Anti-corporal Punishment Of Children

PEOPLE COUNT P

L

C

P

D

P

O

L

I

C

Y

B

R

I

E

F

Parenting without punishing A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law By Carlos O. Tulali

Introduction Corporal punishment is often defended in the name of tradition and, at times, even in the name of religion. Physical punishment as a discipline method is also defended by touting its supposed beneficial impact on children’s behavior. Discipline is frequently confused with punishment, particularly by caregivers who use corporal punishment in an attempt to correct and change children’s behavior. But there are several differences between discipline and punishment (refer to Box 1). Discipline for children involves training and helping them develop judgment, a sense of boundaries, self-control, self-sufficiency, and positive social conduct. Discipline, unlike punishment, teaches children to learn from their mistakes rather than making them suffer for those mistakes. In fact, imposing suffering actually shifts the focus from the lesson that needs to be learned to who is in control. As a result, with punishment, the focus is on the parent controlling a child’s behavior, as opposed to discipline wherein the focus is on the child controlling his own behavior. There are two types of punishment typically used on children: punishment involving verbal reprimand

and disapproval, and punishment involving physical pain, as in corporal punishment. Corporal punishment has been commonly used in many societies and the form it takes varies according to culture and religion. Research has shown, though, that it is not effective in promoting the desired change in behavior in any lasting way. The behavioral and emotional consequences of corporal punishment vary according to how frequently and how severely the punishment is applied, as well as to the age, developmental state, vulnerability, and resilience of the child. Corporal punishment humiliates children and can lead to physical injury and serious impairment in development. Noting that parents’ use of corporal punishment to discipline their children remains a strongly debated issue, this policy brief discusses why prohibition is needed (the human rights imperative), what should be prohibited (all corporal punishment and other cruel and degrading punishment), how prohibition can be achieved (law review and reform), and how to use positive discipline as an alternative form of disciplining children.

Expanding choices, uplifting lives through responsive population and human development legislation

2

POLICY BRIEF

Box 1. Discipline vs. Punishment

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law Discipline Emphasizes what a child should do Is an ongoing process Sets an example to follow Leads to self control Helps children change Is positive Accepts child’s need to assert self Fosters child’s ability to think Bolsters self-esteem Shapes behavior

Definition The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child defines “corporal” or “physical” punishment as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light.” Most involves hitting (“smacking,” “slapping,” “spanking”) children, with the hand or with an implement—a whip, stick, belt, shoe, wooden spoon, etc. But it can also involve, for example, kicking, shaking or throwing children, scratching, pinching, biting, pulling hair or boxing ears, forcing children to stay in uncomfortable positions, burning, scalding or forced ingestion (for example, washing children’s mouths out with soap or forcing them to swallow hot spices). In the view of the Committee, corporal punishment is invariably degrading. In addition, there are other non-physical forms of punishment that are also cruel and degrading and, thus, incompatible with the Convention. These include punishment that belittles, humiliates, denigrates, threatens, scares or ridicules the child.1

Forms of Corporal Punishment Save the Children (2004)2 defines corporal punishment to include all forms of physical and humiliating or degrading punishment. Corporal punishment of children and the threat of it includes hitting the child with the hand or with an object (such as a cane, belt, whip, shoe, etc.); kicking, shaking, or throwing the child; pinching or pulling their hair; forcing a child to stay in uncomfortable or undignified positions or take excessive physical exercise; and burning or scarring the child.

Punishment Emphasizes what a child should not do Is a one-time occurrence Insists on obedience Undermines independence Is an adult’s way of venting anger and frustration Is negative Makes children behave only on the short term Thinks for the child Defeats self-esteem Condemns misbehavior Corporal punishment also includes humiliating or degrading punishment of children, which, takes various forms, such as psychological punishment, verbal abuse, ridicule, isolation, or ignoring the child. Other forms of punishment such as making children do heavy physical labor or stay in degrading or uncomfortable positions also constitute corporal punishment. While physical forms of punishment are more visible, emotional punishment in the form of humiliating or degrading punishment is more difficult to identify and confront as forms of child abuse.

