Britain's House of Lords has addressed precisely this dilemma when it rejected an outright ban on spanking children, and backed a compromise allowing parents to resort to 'mild smacking'. The compromise was in accordance with the UK government's request to the peers, before they voted on the issue, to reject a total ban on the grounds that it would criminalise parents who smack their disobedient children. Prime Minister Tony Blair's position is that a full ban on smacking would be an unacceptable intrusion into family life, which would inevitably lead to parents ending up before a judge for minor slaps. However, support for a ban - similar to the ones already in place in a dozen European countries including Germany and Sweden - is strong among members of the public and Blair's Labour Party. According to them, hitting is hitting, whether mild or hard, and it should be banned.
They argue that children have the same protection as adults under the law on assault. It has been seen that physical punishment is some cases can escalate and turn into abuse. Besides, it sends a clear message to children that might is right, that physical force would make people behave in the way they want them to. This in turn would lead to a very violent society. Scientists buttress the case against smacking with evidence that everyone tends to underestimate the power of their physical actions because of the way the human brain is programmed. That is to say, parents may smack their children much harder than they intend to. Indeed, the middle path chosen by the House of Lords marks the beginning of a new debate on smacking.
This spot has been known to be one of the coldest spots in the UAE, recording sub-zero temperatures during peak winter in recent years
The leaders mourned the passing of Sheikh Isa bin Mubarak bin Hamad bin Sabah Al Khalifa
A collective of 509 university graduates received their graduation certificates this year
Read some of his last words in a poem he wrote amidst the raging war between Israel and Hamas