\n
Our series of three booklets, published together with\u00a0Save the Children Sweden, provide answers to the questions that arise when we think about prohibiting all corporal punishment of children, aiming to give parents and carers, government officials, education professionals and others the confidence to support and pursue legal reform and move a step closer to realising children\u2019s right to protection from all forms of violence in all settings.<\/p>
The booklets are available to download now in the following languages:<\/span><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n Albanian Arabic Bengali English French<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div>\n\n Hausa Hungarian<\/a><\/p> Japanese<\/a><\/p> Korean<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div>\n\n Lithuanian<\/a><\/p> Mandarin<\/a><\/p> Portuguese Russian<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div>\n\n Spanish Swahili<\/a><\/p> Thai Vietnamese If you would like to discuss translating these booklets into your working language, please contact us at herbertb@who.int<\/a><\/span><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n <\/section>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n \n Yes, of course it does! It hurts physically and emotionally. It hurts physically and emotionally. Through research being carried out all over the world, children are beginning to tell us how much corporal punishment hurts them. The\u00a0UN Secretary-General\u2019s Study on Violence against Children<\/a>, completed in 2006, was the first comprehensive global study into the nature and extent of the problem. The Independent Expert leading the Study, Professor Paulo S\u00e9rgio Pinheiro, wrote in the report:<\/span><\/p> \"<\/span>Throughout the study process, children have consistently expressed the urgent need to stop all this violence. Children testify to the hurt \u2013 not only physical, but \u2018the hurt inside\u2019 \u2013 which this violence causes them, compounded by adult acceptance, even approval of it.<\/em><\/span><\/p> Governments need to accept that this is indeed an emergency, although it is not a new emergency. Children have suffered violence at the hands of adults unseen and unheard for centuries. But now that the scale and impact of violence against children is becoming visible, they cannot be kept waiting any longer for the effective protection to which they have an unqualified right.<\/em>\"<\/span><\/span><\/p> Causing physical pain to a child is itself a breach of children\u2019s right to protection from assault \u2013 and adults often don\u2019t appreciate the difference in size and strength between them and a child, and the impact that this difference can have on the intended and actual physical pain felt by the child. Large scale research in which parents have been asked about the force used when \u201csmacking\u201d their child found that two in five had used a different degree of force than intended (Kirwaun, S. & Bassett, C. (2008), Presentation to NSPCC: Physical punishment, British Market Research Bureau\/National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children). And research by the Institute of Psychiatry and University College London proved that changes in brain activity when force is used in tit-for-tat situations naturally lead to escalation in the degree of force used and inaccuracy in judging how much force is being used (Shergill, S. S. et al (2003), \u201cTwo eyes for an eye: The neuroscience of force escalation\u201d, Science, vol. 301, 11 July 2003, p. 187).<\/span><\/p> In addition, adults often don\u2019t appreciate the emotional hurt caused by corporal punishment, its impact on the dignity of the child, and the potential short- and long-term damage this can have on individuals and society. The Global Initiative is aware of over 250 studies on the effects of corporal punishment which associate it with a wide range of negative health, developmental and behavioural outcomes for children that can follow them into adulthood \u2013 this includes poor mental health, poor cognitive development, lower school grades, increased aggression, poor moral regulation and increased antisocial behaviour (read our\u00a0summary of research on the negative effects of corporal punishment<\/a>).<\/span><\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, or UNCRC, is the most complete statement of children\u2019s rights ever produced and is the most widely-ratified international human rights treaty in history. The Convention has 54 articles that cover all aspects of a child\u2019s life and set out the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that all children everywhere are entitled to.<\/p> The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is tasked with ensuring the Convention is properly observed by the countries who have signed and ratified it. The Committee has made it clear that the UNCRC requires the prohibition in law and elimination in practice of all corporal punishment in all settings \u2013 the home, alternative care settings, day care, schools and penal systems. The Committee\u2019s General Comment No. 8 (2006) on \u201cThe right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia)\u201d consolidated and confirmed these obligations, which were reiterated in General Comment No. 13 (2011) on \u201cThe right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence\u201d.<\/p> The Committee examines countries implementation of the UNCRC on a regular basis and systematically recommends prohibition of corporal punishment in its concluding observations. Other treaty monitoring bodies also increasingly recommend prohibition and the issue is regularly raised in the Universal Periodic Review of states\u2019 overall human rights records.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n On this issue \u2013 like others, including violence against women and race discrimination \u2013 politicians have to lead, not follow public opinion. The emphasis must be on the government\u2019s obligation to ensure that the law provides children, like adults, with full protection for their human dignity.