IN an ideal world we would not require laws which cover the issue of smacking.

But we do not live in an ideal world. In the real world, children misbehave and it is not possible to introduce an outright ban.

Firstly, such a ban would be unworkable. And, secondly, do we really want to go down the route of criminalising well-intentioned parents?

While there are sound arguments for equating, in the eyes of the law, criminal assaults on adults with similar treatment meted out to children, such a move is impractical.

Amendments to existing legislation, however, are long overdue.

The defence available to parents of "reasonable chastisement" in disciplining their children belongs to the Victorian age. It was the same defence used by husbands to justify beating their wives.

We need a law which is aimed at protecting the most vulnerable individuals of our society, not one which justifies excessive physical violence inflicted on them.

A reform which allows for a mild form of smacking is fraught with danger. What one parent thinks of as "mild" punishment, another may think is excessive.

But the preferred option of banning smacking which leaves marks or causes mental harm appears reasonable.

While it will be difficult to enforce, it is a vast improvement on the current low level of protection afforded children by the law.

It will set standards on acceptable behaviour which are in line with the 21st, rather than the 19th, century.

And if this reform prompts parents closely to examine their treatment of children, then it is one worthy of support.