Prevalence Research into Filipino children’s experiences of child abuse found that the most abusive acts were those inflicted by parents in the name of discipline and included spanking, beating or mauling (including the use of a wooden stick, belt, bat or broom by a parent, incessant beatings, slaps on the face, and burning with a flat iron), scolding or punishing the child even if he did nothing wrong, humiliating the child in public, and shouting and cursing at the child.3 Save the Children Sweden’s Comparative Research on the Physical and Emotional Punishment of Children (2005), which included the perspectives of 3,322 children from eight countries in Southeast Asia and Pacific Region including the Philippines, revealed that physical and emotional punishment is widely used in these countries and, interestingly, the methods were very similar – spanking, hitting using specific objects like a stick or belt, punching,

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

kicking and verbal assault.4 An unpublished study also conducted by Save the Children Sweden in the Philippines (2005) revealed that 85 percent of children interviewed said they are being punished in the home, with spanking as the most common (65 percent), and 82 percent said that they were hit on different parts of the body.5 Filipino children also experience threats of physical punishment and humiliating treatment such as being shouted at in front of others, and being labeled and denigrated.6 In the areas covered by the UNICEF Philippines country programme, 60 percent of women (3.6 million) reported that they used at least one form of psychological or physical punishment to punish or discipline their children. In particular, 13 percent reported that they used some severe physical punishment on their children.7 A survey conducted among Filipino students generated evidence that Filipino children, especially adolescents, also experience verbal abuse, degradation and other forms of psychological punishment, and that even these non-physical forms of punishment have negative effects on children, such as low self-worth, depression, displaced anger and aggression.8

Consequences and Effects There is a large body of international research suggesting negative effects from corporal punishment. These are some of them:

— Escalation: mild punishments in infancy are so ineffective that they tend to escalate as the child grows older. The little smack thus becomes a spanking and then a beating. Parents convicted of seriously assaulting their children often explain that the ill treatment of their child began as “ordinary” corporal punishment.

| POLICY BRIEF

— Encouraging violence: any corporal punishment carries the message that violence is an appropriate response to conflict or unwanted behavior. Aggression breeds aggression. Children subjected to corporal punishment have been shown to be more likely than others to be aggressive to siblings; to bully other children in school; to take part in aggressively anti-social behavior in adolescence; to be violent to their spouses and their own children; and to commit violent crimes. — Psychological damage: corporal punishment can be emotionally harmful to children. Studies found that most children who are hit by parents will experience few or no longterm problems but the proportion that do experience problems is at 1.8 to 3.9 times greater risk than children who are not hit by parents, depending on the type of problem. Lansford and others (2005) found that children who are disciplined with spanking or other physical punishments are more likely to be anxious and aggressive than children disciplined through other methods9. Meanwhile, Esteban (2006) found that children exposed to verbal abuse “displayed a propensity for confusion, worrying, lack of concentration, thoughts of rejection, low selfworth, chronic fatigue, and displacement of anger on siblings…[which] suggests a potential risk for transgenerational verbal abuse.”10

Why Prohibit Corporal Punishment? There are many reasons why corporal punishment of children should be prohibited: • it is a violation of children’s rights to respect for physical integrity and to human dignity, and to equal protection under the law;

3

4

POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Box 2. • Different Forms of • Corporal • Punishment • • • • • • • •

Direct assault in the form of blows to any part of a child’s body such as beating, hitting, slapping or lashing, with or without the use of an instrument such as a cane, stick or belt; Other forms of direct assault on a child’s body such as pinching, pulling ears or hair, twisting joints, cutting and shaving hair, cutting or piercing skin, carrying or dragging a child against his or her will; Indirect assault on a child’s body, through the use of power, authority or threats, to force a child to perform physically painful or damaging acts, such as holding a weight or weights for an extended period, kneeling on stones, standing or sitting in a contorted position; Deliberate neglect of a child’s physical needs, where this is intended as punishment; Use of external substances–such as burning or freezing materials, water, smoke (including from smoldering peppers), excrement or urine–to inflict pain, fear, harm, disgust or loss of dignity; Use of hazardous tasks as punishment or for the purpose of discipline, including those that are beyond a child’s strength or that bring him into contact with dangerous or unhygienic substances; such tasks include sweeping or digging in the hot sun, using bleach or insecticides, unprotected cleaning of toilets; Confinement, including being shut in a confined space, tied up, or forced to remain in one place for an extended period of time; Any other act perpetrated on a child’s body for the purpose of punishment or discipline, which children themselves define as corporal punishment in the context of their own language and culture identified through scientific participatory research with children; Witnessing any form of violent conflict resolution; Threats of physical punishment; Verbal assaults, threats, ridicule and/or denigration intended to reduce a child’s confidence, selfesteem or dignity.

