that's where the risk arises.' He also said that pay would have to form part of future negotiations. 'This is a pay dispute, fundamentally, alongside the the unemployment issues, so there would need to be some discussion about pay but it doesn't need to all be at once,' he said. NHS officials have said cancelled bookings would be rescheduled within two weeks but warned of knock-on impacts for other patients. On X, the BMA posted about a number of derogation requests made by hospitals – which occur when hospitals call for striking doctors to return to work from picket lines amid concerns about patient safety. In some cases, striking doctors were permitted to return to work but in some cases the requests were 'revoked'. Dr Dolphin said some derogation requests were granted but said that in other instances 'there was a complete lack of planning on the hospital's part' and managers had not made any 'attempts to find cover' and after discussions with the union these rota gaps were resolved by hospitals.
