|
|
| | |
| |
 |
| Summary: Is physical force a justifiable method of punishing children? |
|
|
| |
Author:Eliot Jones ( Tunisia )
Eliot Jones is a freelance communications consultant.
Created: Wednesday, November 15, 2000
Last Modified: Sunday, August 23, 2009
|
| |
This debate shares something with Corporal Punishment (for Adults), namely whether the infliction of physical pain can ever be justifiable; but the issue of ‘paddling’ or spanking for children is less about punishment in itself and more about punishment as a means of education. How can young children learn the difference between right and wrong? How can teachers establish order in the classroom and enable a better environment for learning? Britain is a major example in this debate, having allowed corporal punishment in classrooms until 1986 when legislation brought it in line with the rest of Europe. All industrialised countries now ban corporal punishment in schools (not parental spanking) apart from the USA, Canada and one state in Australia. New Zealand has banned corporal punishment of children for some years, but a citizens' initiative forced the issue to a referendum in 2009; the vote went heavily against the ban, but is not binding on the NZ government. |
 |
|
|
| Corporal punishment, specifically spanking or similar actions, can be an effective punishment and deterrent for childish misbehaviour. If children do not respond seriously to verbal warnings or light punishment from teachers or parents, then a short, sharp stimulus, which inflicts pain but no lasting damage, is the last resort to cause the child to associate misbehaviour with punishment - a crucial association in child development. |
|
It is never right to hit a child. Even the power of physical punishment to teach a child the difference between right and wrong is dubious; a young child may learn that the adult is displeased, but not why. Spanking will cause a state of extreme distress and confusion which makes it less likely they will analyse their behaviour with clarity. In older children disciplined at school, a physical punishment is likely to provoke resentment and further misbehaviour. |
 |
|
|
| Corporal punishment must be used as part of a wider strategy and at the correct time: when other immediate discipline has failed; when the child understands their behaviour and has had an opportunity to explain it; and after an initial warning and opportunity for the child to repent. Crucially, the person delivering the punishment must not be angry at the time. This undermines much of the hysterical argument against corporal punishment. |
|
No matter how orderly you make the beating of a child, there are a number of adverse effects. They will lose trust in the adults who administer the beating; they learn that force is an acceptable factor in human interaction; they feel humiliated and lose self-respect; and they build up resentment that cannot be resolved at the time but may lead to severe misbehaviour in the future. |
|
|
|
| Serious physical injuries only occur where disciplined, strategic corporal punishment becomes child abuse. There is a strict line between the two (see above) and to ignore it is deliberately misleading. |
|
The actual physical damage inflicted via corporal punishment on children can be horrifying. Examples can be found of students needing treatment for broken arms, nerve and muscle damage, and cerebral haemorrhage. Spanking of the buttocks can cause damage to the sciatic nerve and therefore the leg to which it leads. |
|
|
|
| If corporal punishment is administered in the presence of at least two adults, that greatly reduces the risk of violent or sexual abuse. At school, another teacher should be present; at home, both parents. |
|
The buttocks are a sexual zone; adults can derive pleasure from administering punishment to that zone, and can affect the psychosexual development of the children receiving it. Even the presence of another adult does not prevent the easy degeneration from punishment into child abuse. A notorious case from Arizona in 1995 saw school principal Michael Wetton, who had previous convictions for violence against children, convicted of abuse after forcing a 9 year-old boy and a 15-year old girl to strip naked and be paddled. In the girl’s case, her mother was present, but "too frightened to resist". |
|
|
|
| "He who spareth his rod hateth his son, but he who loveth him is chasteneth him betimes." (King Solomon, in the Book of Proverbs [13:24]. |
|
"The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." [Shakespeare] The Bible frequently condones practices that are outrageous to the modern sensibility. |
|
|
|
| | This House would spank its children when necessary
This House believes that it is never right to hit a child
|
| View the full discussion |
Author |
Post |
cong3
Member
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 03:20 pm
|
|
[user=60424]zwglaze[/user] wrote: LOL
Seriously,,,,,,,,,,Cong3 is trying to think LOL
seriously either get better insults, or contribute to the debate. |
zwglaze
Member
|
Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:52 am
|
|
LOL
Seriously,,,,,,,,,,Cong3 is trying to think LOL
|
cong3
Member
|
Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 01:53 pm
|
|
[user=60424]zwglaze[/user] wrote: So, theway to teach them that hitting is wrong, is to hit them?
wow
be that as it may with anything it shows that if you do this theres bad consequences |
|
|
Login
to leave a quick reply or
View the full discussion
|
|
|
|