Source: International Save the Children Alliance SEAP Region, 2003, 42-43. • it can cause serious physical and psychological harm to children; • it teaches children that violence is an acceptable and appropriate strategy for resolving conflict or getting people to do what they want; • it is ineffective as a means of discipline–there are positive ways to teach, correct or discipline children, which are better for children’s development and which contribute to building relationships based on trust and mutual respect; • it is difficult to protect children if corporal punishment is legitimate–this implies that some forms or levels of violence against children are acceptable.11 Prohibition is necessary because all people, including children, have human rights to respect for dignity and physical integrity, protection from all forms of violence, and equal protection under the law. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has made it absolutely clear that prohibition of corporal punishment in all settings is required to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The UNCRC, one of the most widely ratified United Nations Conventions, entered into force on September 12, 1990, only a year after its adoption. Under the Convention, a child is defined as “a human being

below the age of eighteen years, unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.”12 It sets the primary guideline in all actions concerning children, which is in the best interest of the child. The Committee has also emphasized that, in addition to being an obligation of States, prohibition is ‘a key strategy for reducing and preventing all forms of violence in societies’.13 UNCRC defines substantive provisions on how children should be treated in the different areas of their lives. Some provisions relate to the family environment or alternative care; others describe measures to guarantee children a meaningful education and access to health care. UNCRC encompasses the economic, social and cultural, as well as the civil and political rights of children, making it the most comprehensive human rights instrument. Other UN treaty monitoring bodies including the Committee Against Torture, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, and the Human Rights Committee have also recommended that states explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of children.14

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Policy and Legal Environment The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines guarantees the right of children to assistance and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development.­15 The Constitution recognizes as a State policy the natural right and duty of parents in the rearing of children, stating that:

“The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.” 16

| POLICY BRIEF

the Rights of the Child, the international body established to monitor governments’ progress in implementing the UNCRC. In its scrutiny of these reports, the Committee has stressed the need for changes in government structures and mechanisms to allow consistent consideration of children’s rights–compatibility of legislation, national strategies for children rooted in the UNCRC, analysis of the impact of proposed policies on children, budgetary analysis, and public awareness of children’s rights, to name just a few.

The Philippines was the thirty-first State to ratify the UNCRC on July 26, 1990 by virtue of Senate Resolution 109, thus, the UNCRC forms part of the law of the land. In the World Summit for Children of 1990, the Philippines adopted specific goals for children, which resulted in the adoption in December 1991 of the Philippine Plan of Action for Children (PPAC) in the 1990s and Beyond through Proclamation No. 855.

The UNCRC serves as the moving force for the enactment of national laws to further protect children from different forms of abuse and exploitation. On June 17, 1992, the Philippine Congress passed Republic Act 7610 (An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, otherwise known as the Special Protection of Children Act). It provides stronger legislation and public policy for the care and protection of children in need of special protection, declaring it “the policy of the State to provide special protection to children from all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation and discrimination, and other conditions prejudicial to their development, provide sanctions for their commission and carry out a program for prevention and deterrence, and crisis intervention in situations of child abuse, exploitation, and discrimination”19

The Convention also requires governments to provide regular reports to the UN Committee on

Other laws that provide Filipino children protection from violence and abuse include: the Revised Penal

The insertion of the adjective “primary” to describe the rights of parents implies that the right of parents is superior to that of the State.17 However, the State has the “duty of protecting the rights of persons or individuals who, because of age or incapacity, are in an unfavorable position vis-à-vis other parties.”18

5

Save the Children Sweden 2005: • 85% of children said they are punished in the home • 82% reported that they were hit on different parts of their body • 65% reported that spanking is the most common form of physical punishment World Report on Violence and Health 2002: • 75% of Filipino children said that they were spanked National Health Institute 2003, Department of Health, Philippines; Nationwide (community survey of 2,704 adolescents): • 83% said they had been physically maltreated • 60% received psychological insults and debasement Ramiro et al., 1998 (survey of 2,550 Filipino school children from urban and rural communities): Top abuses experienced by children: • verbal abuse (70 %) • physical maltreatment (60.7%) • emotional, non-verbal abuse (45.8%)

Box. 3. Results of Studies on Prevalence of Corporal Punishment in the Philippines

6

POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Code (RA 3815); the Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603), the Family Code (EO 209); the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353), the Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 (RA 8552), the Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (RA 9262), the Antitrafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (RA 9208), the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (RA 9344), and the Act Providing for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor and Affording Stronger Protection for the Working Child (RA 9231).

psychological injury.” Based on the definition, what is “reasonable” and “moderate” cruelty is based on an assessment influenced by one’s values, beliefs, and own experiences. As the Committee on the Rights of the Child observed, while RA 7610 broadly defines child abuse to include corporal punishment, there is yet no explicit law prohibiting corporal punishment in the home, in schools, and in other institutional settings, except for children in conflict with the law and children in detention who are now adequately given protection and more humane treatment under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act enacted in 2006. This fact has been reinforced by a 2006 Save the Children UK study, which reviewed and analyzed various existing Philippine laws related to discipline and punishment of children within the family. The study found that current legislative provisions are too general and vague to guide parents in the exercise of their right to discipline children and, more importantly, to protect the physical integrity and human dignity of children.20

