There are some topics I am usally wary of mentioning one being anything connected to the parenting of actual children today for a number of reasons one being having no children of my own, I don't generally have a reason to push any one approach and for another a particular interest in some aspects is highly likely to totally misunderstood.There is a ongoing discussion around the legal defence of "reasonable chastisement" when it comes to smacking children which given my adult work in child protection tends to be an area I legitimately had an interest.
I have views, you may have views too about that but we're NOT getting to debating that here and the wider parenting debate is one with polarized views, often hard for those of a generation to recognize.
Where I do feel there are issues is really more around legislating certain responses and measures that a parent may take as the one in law who is said to be responsible for that child so at the moment anything is observed or otherwise reported, a rigid process comes in and being in that line of work, I accept the need for investigation.
Often though it won't be an investigation, followed by guidance and maybe a warning but actually it will go into court in which I was involved personally.
We have "Bibles" of legal guidance inolving statute and case law established that you do look at in detirming if the case should go to court but there are whole areas where Parliament has decreed it is in "The Public Interest" that the matter should go before a court regadless and a judge for them to detirmine.
That is where I while recognizing the concerns of others in Child Protection have my own in extending areas because the matter will not be resolved until it is heard in court and it may be he/she reviews and rejects it.
What has happened in the meantime is the parent has been investigated, other children interviewed and highly likely to kept a close eye on, the neighbourhood knows and is judging them and they may be suspended from work depending on the nature of it and contact with children or other vulnerable groups.
Because of the "blowback" many parents often leave contious disciplinary matters more to others rather than dealing directly with their own children which tends to enable some children to act in dangerous or anti-social ways.
The more you extend the States role in immediate family matters, the less actual parenting goes on and yet I would say, you might too, we have a duty to protect children so is bringing the law totally in which is a very blunt instrument necessary the right response all of the time which will happen if we criminalize some methods that society itself has differing views over?
Speaking personally I, feel in so far as abuse goes, we have the powers to act as often those case have exceeded any legal defences and others can step in to those "on the edge" to provide better guidance and arranges for parenting course as where things go awry is in parents who lack the knowledge and confidence to parent fairly and where necessary, strictly, their children.
It may mean bring in support as some parents do struggle and struggling parents need help dealing with things such as housing issues, debt and own mental health issues and that is where behaviours that are a concern to all of us in child protection and welfare often stem from.
I'm less convinced more criminalization really helps us to do what matters. Protecting Children.