The authorities should absolutely concentrate on the most serious cases of assault; on the kids who turn up to school with welts and bruises on their arms and legs, and worse.

But it is nonetheless important that the state establishes the principle that hitting children is wrong. It should be illegal, just as hitting anyone else is illegal. 

We’re in a frankly bizarre situation when you could wind up in jail for lamping a six foot rugby player who insults you while you’re out carousing, but can freely hit your three foot daughter if she throws a strop and gets in the way of you watching him on Sky Sports when you get home.   

‘But it never did me any harm.’

That's the fall-back position of those who seek to debunk trained psychologists when they argue that yes, physically punishing your children does damage them and can lead to a range of negative consequences including poor mental health, heightened aggression, and antisocial behaviour. 

Thing is, doesn’t a willingness to stand up and argue that it’s reasonable to violently strike someone half your size serve as clear evidence that it is harmful?