Home and Family

Gaps and Weaknesses of Policies on Corporal Punishment At first glance, the child protection laws in the country seem to be progressive. However, once the definitions of terminology are examined, the laws are revealed not to be so protective. Indeed, parents and legal guardians can use discipline as an argument to defend the use of corporal punishment. The Special Protection for Children Act (RA 7610), which is a response to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, prohibits ”the infliction of physical or psychological injury, cruelty to, or neglect, sexual abuse or exploitation of a child.” Cruelty is defined as ”any act by word or deed, which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being.” However, the Implementing Rules and Regulations to RA 7610 defines some terms within the context of the Philippine law. Physical abuse is included in the definition of cruelty and physical injury. It states that “discipline administered by a parent or legal guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty, provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate in degree and does not constitute physical or

• Existing laws are unclear and can have different interpretations The right to discipline and punish children accorded to parents are not without limitations. Philippine laws refer to terms such as “may be required under the circumstances,” “moderately” and “just and reasonable rules, suggestions and admonitions” in the exercise of discipline and punishment. In applying these qualifications, it is not clear whose point of view is considered–whether that of the parents or of the child. Another major concern is that the qualifications provided by law are open to subjective interpretation. What is “moderate” and “just and reasonable” for the parents may already be considered “excessive” or “unreasonable” by another set of parents. These restrictions, which are applied subjectively, are too general and vague to guide parents in the exercise of their right to discipline children and, more importantly, to protect the physical integrity and human dignity of children. • Existing laws do not cover the more common and lighter forms of punishment General penal laws do not cover the second category of discipline: humiliating or degrading

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

punishment–which takes various forms such as psychological punishment, verbal abuse, ridicule, isolation or ignoring the child–because the law requires that a deed or physical act be committed before any person may be deemed to have committed an offense.21 All forms of corporal punishment of children, however light, constitute violence against the child. Corporal punishment is one form of violence against children or child abuse. It is not a separate method of discipline used by parents, teachers or other caregivers as they see fit. In today’s society, violence against women and elderly people are not accepted in any form. Why should it be different for children? • Existing laws do not cover injuries resulting from discipline administered by parents to their children Even if regulations exist against the parents in disciplining the child, the crimes covered by penal laws are specifically defined. There is a possibility that the act of the parents in disciplining the child may not fall under penal laws.

School Setting The DepEd guidelines for both public and private schools prohibit the use of cruel or physically harmful punishment against students. However, while the public schools’ Service Manual elaborates on the rule, specifically prohibiting corporal punishment including humiliating and degrading punishment, the private schools’ Service Manual does not include “humiliating and degrading punishment.” Thus, a similar provision should be added to the manual for private schools.

Penal System The judiciary issued guidelines specific to children in conflict with the law, which define and prohibit corporal punishment. However, aside from prohibiting corporal punishment, the judgment should be guided by the principle that it should not be degrading or humiliating for the child.

Alternative Care Settings The “Standards in the Implementation of Residential Care Services” adopted by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) applies

| POLICY BRIEF

to agencies or centers that provide residential care service. However, it only provides that “corporal punishment detrimental to the residents’ emotional, psychological and physical development shall never be used.”22 The Standards should be further amended to include all forms of punishment, physical or emotional, which violate the physical integrity and human dignity of the child.

Workplace Unlike laws on family relations, schools and alternative care settings, there are no provisions, which are directly applicable to discipline and punishment of children in the context of work. Although there are several penal laws that are applicable to certain acts committed against children, a more direct provision prohibiting corporal and humiliating and degrading punishment of children should be enacted to cover persons who employ them.

Barriers to Prohibiting Corporal Punishment Proponents of corporal punishment primarily base their support for this disciplinary practice on their interpretation of biblical statements and other religious teachings, or on their firm conviction that physical punishment is a parental obligation or duty. Many also recount their personal experience of physical discipline within their childhood home or school and note that, because ‘it never did them any harm,’ it is likely to work for the next generation as effectively. Advocates of corporal punishment, therefore, support existing legal provisions, which provide parents a defense against charges of assault, provided the force used was “just and reasonable” and for the purpose of correcting the child’s behavior. Government and public will are also considered to be a barrier in prohibiting corporal punishment in the Philippines. Without government support for child protection and the necessary resources, policies, systems and services, then neither individual professionals nor NGOs can achieve a systematic impact to support all children (in all geographic areas, at all economic levels). Public awareness and cooperation are also critical in enabling professionals to help prevent corporal punishment and child abuse.