<\/p> Almost all the countries that have prohibited all corporal punishment have done so ahead of public opinion, and then public opinion has quickly come round to support the change. In a few years\u2019 time we will look back in wonder \u2013 and with shame \u2013 at the time when it was regarded as lawful and acceptable to hit children.<\/p> The results of polls generally depend on how questions are phrased and on how much information the respondents have. If people are fully informed about the issue, the existing inequality of protection for children and the purpose of a ban, they may well support prohibition \u2013 and repeated polls have shown very different results when the question is asked in different ways.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n It is true that children will sometimes say that being physically punished is good for them, that it teaches them how to behave, or even that it shows that their parents love them. And of course we should listen to what young people say. But adults have a responsibility not only to hear but to understand what children say to us. We have already drawn attention to the way children are beginning to tell us about the physical and emotional hurt caused by corporal punishment (see \u2018Does corporal punishment really hurt\u2019, above). When some children say that this is somehow necessary and good, they are demonstrating how they have grown up surrounded by the belief that it is normal and right to be physically punished and have internalised this belief themselves, absorbing the attitudes and behaviours of their parents and rationalising or trying to make sense of the hurt they have experienced.<\/p> Children have an inalienable right to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection from assault. It is the responsibility of governments to ensure that the law upholds these rights. It is the responsibility of parents and other adults to raise children to know about their rights and to respect them in relation to themselves and others.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n None of us knows how we would have turned out if our parents had never hit or humiliated us. And many people, in saying it did them no harm, are denying the hurt they experienced when the adults closest to them thought they could only teach them by inflicting pain.<\/p> Adults who hit their children in the name of discipline usually began doing so because they themselves were hit as children. Although research shows they often feel guilty about it afterwards, they continue to hit their children, especially when they are at the end of their patience. It is pointless to blame previous generations for this, because they were acting in accordance with the pervasive culture of the time. But it is wrong to resist change because we are afraid of appearing to criticise our parents. Times change and societies move on. Recognition of children as rights holders requires action to end the legality and social acceptance of violence against children, just as societies have moved to end acceptance of violence against women.<\/p> Some people say: \u201cI was hit as a child and I turned out OK.\u201d But there are people who have endured all kinds of bad experiences while growing up who have \u201cturned out OK\u201d as adults, yet nobody would say that what they experienced was good. Often it is the way they have dealt with their experiences that has helped them to be \u201cOK\u201d, not the experiences themselves.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n As UNICEF has recorded, violent \u201cdiscipline\u201d is the most common form of violence against children (UNICEF (2014), Hidden in Plain Sight: A statistical analysis of violence against children, NY: UNICEF). Corporal punishment kills thousands of \u2013 mostly very young \u2013 children across the world each year and injures millions more. It is not an insignificant or minor issue.<\/p> But it is not simply a child protection issue. The legality of corporal punishment in so many countries is the most symbolic reflection of the low status of children, as possessions and less-than people instead of as full rights holders. Corporal punishment reflects the day-to-day experience of the majority of the world\u2019s children, and in every case, a child\u2019s dignity and physical integrity are violated. Just as prohibiting and challenging domestic violence against women has been central to women\u2019s empowerment and acceptance of their rights, so it is with children. Prohibiting corporal punishment raises the status of children and contributes positively to how they are viewed and treated in society. No state can pretend that it respects children as rights holders alongside adults, nor pretend that it has an effective and safe child protection system while its law condones violence against them.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n Societies are moving on from seeing children as their parents\u2019 property to seeing them as people in their own right. As human beings, children enjoy human rights \u2013 and these do not stop at the front door of their home. Children have the same right as all other family members to protection from being hit, and it is no more invasive of privacy and family life to insist that the law protects children from assault in the home than to insist that it protects adults from intimate partner violence.<\/p> The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child upholds the importance of the family and promotes the concept of parental responsibility, with children\u2019s best interests as parents\u2019 basic concern (article 18). Some people argue, perversely, that hitting a child in the name of discipline is, in fact, in the child\u2019s best interests in the long term. But as the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated:<\/p> ... interpretation of a child\u2019s best interests must be consistent with the whole Convention, including the obligation to protect children from all forms of violence and the requirement to give due weight to the child\u2019s views; it cannot be used to justify practices, including corporal punishment and other forms of cruel or degrading punishment, which conflict with the child\u2019s human dignity and right to physical integrity.