Is it illegal to smack a child ?

It depends what you mean by smack tbh. there is such a thing as legal chastisement. i'll see if i can find you a link...

but punching or open hand slapping...no. mummy or no mummy

As far as I'm aware it's not illegal to smack a child, but the use of excessive force/leaving a mark would possibly be seen as child abuse

some advice

I believe that it is legal to smack a child. It is illegal to smack a child hard enough that it leaves a mark.

Smacking has not been banned-yet. So reasonable,physical chastisement, is still within the parameters of the law. Using any implement, fists or open palm slap to face,or causing injury (swelling bruising is not) then the adult could be charged with assault.

Thanks everyone. Keiren, would be really interested to read the "official" thingy if you can find it.

i'm struggling. because there's no actual law saying you can smack a child, there isn't really anything to say you can't. and googling reasonable chastisement brings up lots of biblical references. in the true sense of the word incidently ?

Section 58 of the 2004 children act removes some defense under 'reasonable chastisement" in cases of actual bodily harm

link

and another

Here's the 1989 act

and the 2004 act

Tsk. Have you turned American, roo?

I'm a bit confused by the use of the phrase 'open palm slap' or 'open hand slap'. Is there another kind of slap and, if so, why is it deemed less abusive?

Bah, can't type today - I've got the dumb

I'm guessing it's been worded like that to make a distinction between an open handed 'slap' and a closed fist 'punch' or other type of strike, avoiding ambiguity

does sound a bit daft doesn't it? i can't think of any other way to slap either tbh...

i think it means a real wallop where you're intending the recipient to feel the impact of the whole of your hand. as opposed to a tap on the backside or something iyswim.

Well it failed because it definitely ambiguited me. (brand new word, copyright Hooby 2008) ? To me a slap is by its very nature open-handed. And is a smack something altogether different again? It's all very complicated, no wonder the law is a bit fuzzy.

The legal definition is:

"A smack might be considered to be reasonable chastisement if it is

• open-handed (not administered with a fist or any kind of implement)
• administered on a part of the body where it will not cause harm
• not severe enough to leave a mark.

Depending on the circumstances,.an open-handed smack on a child's bottom, if it does not leave a mark, might therefore be considered "reasonable chastisement", whereas a smack on the head - even open-handed - might be considered assault, as it could cause harm."

so it really relates to the word 'smack' not 'slap', which makes more sense