7

8

POLICY BRIEF

Box 4. Philippine Laws Related to the Discipline and Punishment of Children at Home

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law Family Code of the Philippines: “The parents and those exercising parental authority shall have… the following rights and duties… (sec. 7) to impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances.“ (Art. 220) “… parental authority [may be suspended] if the parent or the person exercising the same… (sec. 1) treats the child with excessive harshness or cruelty.” (Art. 231) Child and Youth Welfare Code: “Parents have the right to discipline their child as may be necessary for the formation of his good character, and may therefore require from him obedience to just and reasonable rules, suggestions and admonitions.” (Art. 45) “Criminal liability shall attach to any parent who… (sec. 8) inflicts cruel and unusual punishment upon the child or deliberately subjects him to indignities and other excessive chastisement that embarrass or humiliate him.” (Art. 59) Republic Act 7610, Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act (Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases, Sec. 2): “Cruelty” refers to any act by word or deed, which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being. Discipline administered by a parent or legal guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate in degree… RA 7610 (Rules and Regulations, Sec. 2): Discipline…does not constitute cruelty provided it…does not constitute physical or psychological injury as defined herein; “Physical injury” includes, but is not limited to, lacerations, fractured bones, burns, internal injuries, severe injury or serious bodily harm suffered by a child; “Psychological injury” means harm to a child’s psychological or intellectual functioning, which may be exhibited by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal or outward aggressive behavior, or a combination of said behaviors, which may be demonstrated by a change in behavior, emotional response or cognition; Revised Penal Code (Art. 263: Serious physical injuries): “Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries…[This] shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement.”

There are several factors that prevent government and the public from taking an active pro-child stand, including prohibiting corporal punishment, such as:

Philippines, there is an almost absolute respect for family privacy and parental rights. Corporal punishment is widely practiced, accepted and encouraged. Parents, teachers and other caregivers are not aware of positive parenting and other non-violent forms of discipline as an alternative to corporal punishment of children.

— Financial concerns. Government believes that child protection is expensive. What it does not understand is that prevention is less expensive in the long-term. International donors that provide funding directly to the government rather than through civil society often do not establish monitoring requirements or control to ensure that funding is used for strengthening the effectiveness of child protection.

In summary:

— Lack of public awareness and will. Social and traditional norms can constrain the government from taking action to protect children or establish children’s rights. In a country like the

2) Structures and mechanisms for promoting, implementing and monitoring children’s rights, and addressing and monitoring child

1) There is still a general acceptance of corporal punishment, which stems from a very low awareness and understanding of children’s rights by the public.

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

rights violations (including cases of corporal punishment) at the national and local levels are generally weak. 3) Lack of effective monitoring and reporting mechanisms to address the issue of corporal punishment. Local councils for the protection of children, which are supposed to serve as mechanisms for reporting, monitoring and addressing child abuse cases are not established in many areas, and non-functional in areas where these exist. 4) The lack of said information is exacerbated by the lack of evidence-based good practices and models for prevention of corporal punishment and intervention programs. 5) Without commitment to such programs, there are no commitments of financial allocations for these critical child protection components. We therefore need data and evidence to establish the importance of the issue and an ensuing commitment of financial resources to establish capacity to protect children (policy, systems, services, training, and related professionals).

Legislative Measures to Prohibit Corporal Punishment Law reform to prohibit all corporal punishment and other forms of humiliating punishment of children is essential for the realization of children’s rights. When accompanied by comprehensive and sustained awareness-raising, public education, and promotion of positive, participatory and nonviolent ways to approach parenting and discipline, law reform sends a strong educational signal: that hitting or humiliating a child is just as illegal and unacceptable as hitting or humiliating anyone else. Thus, on November 5, 2007, recognizing the prevalence of corporal punishment in the country, Senator Manny Villar filed Senate Bill No.1812 titled, “An Act Prohibiting the Act of Imposing Corporal Punishment on Children, Amending for the Purpose Republic Act No. 7610, as Amended, Otherwise Known as Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.”

