Abstract:
Smacking is often considered a personal, moral issue. However, there are benefits to taking an objective, structured approach to smacking, such as a public health approach. Smacking and other related terms are poorly defined. Definitions of ‘acceptable’ smacking are grounded more in socio-cultural norms than in rational argument. Parents smack for a range of reasons, of which discipline and guidance is only one. The distinction between physical punishment and abuse is problematic. There now exists a large and consistent body of observational evidence linking smacking to a range of negative outcomes. It has been suggested that such results may be due to confounding in cross-sectional studies. However, more recent robust prospective designs yield similar results. It seems likely, though not certain, that smacking causes negative health outcomes. It is also very prevalent, both in New Zealand and in many other countries. No widely agreed definitions exist on what constitutes a public health problem. Smacking satisfies epidemiologically-based criteria for a public health problem, but other criteria are also relevant. Inequalities and human rights approaches are important aspects of public health problems, and smacking is both a health inequality and a breach of human rights. Public health approaches may be useful both in understanding the problem of smacking, and in intervening. The application of a public health intervention framework to smacking, such as the Ottawa Charter, reveals promising opportunities for public health action, though further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of such interventions. Both intervention and further research are clearly justified for this significant public health problem.