\u201d (General Comment No. 8<\/a> (2006) on \u201cThe right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment (arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia)\u201d<\/em>, para. 26)<\/p><\/blockquote> Finally, parents are also entitled to benefit from a clear message that violent punishment is associated with impaired family relationships and a long list of negative outcomes for their children, with no links to any positive outcomes.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n Beating a child may physically hurt more than a \u201cloving smack\u201d (but see \u2018Does corporal punishment really hurt\u2019, above), but both are on a continuum of violence and both breach a child\u2019s right to respect for human dignity and physical integrity. Societies do not draw lines and try to justify any level of violence when challenging violence against elderly people. So why should they when it comes to children? And the dangers of making any connection between loving and hurting people should be obvious. A \u201cloving smack\u201d is a contradiction of the worst kind. This seemingly harmless term is a veil behind which rights violations can hide. Law makers and governments have traditionally separated \u201cchild abuse\u201d and \u201ccorporal punishment\u201d, but most abuse is corporal punishment \u2013 adults assaulting children to punish them and gain control. No such threshold is proposed in the case of violence against elderly people, where zero-tolerance clearly conveys the message that all violence is unacceptable. But for children, adults have invented an arbitrary distinction between punitive violence which is regarded as acceptable, and \u201cabuse\u201d which is not. In reality, it is not possible to differentiate between child abuse and corporal punishment.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n There is no such thing as \u201csafe\u201d smacking. All smacking invades a child\u2019s physical integrity and shows disrespect for their human dignity. Many research studies have shown milder forms of corporal punishment by parents to be a risk factor for severe violence characterised as abuse, and the tendency towards escalation and personal inaccuracy in judging the amount of force used has already been discussed (see \u2018There is a big difference between beating a child and a loving smack. Isn\u2019t prohibiting corporal punishment taking things too far?\u2019 above).<\/p> A few countries have attempted to define acceptable ways of hitting children \u2013 at what age, on what parts of the body, with what implements and so on. As well as sending a very confused message about society\u2019s attitude to violence towards children, this is a very disreputable exercise. We would not think of trying to define acceptable ways of assaulting women, or elderly people, or any other population group. Children have a right to equal protection from assault. If anything, children \u2013 generally smaller and more fragile than the rest of us \u2013 have a right to more protection.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n Hitting children is not compatible with the ideals, values and beliefs of the major world religions, which profess compassion, equality, justice and non-violence. Adherents of the world religions model their lives on the example and teachings of their founders. Scholars and theologians emphasise that there is no recorded evidence of any of the founders of the major religions striking a child.<\/p> The religious view which condones corporal punishment of children often stems from a culture of authoritarianism, power and control over children. It regards blind obedience as a virtue and physical punishment as an acceptable response to children who are considered to be \u201cdisobedient\u201d.<\/p> Religious leaders are part of the global movement to eliminate corporal punishment of children. More than 800 religious leaders at the World Assembly of Religions for Peace in Kyoto, Japan (2006) endorsed a declaration \u2013\u00a0A Multi-religious Commitment to Confront Violence against Children (Kyoto Declaration)<\/em>\u00a0\u2013 which urges governments to adopt laws to prohibit all violence against children including corporal punishment.<\/p> The Committee on the Rights of the Child asserts that religious freedom \u201cmay be legitimately limited in order to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of others\u201d and states:<\/p> Some raise faith-based justifications for corporal punishment, suggesting that certain interpretations of religious texts not only justify its use, but provide a duty to use it. Freedom of religious belief is upheld for everyone in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art. 18), but practice of a religion or belief must be consistent with respect for others\u2019 human dignity and physical integrity. Freedom to practise one\u2019s religion or belief may be legitimately limited in order to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.\u201d (General Comment No. 8, para. 29)<\/p><\/blockquote> For further information see the website of the\u00a0Churches\u2019 Network for Non-violence<\/a>.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n Elimination of all corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading punishment requires both education and prohibition. It is not a matter of choice. Human rights demand that children have at least the same legal protection as adults \u2013 in the family and everywhere else \u2013 now. The law in itself is a powerful educational tool, and of course law reform banning corporal punishment needs to be linked to public and parent education. A ban will motivate parents to look into positive ways of bringing up their children and motivate professionals, politicians and the media to resource and provide this education.<\/p> It is also very difficult and confusing to educate parents away from something that is still supported in law. The assumption is that \u201cif the law allows it then it must be OK\u201d. Education is much more effective when the law gives the same message.