Smith Murray: General Debates 
Smith Murray: General Debates 
[Volume:612;Page:8974] 
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
: 
 Smacking one’s child is not physical violence injury or abuse as per article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Violence is described in the  
Oxford Dictionary  
as: “The exercise or an instance of physical force usually effecting or intended to effect injuries destruction etc.; powerful untamed or devastating force; an unjust unwarranted or unlawful display of force.” It is something that brings about injury but in a significant way. Clearly the definition in that context is talking about substantial injury. It is certainly abuse. There is no connection whatsoever between Coral Burrows’ death and section 59 of the Crimes Act. In fact the mother of Coral Burrows said that Steve Williams the accused was a good father figure from which we take the fact that there was not abuse. We do not yet know the facts that will come out in that situation but there is not always a connection between the way a person responds to a child and what happens later on. 
Physical violent injury is abuse. A negative intention is quite clearly implied. Child discipline requires a loving attitude. Spanking is not just a right parents have when dealing with their children; nor is it just a necessary tool for training and disciplining children. From my experience as a father of five very well-adjusted children currently aged 23 years to 11 years—who as best as I can recall all received a smacking at some stage in their younger years—I say that smacking is an important part of a child’s early development as an individual and as a potential valued and contributing member of society. The latest Australian statistics show that step-parents and de facto partners particularly a mother’s male de facto partner are the most likely to abuse a child; not natural parents. In my view adults with convictions for violence are far more likely to come from families where no physical discipline took place than from families where there was appropriate physical discipline provided by loving parents. 
Child abuse is based on a hatred; a disregard for children’s needs. Child discipline is based on love and a genuine concern for the welfare of the child. Firstly children need physical discipline. It is how they learn. If a child reaches out to touch a hot stove sure we can shout in a loud voice: “No!” and maybe that will scare the child and frighten him or her from touching the stove. But ultimately giving a child a small spank teaches the child that it is far better not to touch something because the consequences will be far more severe. If a child is going to cross the road restraining the child by grabbing it is an acceptable way of stopping the child. Shouting at the child may simply be far too late. 
Physical discipline provides a sense of security for children. It provides them with safe boundaries and convinces them that boundaries will be provided in their lives and that those boundaries will be enforced no matter what they do. All parents who have had young children have gone through what is euphemistically known as the “terrible twos”. Usually in my experience it starts at about 18 months of age. It is a period of time when young children tend to be defiant and tend to decide to put their parents to the test as to who is in charge. It is a case of “Will my parents protect me from hurting myself no matter how determined I am to do it?”. Any parent of a 2-year-old will know that experience. In my experience once a parent has conquered that test children are very affectionate. They recognise that they have safe secure boundaries within which to operate and that they can trust their parents to enforce those boundaries. 
I recognise that for outsiders children being smacked is an uncomfortable thing to see. Hitting other people does not come naturally. A crying child naturally engenders sympathy. But wilful petulant children who are determined to win against their parents’ wishes and who are allowed simply to do that suffer more harm than if they are given the boundaries they need to survive. It is in both their own interests and society’s long-term interests that that restraint be provided and the vast majority of parents realise this. In a snapshot poll on Radio Pacific last week 96 percent of the children polled answered “yes” to the question of whether smacking should be allowed.