The priest and corporal punishment of children

HAZEL MARY THOMPSON-AHYE

ON NEW Year’s morning I attended the 8 am Mass at my parish church. In the course of his sermon, the priest mentioned the words “child rights.” It was music to my ears. I thought I was in for a treat. Glory Hallelujah! My joy was short-lived, however, for, as the sermon continued, I became increasingly concerned about the message being conveyed.

The priest said that the reason there was so much crime in the society was that children were not being corrected, as we adults had been when we were children. He blamed the child rights advocates (among whom I count myself) for that state of affairs. He told of a child in the US who had called the protective services to complain of his grandmother beating him and the grandmother had been arrested. He advocated a return to the good old days when children were flogged and became law-abiding members of society. I vowed to speak to him after Mass.

The sermon was reminiscent of a Mother’s Day sermon at the cathedral in Nassau many years ago.The parish priest had said then that mothers were responsible for boys being in Fox Hill Prison. A number of mothers, including the then president of the Bar Association, walked out the church. Archbishop Burke had taught us that older parishioners had a responsibility to correct young priests when they fell into error, so I had a word with the priest and discovered that he was oblivious to the exodus that had occurred.

After the New Year’s Mass I approached the priest, whom I had, in the past, complimented on his inspiring sermons and his manner of engaging the congregation in the liturgy, and asked him if a Trinidadian mother was told, as Mary was, by Jesus, “Did you not know I must be about my father’s business?” should she cuff him in his mouth? He laughed. I promised to respond publicly to his sermon. I do so now.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which TT ratified since 1991, has made it clear that “legal and social acceptance of physical punishment of children in the home and institutions is not compatible with the convention.”

In its general comment No 8 on the “The right to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment,” the committee defined corporal punishment as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light.

“Most involve hitting (smacking, slapping, spanking) children, with the hand or with an implement – whip, stick, belt, shoe, wooden spoon, etc. But it can also involve, for example, kicking, shaking or throwing children, scratching, pinching, burning, scalding or forced ingestion (for example, washing children’s mouth out with soap)…”

The committee views corporal punishment as “invariably degrading and recognises that some justify the use of corporal punishment through religious faith teachings and texts” but that “practice of a religion or belief must be consistent with respect for others’ human dignity and physical integrity…and that freedom to practise one’s religion or belief may be legitimately limited to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

In addition to the committee, recommendations to prohibit corporal punishment of children have been made to states by the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee Against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The UN secretary general’s study on violence against children highlighted the number of countries with legalised violence against children and intensified the campaign for prohibition. The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children was launched in 2001 to encourage states to abolish corporal punishment of children. Today, 67 countries out of 193 have achieved total abolition.

While there has been some progress in TT with the prohibition of corporal punishment of children in schools and in institutions, we lack the political will to enact laws to prohibit corporal punishment in the home. Our Children Act preserves the right of parents and guardians to administer “reasonable” corporal punishment.

The well-known saying about sparing the rod and spoiling the child, erroneously ascribed to Proverbs, has now been interpreted to mean “not an endorsement of harsh punishment but a call to parents to fulfil their God-given duty to lovingly guide children to right behaviour to prepare them for adulthood.”

Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu was strongly against corporal punishment. He said that “violence against children is a violation of their human rights and can have serious lifelong effects.” He also said that “no form of violence against children is acceptable, and legalising violence in one context can lead to tolerance of violence more generally.”

After Vatican City was admonished by the Child Rights Committee for its stance on corporal punishment, the Holy See, through Pope Francis, issued new regulations in March 2019. These regulations “flatly forbid any corporal punishment, offending a child or engaging in inappropriate or sexually suggestive conduct, asking children to keep a secret; or filming or photographing a child without written consent from their parents.”

Although there is a great deal of research which reveals the dangerous and harmful effects on children of corporal punishment, both physical, psychological harm, we still embrace corporal punishment as an acceptable form of discipline of children in our homes, places where children should feel safe and secure. UNESCO has stated that corporal punishment is counterproductive and ineffective, and dangerous and harmful to children.

Save The Children opposes all forms of corporal punishment. The Australian Psychological Society and the American Humane Society have stated that corporal punishment is ineffective in deterring undesirable behaviour and in fact promotes undesirable behaviour. The Canadian Paediatric Society, the UK’s Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the American Academy of Pediatrics and some local and regional bodies, including Working Women, speak to the negative effects of corporal punishment.

Research shows the effects of corporal punishment as increased aggression in children, anxiety and fear generated, decrease in self-esteem, the lesson learned that violence is an acceptable way to handle conflict, injuries to health, developmental delays, and threats to the right to life.

A UNECLAC/UNICEF study estimated that every year worldwide 275 million children are victims of violence in their homes and that in Latin America and the Caribbean 40 million children under 15 suffer violence, abuse and neglect in the family, the school and the community.

We fail to even consider the warnings against corporal punishment of researchers like Murray Strauss, who wrote Beating the Devil out of Them, of Alice Miller, author of For Your Own Good, The Roots of Violence in Child-Rearing, and Karl Morse and Wiley who wrote Ghosts from the Nursery, when they point out the long-term negative effects of corporal punishment.

Psychologists call it cognitive dissonance. How can we accept that corporal punishment is wrong when our loving parents did it to us? So we must reject that thought that we were harmed or abused. In any event, we turned out all right, didn’t we? Did we though?

Hillary Clinton stated that in one year, 141,700 infants and children were seriously injured or neglected. She noted that more children have died from child abuse and neglect than from urban gang wars, AIDS, polio or measles, yet the contrast in public attention and commitment of resources was vast.

Psychologists teach that we should look at discipline with love, listen and communicate, focus on the behaviour rather than the child, respond immediately, be realistic, do not harm or injure, set boundaries, be consistent, use time-outs, reward or praise desirable behaviour, and be calm. They recommend that we see discipline not as control and punishment, but an opportunity for learning.

Given our history and experience, it is not easy to make the paradigm shift from punishment to positive discipline, but it is a choice we must embrace with grace and faith. Our children’s lives and the future of our society depend on us. Father, you meant well, but your message was wrong.

A couple of months ago, my grandson Gabriel in Florida, who celebrated his fifth birthday on January 31, noticed a pre-school teacher had hit his older twin brother, Jacob, born on January 30 (a few minutes before midnight), as Jacob had accidentally caused her to spill her coffee. Gabriel bravely walked over to the teacher and said to her, “No hitting!” A chip off the old block?

Senator Hazel Mary Thompson-Ahye is a former co-ordinator of the Caribbean Coalition for the Abolition of All Corporal Punishment of Children, and a child rights advocate

The post The priest and corporal punishment of children appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.