| POLICY BRIEF

In the House of Representatives, a similar bill, House Bill 682, “An Act Prohibiting and Penalizing the Use of Corporal Punishment on Children,” was introduced by Representative Monica PrietoTeodoro of the First District of Tarlac City. Both bills, filed during the 14th Congress, seek to prohibit and penalize the use of corporal punishment on children and to amend Republic Act 7610. Also known as “The Anti-Corporal Punishment Law of 2008,” the above bill redefines corporal punishment as an infliction of physical and mental violence upon children as forms of punishment. The revised definition also includes any form of public humiliation, verbal abuse, and other humiliating and degrading means. The proposed bill states that any parent, ascendant, teacher or guardian who uses any form of corporal punishment, whether verbal, physical, mental or psychological, can suffer lawful penalties. The proposed bill will also protect students from abusive punishments from teachers and other academic authorities, regardless of when or where corporal punishment was executed. If passed into a law, violators shall be liable in accordance with existing penal laws, provided that the penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period, except where a higher penalty is provided under Republic Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise known as the “Revised Penal Code,” Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the “Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act,” or Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the “Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act”. If the act is not penalized under the above mentioned laws, the penalty shall be arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months) in its maximum period. If the penalty imposable for the act is only arresto menor (1 day to 30 days) or arresto mayor, the bill states that the prosecutor may refer the accused to the local social welfare and development office for assessment and intervention; provided, that the offender has not been previously charged under this Act. The interventions shall include seminars on children’s rights and positive and non-violent discipline of children, counseling, anger management, and referrals to other rehabilitative services. If the

9

10 POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

offender is the parent or a person exercising parental authority, the court may suspend parental authority in accordance with the Family Code. Another bill, Senate Bill No. 1947 titled, “An Act Amending Article 218, Article 220 and Article 223 of the Family Code to Prohibit All Forms of Corporal Punishment,” was filed in the Senate by Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on December 11, 2007.

Promoting Positive Discipline as an Alternative Discipline is an essential part of child care. Discipline helps children feel secure, meets their needs, and builds self-control and self-esteem. The objective of discipline is to promote behaviors that are beneficial to the child’s development and welfare and to change and/or eliminate behaviors that are harmful or distressing to a child or to others. This is different from punishment. Corporal punishment may change children’s behaviors, but often through fear. It stresses what children should not do, but rarely teaches them what to do. Children controlled by punishment such as spanking or severe consequences may “behave” to avoid a penalty chosen by the adult. It often teaches children to hide their mistakes, and does not build long lasting inner controls or cooperation. Punishment may also cause the children to focus on revenge rather than on changing behaviors. In a 1997 research, American children whose parents used corporal punishment to reduce antisocial behavior actually experienced the opposite result from their children and an increased probability of aggression and other antisocial behavior in the long run.23 Disciplining children by spanking does not facilitate learning. Instead, it may halt the unwanted behavior only while the child is in the adult’s presence or it may scare a child into submission. While it may teach a child what not to do, it fails to teach a child what is expected of him or her and what is an alternate behavior. Additionally, corporal punishment is most often used when the parent is frustrated or does not have another resource. Spanking in these circumstances may lead to an unintentional injury or more serious abuse.

The following illustrate more of what corporal punishment does: • ­increases anxiety and fear • hinders the development of empathy and compassion for others • makes children angry in response • heightens aggression toward others • decreases compliance and increases resistance • harms relationship with parent or caregiver • potentially causes unintended and severe physical injury • decreases self-esteem • increases the probability for an array of undesirable social and psychological behaviors • teaches that violence is an acceptable way to handle conflict Positive discipline, on the other hand, refers to an approach to parenting that teaches children and guides their behavior while respecting their rights to healthy development, protection from violence, and participation in their learning.24 It is based on the philosophies of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs who believed that all human beings have equal rights to dignity and respect. All positive discipline methods are non-punitive and non-permissive. They are kind and firm at the same time. Kind because that shows respect for the child and for the adult, and firm because that shows respect for what needs to be done. Positive discipline is not permissive parenting. Neither is it about punishment. It is about longterm solutions that develop children’s own selfdiscipline and their life-long skills. Positive discipline is about teaching non-violence, empathy, selfrespect, human rights and respect for others. The use of positive techniques in rearing and educating children will help them grow to be responsible and caring citizens as children are given the venue to learn, think for themselves, think of others, and take responsibility for their actions. The four principles of positive discipline are: 1) identifying long-term childrearing goals; 2) providing warmth and structure; 3) understanding how children think and feel; and 4) problem-solving.25 The following are the major characteristics of positive discipline: • it is non-violent and respectful of the child as a learner;

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

• it is about finding long-term solutions that develop children’s own self-discipline; • it involves clear communication of parents’ expectations, rules, and limits; • it builds a mutually respectful relationship between parent and child; • it teaches children life-long skills; • it increases children’s competence and confidence to handle challenging situations; and • it teaches courtesy, non-violence, empathy, selfrespect, human rights, and respect for others.26 Many parents acquainted with the term have the misconception that positive discipline is a bag of techniques including time outs, natural consequences, and logical consequences. The concept has actually evolved significantly as research and experience have shown that consequences are often just punishment in disguise. Positive discipline actually strongly focuses on the benefits of regular family meetings, focusing on solutions for misbehavior rather than blame and on teaching children successful social skills and personal accountability. Strategies for parents and other caregivers that help children learn positive behaviors include: • providing regular positive attention, sometimes called special time (opportunities to communicate positively are important for children of all ages); • listening carefully to children and helping them learn to use words to express their feelings; • providing children with opportunities to make choices whenever appropriate options exist and then helping them learn to evaluate the potential consequences of their choice; • reinforcing emerging desirable behaviors with frequent praise and ignoring trivial misdeeds; and • modeling orderly, predictable behavior, respectful communication, and collaborative conflict resolution strategies.27

