I don't agree with the idea that the parent knows best. This simply is not true. It is however, a delicate issue. You cannot have the state playing an active role in raising children, that is the parents responsibility, however I don't think parents should be given free reign to do whatever they want with their kids. The phrase "the road to hell is pathed with good intentions" springs to mind, some people do terrible things to their kids, even though they think it is for the best and I do feel that it is important for the state to try and draw a line with regards to what is acceptable and what isn't.

For instance, I don't think the parent should have the right to determine what kind of education their child should have, and what content it should have. Most parents simply aren't qualified to be able to make a good judgement on this. I think this has the potential to do more harm than good and in this case, the parent doesn't know best, there are however others who do, like experienced and qualified teachers, politicians and academics who tend to rely more on research and evidence to support what the child should be taught, as opposted to "parental instinct" and other equally useless things (with regards to the subject).

As for "spanking" as most of you call it, I do think parents should be able to give their kids a slap when they misbehave. However there needs to be a limit, a line certainly needs to be drawn. Just as many people here say how they got spanked and it never screwed them up, I know a lot of kids who got beaten half to death on a regular basis by their parents and they are very, very screwed up, the very fact that they never killed themselves speaks highly of their emotional strength. However, how do you draw a line?

I think it would be better to say "please don't hit your kids" and force parents to find other, maybe more stressful (on them) methods to punish their kids as opposed to creating an environment where parents can commit GBH on their kids and it is considered to be "ok", it's their kid after all. The issue does get me fired up, too many of my childhood friends have had their lives literally ruined because of their parents and what used to happen to them. I remember one of my pals had a slumber party for his birthday. I took me PS up so we could play, but his dad had trouble tuning it in, so when my pal tried to help out, his dad snarled at him before head butting him across the room. Another pal, he made the mistake of dirtying the expensive shoes his mother got him and was then subsequently beaten across the head with a baseball bat. But hey, gotta give parents freedom to discipline their kids the way they want, because that is what is important, parents getting their way, regardless of the effect it will have on their property. These 2 kids I mentioned, 1 is just out of jail, he will be back, and none of them will ever have a job, for some reason they get really violent when people tell them what to do, can't think how they got that way

Sorry for that, it wasn't needed, my point is though, that it is better to just say "don't hit your kids" and reduce the risk and the acceptability of blatent assault, then to allow it and make it easier for parents to do it and get away with it. Saying that parents need the freedom to discipline however they see fit is frankly disturbing. Allowing them to do it their way isn't important, the childs well being is much more important and there are other ways to do it.

Parents wanting the best, and parents doing the best are not the same thing.