Right: Corporal punishment was banned by New Zealand, but not before much debate. Cartoonist Eric Heath saw the funny side of the argument - or perhaps he was pointing out that the whole controversy was a touch ridiculous.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against corporal punishment within Australian schools
1. Corporal punishment normalises violence
A majority of educationalists argue that using corporal punishment to modify the behaviour of students teaches them to see violence as a legitimate means of addressing a problem.
In an opinion piece published in The Sydney Morning Herald on July 17, 2014, Ross Tarlinton, the headmaster at St Joseph's College, Sydney, stated, 'Looking back over many years of dealing with young people and reflecting on my own initial response to "behaviour modification", I remain convinced that inflicting a violent act on another person is not the way to bring about positive change in that person's behaviour. Corporal punishment, which is sometimes purported as a "quick-fix", fails to address the root cause of poor behaviour and teaches young people that using physical force against another person is acceptable.'
A 2013 longitudinal study on the effects of physical punishment on children, drawing on data from all around the world, concluded, 'There is abundant evidence that corporal punishment is associated with increased aggression in children. All 27 studies on the topic included in the major meta-analysis found an association, and this has been confirmed by numerous other studies. Children who have experienced corporal punishment are more likely to be aggressive towards their peers, to approve of the use of violence in peer relationships, to bully and to experience violence from their peers, to use violent methods to resolve conflict and to be aggressive towards their parents.'
The same study further concluded, 'Corporal punishment can reduce empathy and moral regulation. It does not teach children how to behave or help them understand how their behaviour affects others; rather than helping children to develop the desire and motivation to behave well of their own accord, it teaches them that it is desirable not to get caught.
Corporal punishment may also decrease the likelihood of long-term compliance by damaging adult-child relationships, introducing fear and undermining the powerful behavioural motivations of children's love and respect for their parents and other adults involved in their care and education.'
2. Physical punishment can easily degenerate into abuse
It has been claimed that even though it may be a school's policy to use physical punishment in a controlled, moderate and regulated manner, it is very easy for institutionalised violence to become abuse.
It has been noted that physical punishment as a deterrent tends to lose its effectiveness over time and so there is a temptation for teachers and administrators to use more severe physical punishment in order to gain the behaviour they want.
In July 2013, The Royal Australasian College of Physicians, Paediatric & Child Health Division, released a position statement on 'Physical Punishment of Children'.
The position statement included the following judgement, 'A systematic review of the short-term and long-term effects of physical punishment concluded that although children are more likely to comply with adults' demands in the short term following physical punishment, they do not actually learn the desired behaviour.
The review concluded that repeated and escalating levels of physical punishment may be required to sustain the desired behavioural outcome.'
Many Australians recall the abuse to which they were subjected when corporal punishment was last used regularly in Australian schools.
On July 17, 2014, Saman Shad, writing in The New Daily, noted, 'The stories of abuse that have come out since Mr Donnelly's comments are testament to what life was like for a number of children when corporal punishment was still legal in our schools. Both in social media and the letters' pages of our national newspapers people have been telling their stories of physical abuse at the hands of their teachers.'
One of those who has recalled the violent treatment to which he was subjected is ABC journalist Mark Colvin, who tweeted on July 15, 2014, 'Teachers beat me, often, savagely & brutally (blood flowed) when I was 7-8. Gives me a sceptical perspective on this.'
3. Corporal punishment appears to do long-term psychological harm to children
There have been multiple studies of the psychological impact of corporal punishment on children which have suggested its harmful effects. Dr Joan Durrant, the lead author of a 2012 longitudinal study of corporal punishment, released in Canada and drawing on data from all over the world, stated, 'Our main message really is that over 20 years of research across countries, across samples, across measures, methodologies - as the methodologies have become better and better - we find the same things over and over and over, and that is that physical punishment predicts only negative long-term outcomes.'
The Canadian analysis has found 'Physical punishment is associated with a range of mental health problems in children, youth and adults, including depression, unhappiness, anxiety, feelings of hopelessness, use of drugs and alcohol, and general psychological maladjustment.'
In a position paper released in June, 2013, The American Psychoanalytic Association stated, 'Physical punishment is a serious public health problem in the United States, and it profoundly affects the mental health of children and the society in which we live...research shows that physical punishment is associated with increases in delinquency, antisocial behaviour, and aggression in children, and decreases in the quality of the parent-child relationship, children's mental health, and children's capacity to internalize socially acceptable behaviour. Adults who have been subjected to physical punishment as children are more likely to abuse their own child or spouse and to manifest criminal behaviour.'
4. Corporal punishment does not result in improved academic performance
Opponents of corporal punishment in schools note that it harms students' academic performance.
In April, 2010, the United States human rights organisation Human Rights Watch published an article in which it noted, 'Harsh physical punishments do not improve students' in-school behaviour or academic performance. In fact, one recent study found that in states where corporal punishment is frequently used, schools have performed worse academically than those in states that prohibit corporal punishment.
While most states demonstrated improvements in their American College Testing (ACT) scores from 1994 to 2008, "as a group, states that paddled the most improved their scores the least." At the same time "the ten states with the longest histories of forbidding corporal punishment improved the most."'
A Northern Territory background briefing on corporal punishment released in 1996 stated, 'The threat of corporal punishment can also create an atmosphere of trepidation where all children may feel like potential victims and can lose their feelings of self confidence or security which can seriously harm their learning potential.'
5. There are other modes of disciplining children beyond physical violence
(The following information has been drawn from Fitzroy Legal Service Inc.) Schools have a legal responsibility to protect staff and students and to provide a safe learning environment for all students. Sometimes the actions of some students threaten the health and safety of staff and other students or create violence, either by the destruction of school property or by possession of illegal weapons and substances, or their actions generally disrupt the good order and management of the school.
Schools have the power to suspend, expel or punish students for breaches of school rules and regulations.
Suspension occurs where a student is prevented from attending school for a specified period of time. The suspension period may be limited, or longer depending on the age of the child. Longer suspension can usually occur when the child is above the compulsory school age.
Expulsion occurs when a student is permanently prevented from attending school and usually occurs when the student is engaged in serious misconduct or behaviour.
In government schools the power to suspend or expel a student is granted by legislation and regulated by Department of Education and Early Childhood Development guidelines. In Catholic and independent schools the power to suspend, expel or punish a student arises from the agreement between the school and the parents that their child will obey the rules and regulations of the relevant school.
In Victoria, the authority to discipline students for breaches of school rules arises out of section 25 of the Education Act 1958 (Vic).
Time-out, suspension and expulsion are all implemented through interaction with the student and parents and are meant to give students an opportunity to reflect upon and amend their behaviour. The procedures are intended to protect the learning rights of other students at the same time as they seek to alter positively the behaviour of disruptive students. These punishments are conducted in conjunction with counselling in order to help the student develop insight into and control over his or her behaviour.