If we smack kids, they'll get the notion hitting's OK

Mark Dawson, Editor of Wanganui Chronicle

Being a parent can be a very long and challenging learning curve.

But there are a few lessons you gradually pick up on - and one of the key ones is that children will do what you do; NOT what you say they should do.

They are there to mimic; you are there to model.

So if you hit them, the chances are that at some point they will hit also.

Which is just one reason why Sue Bradford's 2007 repeal of the defence of parental "reasonable force" in the Crimes Act when physical violence is used on a child - the so-called "anti-smacking" legislation - was so important.

Rather than see well-intentioned parents carted off to the cells, the effect has been, hopefully, to make us all reflect on how we deal with our misbehaving children, and to find better ways of managing them than by the traditional "clip round the ear".

Yes, the temptation to deliver a smack is great - almost overwhelming, at times - but that piece of legislation will have caused many parents to pause, especially if in a public place, and to seek an alternative solution.

The Bradford bill has come to the fore again with Conservative Party leader Colin Craig saying the law must be changed to give parents back free rein to smack as a condition of him supporting a National-led coalition government after this year's election.

And lobby group Family First has jumped on the bandwagon in its bid for a bit of spotlight and relevance. But, really ... there is a huge swathe of parents who put "family first" and don't resort to hitting their kids.

With just eight prosecutions in six years, the law has hardly triggered the collapse of parental authority. Rather it has been sensibly handled by the police whose discretion has been vital to the success of the law.