Amend the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to protect children from assault
BMJ 2025; 388 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r566 (Published 21 March 2025) Cite this as: BMJ 2025;388:r566
The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill has now come before the UK parliament.1 The bill recognises the education sector as an important partner in child protection and, encouragingly, proposes the formation of multi-agency child protection teams.
Yet there is a glaring missed opportunity to improve children’s wellbeing for generations to come: the bill’s failure to introduce equal protection from assault for children in England.2 This conflicts with the bill’s aim to improve children’s wellbeing, continues the inconsistency of the law in England with international children’s rights,3 and perpetuates an intergenerational cycle of violence towards children. Proposed amendments to the bill offer a chance to change this.
Physical punishment of children undoubtedly harms their health, wellbeing, development, and behaviour on an individual and population basis.45 Failure to legislate for equal protection from assault and to remove the “reasonable punishment defence” to battery of a child leaves England behind Scotland, Wales, and the 67 other countries where physical punishment of children is completely prohibited.67 A lack of legislation means that children’s health and wellbeing will continue to be threatened by violence.
All is not lost. In the spring of 2025, signs of opportunity are emerging in the consideration of the bill1 that offer potential for real and lasting change. Amendments have been submitted to the bill in the House of Commons (new clause 8 and amendment 3) which, if accepted and incorporated into the bill, would finally remove the “reasonable punishment of children” defence in England.8
Untenable
The proposed amendments could drastically improve children’s health and wellbeing and are, at their heart, public health interventions. They will simplify child protection processes in England and make it much easier for professionals, statutory agencies, and third sector groups to contribute to eradicating physical punishment of children.
The amendments will help professionals to move forward with families where physical punishment has been used, as they will have a firm legislative basis: there would be no circumstances in which physical punishment of children was lawful. This will give professionals the solid foundation they need rather than the ambiguity that currently exists, as there are some circumstances where physical punishment may not be unlawful. Evidence from countries that have legislated to prohibit the physical punishment of children in all circumstances—including Finland, Germany, Romania, and Sweden—shows that the use of physical punishment decreases after legislation is introduced.9
To protect children in the UK these amendments to the bill must be incorporated, and parliamentarians must vote for them. Efforts to reduce the incidence of child abuse in England need clear legislation that unambiguously states that physical punishment of children is never permitted.10
Health professionals have an important role as advocates for vulnerable people who may not have a voice. Professionals can encourage their elected representatives to support these changes and contribute to the development of health information for the public about physical punishment: its adverse effects, the alternatives, and any legislation that is brought in. These amendments and the revised bill could be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fundamentally change the way society treats children. The bill is the first child centred draft legislation in over a decade, and this opportunity must not be lost.
The position of a society that forbids child abuse but has a legal defence for the physical punishment of children is untenable. The UK government now has a chance to change that. It’s time to finally give children in England the full and equal protection from assault that they need and deserve.
Footnotes
Competing interests: AGR is honorary professor (children’s rights, law, and advocacy) at the University of Salford; consultant paediatrician at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust; lead employer medical director at Mersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust; chair of the board of trustees of SicKids (registered charity 1164131); a member of the advisory council of the Churchill Fellowship; a non-executive member of the board of directors of M’Lop Tapang (Cambodia); and officer for child protection at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH). AGR has received expenses from the RCPCH in relation to meeting attendance but no speaking fees. AGR is not a member of any political party. GH is policy manager (child protection, ethics, and law) at the RCPCH.
Provenance: Not commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.