Moms and dads who believe toddlers benefit from an occasional spanking might want to close the curtains and soundproof the house. If a certain Sacramento busybody has her way, parents who slap hands or swat fannies could end up in jail.

To spank or not to spank is a decision most parents are capable of making without the government's help, but Mountain View Assemblywoman Sally Lieber believes when it comes to our kids the Legislature knows best.

Lieber plans to introduce a bill next week that would outlaw spanking children up to 3 years of age. Should she manage to push the bill through, it will make California the first state in the country to ban parents from spanking their kids.

If the thought of such blatant government intrusion isn't scary enough, Lieber promises the bill "will be written broadly," meaning one parent's idea of loving discipline could very well be a nosy neighbor's idea of abuse.

Rational parents, including those opposed to corporal punishment, understand the difference between a carefully delivered spanking and child abuse. But Lieber -- who has no children, but does have a cat she really likes -- makes no such distinctions.

When speaking with reporters about her bill, Lieber repeatedly uses terms like "beat," "whip" and "punch," insisting that, under current law, "parents can beat their children to a reasonable degree."

Lieber, who apparently was so swamped with media calls about her bill she had no time to return mine, told reporters Thursday "we ought to have a law against beating children," as if there were none already on the books. But there are plenty of them, as any police officer or Child Protective Services official can tell you.

What an arrogant and intrusive proposal. It's a piece of legislation that some child experts, like Diana Baumrind, a research psychologist with the Family Socialization Project at the University of California, Berkeley says could seriously harm children by undermining parental authority.

"Any act by society that overrides the authority of the parent has serious consequences for family relations," Baumrind says. "Education, not legislation, is the method of choice to improve parent practices, with the exception of clearly abusive practices."

Baumrind, who defines spanking as "physically noninjurious punishment administered with an open hand to the buttocks," says spanking or any other punishment should be reserved for times when methods like persuasion or distraction don't work. She believes that spanking a child under age 2 is ineffective, but the short- and long-term effects on children older than that are "no more or less harmful than a mild scolding or time-out."

Child experts may disagree on the issue of spanking, but even some opposed to the practice are aghast at the idea of Lieber's law, punishable by up to a year in jail or a fine of up to $1,000.

"Do I think it's a wise parenting choice?" asked Cathy Seguine, a local licensed clinical social worker. "No, but we already have laws that protect children from abuse. And I don't like the idea of legislating parenting."

No parent does. Lieber's idea is not only arrogant, it's dangerous. It's a slippery slope proposal that, if passed, would further erode parenting rights in California, could cause irreparable harm to families and turn friends and neighbors into snitches.

If she's smart, Lieber will back off, butt out and leave the parenting to parents.