Policy Options and Strategies To have all Filipinos embrace the goal of eliminating all forms of corporal punishment of children, a multilayered strategy of interventions is necessary. Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD)

| POLICY BRIEF

recommends such a set of policy options and strategies here. Education should be the key goal of any such initiative, a principle that is emphasized in each of the strategies discussed.

Universal Prohibition – Education Campaign on Effective Discipline A universal, or primary, approach to prohibiting parents’ use of corporal punishment would be to educate the general public about its risks and about the benefits of using other discipline techniques. Such an approach has the benefit of providing a consistent message to all current and potential parents in the country and of not merely targeting particular populations who will feel labeled as potential abusers. The main goals of such a universal approach would be to change norms about the acceptability and utility of corporal punishment and to increase knowledge of effective nonviolent forms of discipline.

Targeted Interventions for New Parents and WouldBe Parents While a universal campaign is crucial for changing the national debate about discipline and may be sufficient for some parents to reduce or stop their use of corporal punishment, changing actual discipline behavior for other parents may require more intensive interventions. Because altering established behavior patterns is difficult, many such interventions should be preventive, targeting individuals before they become parents. One preventive approach would be to include a curriculum on effective non-

11

12 POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

violent approaches to disciplining children in schools. Another targeted approach would be what is known as tertiary prevention, in other words, one that is targeted at parents who have already been identified to have physically abused their children.

Reforming Laws Regarding Corporal Punishment Effective prohibition of corporal punishment requires that it be explicitly prohibited in law. This means a clear, unambiguous statement in legislation that all corporal punishment is prohibited. Children, like all people, have a right to equal protection under the law, including equal protection from assault. This should apply in all contexts–in the family home, schools, juvenile justice systems, alternative care (institutions, foster care, day care, etc), in the community, and in situations of employment.

Recommendations The Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) is committed to work towards eliminating–through policy advocacy, legal reform, education and other measures–all forms of control and punishment of children, in the family, schools and other settings, which breach children’s fundamental rights to respect for their physical integrity and human dignity. Protecting children from all forms of corporal punishment is not only about prohibition in law. It also requires: • public education and re-education, raising awareness of the negative effects of corporal punishment and of children’s rights to protection from all violence and to respect for their human dignity among parents, teachers and all those working with and for children; • promoting positive, non-violent disciplinary approaches to childrearing and education; • changing the attitudes and values that underpin the ways adults regard and relate to children; • establishing accessible and effective support for the family and all those with an input into children’s lives; and • monitoring progress towards eliminating corporal punishment.28 Specifically, PLCPD recommends the following strategies to end corporal punishment:

1. Work for the enactment of a law banning corporal punishment of children • explicit prohibition of all forms of corporal punishment and any other humiliating treatment in all settings, including in the home; • removal of legal defences for the corporal punishment of children; • establishment of a range of appropriate responses and sanctions to address the continued use of corporal punishment by parents and others; • clear direction and guidance to all providers of services for children and families to support and enforce prohibition; • comprehensive education and training program of parents, caregivers, and service providers on positive and non-violent forms of discipline and child rearing; • establishment and strengthening of national and community-based child protection systems; and • have the best interest of the child as the primary consideration. 2. Establish and strengthen the national child protection system

Child protection systems are structures, mechanisms, processes and tools (including budget allocations, guidelines, standards, and procedures) that, ideally, should operate in an integrated and coordinated way to prevent, report, and monitor cases of violence against children and respond to such cases through programs and services for children experiencing corporal punishment. In the Philippines, the institutional and community structures in the effort to protect children include: • ­child protection units at hospitals; • ­women and children’s desk at police stations; • local councils for the protection of children (LCPC) and juvenile justice welfare units at the barangay level; • Parent-Teacher Community Associations in schools; • local social welfare and development offices; • Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC); and • quick reaction teams, hotlines, children’s groups, adult support groups or neighborhood monitoring groups set up by NGOs and the community.

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

The means of protecting children in the country also include processes and protocols, as well as national laws and policies, and local codes and ordinances that ensure children’s protection is already in place at the national and local levels. However, these still need to be strengthened to effectively address the issue of corporal punishment. To strengthen existing child protection systems, there is a need to: • set up processes for raising awareness among local officials on corporal punishment; • organize support groups of adults; • build strong networks of response and referral to ensure access to programs and services for children; • develop common standards of response and support; and • strengthen inter-agency and multi-sectoral coordination and collaboration.