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n These days nobody would suggest we should not ban domestic violence against adults in the family because it is difficult to police: why should children have less legal protection? The first purpose of law reform to prohibit corporal punishment is prevention \u2013 to prevent harmful assaults on children before they happen. That is surely the first purpose of all good law: to set a clear standard and send a clear message, including into the \u201cprivacy\u201d of the family home. But prohibition in the family does need to be implemented in a sensitive way, in the best interests of the child \u2013 see \u2018If corporal punishment is criminalised, won\u2019t thousands of parents be prosecuted and many more children be placed in care?\u2019 below.<\/p> And the introduction of prohibition should always be accompanied by a substantial campaign providing information and support to parents to help them make the transition to non-violent parenting.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n This argument is a tacit admission of an obvious truth: corporal punishment is often an outlet for adults\u2019 pent-up feelings rather than an attempt to educate children. In many homes and institutions adults urgently need more resources and support, but however real adults\u2019 problems may be, venting them on children cannot be justifiable. Children\u2019s protection should not wait on improvements in the adult world, any more than protection of women from violence should have to wait for improvement of men\u2019s conditions.<\/p> In any case, hitting children is ineffective in relieving stress. Adults who hit out in temper often feel guilty; those who hit dispassionately find they have angry and resentful children to cope with. Life in homes and institutions where corporal punishment has been abandoned in favour of positive discipline is much less stressful for all.<\/p> In conflict-ridden countries, adults working with children, including parents and teachers, are themselves victims of violence and humiliation. They agree on protecting children\u2019s rights, but question who is fighting for their rights. Clearly, these breaches of rights must be addressed but children should not have to wait until adults are able to enjoy their own rights. All people have rights to respect for their dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law \u2013 and children are people too.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n The idea that hitting children can be a matter of cultural pride is unacceptable. In any event, the hitting of children seems to be a white tradition, exported to many parts of the world through slavery, colonialism and some missionary teaching. The English defence of \u201creasonable chastisement\u201d, for example, is reflected in laws all over the world. It appears that the only cultures where children are rarely or never physically punished are small, hunter-gatherer societies, arguably among the most \u201cnatural\u201d of all human cultures, though now rapidly vanishing under the impact of urbanisation and globalisation.<\/p> But human rights are universal, and children the world over have the right to live lives free from all forms of violence. All cultures have a responsibility to disown corporal punishment, just as they have disowned other breaches of human rights which formed a part of their traditions. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child upholds all children\u2019s rights to protection from all forms of physical or mental violence, without discrimination on grounds of race, culture, tradition or religion. There are movements to end corporal punishment of children in numerous states in all continents. School and judicial beatings have been outlawed in many states in all regions of the world.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n If adults, including politicians, found this issue easy, we would have accepted long ago that children have exactly the same rights as the rest of us to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law. In fact, we would be likely to accept that children, who start off very small and very fragile, have a right to more protection than adults.<\/p> There seem to be a number of reasons for the difficulty adults find in giving up what they still perceive of as a \u201cright\u201d to hit and hurt children in the name of \u201cdiscipline\u201d or control:<\/p> No! Discipline is not the same as punishment. Real discipline is not based on force. It grows from understanding, mutual respect, tolerance, and two way effective communication. Babies start off completely dependent, and as they grow, they rely on adults \u2013 especially their parents \u2013 to guide and support them towards self-disciplined maturity. Corporal punishment tells children nothing about how they should behave. On the contrary, hitting children is a lesson in bad behaviour. It teaches children that their parents find it acceptable to use violence to sort out problems or conflicts. And respect should not be confused with fear. \u201cGood\u201d behaviour due to fear of being punished means that a child is avoiding punishment, not showing respect. Children learn to truly respect people and things when they appreciate their intrinsic worth. When parents hit their children in the name of discipline, children learn to \u201cbehave\u201d only to avoid punishment, and they learn that violence is an acceptable way to handle disputes. But when parents show respect for their children\u2019s and others\u2019 human dignity and integrity, children learn respect. When parents discipline their children in positive, non-violent ways, children learn that conflict can be resolved without undermining this respect.<\/p> Corporal punishment and other cruel and degrading forms of punishment are no substitute for positive forms of discipline. Far from spoiling children, positive discipline is designed to ensure that they learn to think about others and about the consequences of their actions. States have an obligation to support positive parenting. There are many materials available promoting positive parenting and education without violence, which can be adapted and translated for use in every country.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n Children have a right to protection not only from corporal punishment, but also from all other forms of cruel or degrading punishment or treatment. Law reform needs to be linked to awareness raising and promotion of positive, non-violent relationships with children.
