'So Gerard,' said Vanessa, 'You're a confirmed smacker.'
I replied: 'In the context of a loving relationship and a happy family home, there are times when boundaries are clearly drawn and if a child crosses that boundary, then it knows there will be consequences, one of which may well be a smack.' And so began a discussion on the rightness or otherwise of smacking.
I was a genuine guest. The previous day, an opinion poll had been published which showed that of the parents who responded, 87% had at some time smacked their children. This, the producer informed me, was the issue people were talking about in the pubs. So we talked about it on Vanessa.
Fair treatment
Whatever the show's reputation, my treatment was fair, the audience sympathetic and, most importantly, the key issues were discussed. 20 years ago, such opinion poll findings would have raised little interest. It would merely have been a statement of the obvious. But society's values change and today it is a live issue.
The Department of Health is shortly to embark on a consultation process with a view to reviewing the law on the discipline of children by their parents. To coincide with the process, an alliance of over 200 organisations under the banner: 'Children are Unbeatable' has been formed. The aim of this coalition is simply expressed: the criminalisation of any form of physical correction of a child by a parent, however mild. In other words, the aim is to criminalise smacking.
'Children are Unbeatable' is well-organised, well-funded and media-friendly.
Over the past few months, I have had a number of opportunities to speak on television and radio. The experience, though intimidating, has been illuminating. Here are a few of the impressions I have gleaned.
Creative broadcasting
As perhaps I expected, there are times when some of the media are engaged in creative broadcasting, where the programme-maker appears more concerned with preaching his message than with representing truth. For this reason, we declined to be involved in a contentious Channel 4 documentary on the subject of discipline and the family. It seemed to us that our contribution would merely be a means to a predetermined end.
Such creative broadcasting is also in evidence in studio discussions. In one popular morning show, the very arrangement of the seating placed those against smacking at an immediate disadvantage. The presenter declared that he was a supporter of the 'Children are Unbeatable' campaign. The tone was set. Those of us in favour of smacking were more usually interrupted and the questioning was at times hostile. However, those of the contrary persuasion were given greater freedom to express their views. It certainly made watchable television, but one was left wondering whether the programme was more concerned with shaping people's thinking than with providing a snapshot of opinion.
I was, however, thankful for the coverage we received in news reports. In an age of mass information, where space demands that a 20-minute interview is simplified into a 30-second soundbite, the scope for news manipulation must be enormous. However, we found that the snippets used were representative. The BBC1 news report by Joshua Rosenberg on smacking and the law was particularly reassuring.
The people who work in TV are, of course, people. I have met relatively few of them. Nevertheless, I have wondered how many of them have first-hand experience of raising children and hence how many are 'pro-family'. Many of the researchers, reporters and assistants I met were young, educated women who were apparently single and childless. What is more, the frenetic nature of programme-making and the unusual hours it demands must further remove people from the everyday of family life. These factors must in part create within the media a world of shared values and perspectives. In this self-pollinating environment, one can therefore imagine how anti-smacking values find a readier acceptance among some than they do in the country at large.
Thinking it through
Finally, the most troubling aspect of these experiences is how poorly thought through many people are.
Most people instinctively believe that, in the context of a loving family, smacking has a place in the raising of children. However, many are unclear as to its particular benefits. Therefore, when faced with a well-motivated, articulate, media-friendly, personality-centred, anti-smacking lobby, many parents are forced onto the back foot, and are left feeling ashamed and inadequate if they resort to a smack for wrongdoing.
What is more, in this 'touchy-feely' age, the shared experience of the tragic abuse of discipline appears to carry more weight than the reasoned approach to the right use of discipline.
Television is a powerful medium. At times, it appears more real that real life. Its power to shape opinion and to persuade is enormous. In a day when family life is disintegrating and pressures upon parents and children continue to intensify, it is not difficult to see how the anti-smacking lobby, though so unrepresentative of public opinion, could nevertheless set the agenda and significantly influence future legislation.
One good hard kick may be enough to collapse the door which is resisting further interference in family life in this land.
In conclusion, what can Christians do?
Firstly, we must develop biblical convictions on family life and live them. God has not left us to the tyranny of the expert nor to raising children by trial and error.
Secondly, we must be people of prayer. The battle is not won on the airwaves but in wielding the weapon of prayer.
Thirdly, we must be unafraid to speak up and exercise legitimate influence when and where we can. We must not be indifferent or resigned to the dangers. The issue runs deeper than smacking, for it touches upon the whole God-ordained relationship between parents and their children.
