From Anne J Arundel.
Hilary Wilce seems to be in danger of joining the ranks of sanctimonious bureaucrats who use the royal "we" when referring to the disciplining of children (TES, October 25).
Some children need smacking, some do not. I smacked my elder son after he had been warned of the consequences of his actions and chose to ignore the warning. It only happened a few times before he got the message. I did not need to smack my younger son at all.
True, many children need to be protected from violence, but there are just as many who take advantage of the "no corporal punishment" rule.
Surely, it is far more harmful for a child to be excluded from school, lack a basic education, turn to burgling houses and mugging old people, laugh at the police and end up in prison where they have to learn to obey rules the hard way after causing other people distress and suffering, when just a little smack on the bottom at an early age would have taught them the rules of society?
Children are not young adults or immature adults. They are children, who need a loving, secure environment in which to learn respect for others.
If, for some, smacking is the only method by which they learn, then so be it, but I would never smack anyone on the face and Hilary Wilce needs to blush when she confesses to it.
ANNE J ARUNDEL 34 Jubilee Terrace, Ackworth, Pontefract, West Yorkshire.