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\nReasons for prohibiting all corporal punishment<\/h2>\n\t<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n
\n \n <\/i> Does corporal punishment really hurt? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> What is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and what does it say about corporal punishment of children? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Opinion polls say that most people are against a formal ban on corporal punishment. Shouldn\u2019t we listen to the people? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> I\u2019ve often heard young people speaking in support of corporal punishment \u2013 surely we should listen to them? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Being hit as a child didn\u2019t do me any harm. Would I be where I am today if my parents hadn\u2019t disciplined my physically? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> There are so many worse violations of children\u2019s rights \u2013 why focus on this minor one? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Parents have a right to bring up their children as they see fit. Shouldn\u2019t they be challenged only in extreme cases of child abuse? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> There is a big difference between beating a child and a loving smack. Isn\u2019t prohibiting corporal punishment taking things too far? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
Some people argue that \u201cthere is a big difference between child abuse and a light smack\u201d, focusing less on the \u201cloving\u201d intention of the violence and more on the degree of violence used. However, it is inaccurate to suggest that adults have precise control over the degree of violence they use. Research shows that often more force is used than intended, and that the degree of force escalates (see \u2018Does corporal punishment really hurt\u2019, above). And again, whatever the severity of the hitting, it breaches the child\u2019s right to respect for his or her physical integrity.<\/p>\n \n <\/i> Why not define safe smacking, rather than prohibit all of it? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> My religion requires me to use corporal punishment. Wouldn\u2019t it be discrimination to stop me using it? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Why bring the law into this? Why not just educate parents away from using corporal punishment? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> The majority of corporal punishment happens in the family behind closed doors; it will be impossible to enforce a ban, so what\u2019s the point of prohibition? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Shouldn't we wait until everyday conditions improve for parents and teachers before prohibiting corporal punishment, so that it doesn't just add to their stress? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> This is a white, Euro-centric issue. Corporal punishment is a part of my culture and childrearing tradition. Isn\u2019t it discriminatory to outlaw it? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
\n \n <\/i> Why is it so difficult to give up hitting children? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
The impact of prohibiting all corporal punishment<\/h2>\n\t<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n
\n \n <\/i> If parents are forced to give up using corporal punishment, won\u2019t children end up spoilt and undisciplined, with no respect for anyone or anything? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
Hitting children also sends a confusing message to children that although they shouldn\u2019t hit other children or adults and adults shouldn\u2019t hit other adults, it is OK for adults, who are bigger and stronger, to hit children, who are usually smaller and more vulnerable. Children learn from what their parents do, not just from what they say.<\/p>\n \n <\/i> If corporal punishment is banned, won\u2019t that lead to children being treated in more horrible ways \u2013 emotional abuse, humiliation or locking them up? <\/a>\n <\/h4>\n <\/div>\n
Parents want their children to have the best possible start in life. Parents who hit their children or mistreat them in other ways do not feel good about it \u2013 they generally feel upset and guilty. Most parents would welcome advice and support with how to prevent and solve conflicts with their children without using any kind of violence, physical or emotional. Moving on from hitting and humiliating children to regarding them as people and rights-holders alongside the rest of us improves family life for everyone.<\/p> <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n