Debatepedia launches Global Climate Change Debate Series with UN Foundation's The People Speak. See press release.
Debate:Corporal Punishment (for Children)
From Debatepedia
|
[  ][  ][  ][  ][  ]Is physical force a justifiable method of punishing children? |
YOU can become an editor of this article. Debatepedia is a wiki encyclopedia of pros and cons that anyone can edit! What's a wiki? How to edit.
Editing tasks in this article that you can do:
- Pro and con articles on this debate topic need to be researched and presented in the "pro/con resources" section (bottom).
- Arguments and quotations should be drawn from these pro and con articles and framed in this article and in specific argument pages that you can create.
- Arguments need to be separated and isolated and then organized into sub-debate sections so that arguments and counter-arguments align.
- You can add more editing tasks here, delete completed ones, and talk about tasks on the discussion page. See other editing tasks on Debatepedia here
|
|
[ ][  ][  ][  ][  ]Argument #1 | |
|
[  ][ ]YesCorporal 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.
|
[ ][ ]NoIt 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.
|
|
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][  ]Argument #2 | |
|
[ ][ ]YesCorporal 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.
|
[ ][ ]NoNo 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.
|
|
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]Argument #3 | |
|
[ ][ ]YesSerious 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.
|
[ ][ ]NoThe 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.
|
|
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]Argument #4 | |
|
[ ][ ]YesIf 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, or another adult that is significant in the child's life if both parents are not together.
|
[ ][ ]NoThe 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".
|
|
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]Argument #5 | |
|
[ ][ ]Yes
|
[ ][ ]No"The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." [Shakespeare] The Bible frequently condones practices that are outrageous to the modern sensibility.
|
|
[ ]References:This article is based on a Debatabase entry written by Eliot Jones. Because this document can be modified by any registered user of this site, its contents should be cited with care. [ ]Motions
[ ]Related pages on Debatepedia:[ ]External links and resources:
[ ]Books
| |
Categories: Debatabase | Politics | Human rights | Under-age | Moral