3. Promote positive discipline and non-violent child rearing • raise public awareness about children’s rights and corporal punishment to adults and children alike; • encourage media to promote non-violent values, and follow guidelines that protect the rights of the child in all media coverage; • conduct training on positive discipline in communities; and • build the capacity of all those who work with and for children. 4. Involve children in the development of policies and programs • consider children’s experiences and perspectives in the development of policies and programs that would respond to corporal punishment; and • support children’s own initiatives to raise awareness among other children on the issue of corporal punishment and to help address the issue. 5. Monitor children’s situation and the implementation of actions and responses

| POLICY BRIEF

Regularly assess and monitor: • children’s situation and experiences of punishment in all settings, ensuring that children’s perspectives are heard; • changes in children and adults’ views on corporal punishment; • changes in adults’ behaviour and practice; • type and quality of programs and services; and • enforcement of laws and policies banning corporal punishment.

Conclusion Children are bearers of human rights from the moment of their birth, and they are entitled to physical integrity and human dignity in the same way as adults. Children are human beings that are simply younger and more vulnerable than adults.29 The UNCRC sees the child as a subject. He or she has the right not only to schooling, health care, and an adequate standard of living, but also to be heard and have his or her views respected. The UNCRC is clear about how parents and other guardians cannot do whatever they like to children. They are not allowed to beat up or use other methods of physical or psychological violence against children as a means of punishment or to “teach” them a certain behavior. Adults are protected against such ill-treatment. Of course, children should be as well. Only zero-tolerance is acceptable. Prohibition of corporal punishment and other cruel and degrading punishment of children is an obligation under international and regional human rights instruments. Children have a right to equal protection from assault under the law. Failure to enact legislation to achieve equal protection and that explicitly prohibits all forms of corporal

13

14 POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

punishment represents a violation of this right, and allows the near universal social acceptance and use of corporal punishment in childrearing to continue unchecked. The proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment law will prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment to protect the physical integrity and human dignity of Filipino children against abusive forms of discipline at home, in schools and other institutional settings. Existing Philippine laws in restricting corporal punishment do not cover humiliating or degrading punishment. The primary purpose of law reform is not to keep the courts busy prosecuting parents and causing disharmony within families, but to send a concrete message about the unacceptability of violence against children. Prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment in law will set the standard. The best interest of the child is the guiding principle in its implementation. Thus, PLCPD supports the move towards law reform made in the form of draft legislation that has been filed in the Senate and the House of Representatives. PLCPD hopes that the deliberation

on the proposed bill will highlight the importance of the government responding to treaty body recommendations and strongly recommend that the authors of the bill introduce it as a matter of urgency to: • prohibit corporal punishment of children in all settings, including in the home; • include the prohibition of all corporal and degrading forms of punishment of children; • promote positive and non-violent discipline of children; and • provide budget allocation for the implementation of laws related to children’s rights. Ending all forms of corporal punishment requires a combination of legal reform and public education. Legal reform is essential to send clear messages that hitting or humiliating children is just as unacceptable as hitting or humiliating anyone else. But legal reform will achieve little unless it is well publicized among children and adults and linked to the promotion of positive, non-violent discipline. Programs and materials need to be developed to give positive advice on effective ways of discipline to parents, teachers and others.

Appendices Appendix 1. States with Full Prohibition of Corporal Punishment In the following 23 states, children are protected by law from all forms of corporal punishment30 Costa Rica (2008) Venezuela (2007) New Zealand (2007) Hungary (2005) Iceland (2003) Bulgaria (2000) Denmark (1997) Norway (1987)

Spain (2007) Uruguay (2007) Netherlands (2007) Romania (2004) Germany (2000) Croatia (1999) Cyprus (1994) Finland (1983)

Portugal (2007) Greece (2006) Ukraine (2004) Israel (2000) Latvia (1998) Austria (1989) Sweden (1979)

In addition, in Italy, the Supreme Court in Rome declared in 1996 all corporal punishment to be unlawful; this is not yet confirmed in legislation. In Nepal in 2005, the Supreme Court declared null and void the legal defense in the Child Act allowing parents, guardians, and teachers to administer a “minor beating”; the Child Act is yet to be amended to confirm this.

Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

| POLICY BRIEF

Appendix 2. East Asia and Pacific: Progress towards prohibiting all corporal punishment Note: The following information has been compiled from many sources, including reports to and by the United Nations human rights treaty bodies. Information in square brackets is unconfirmed.

Prohibited in penal system As sentence for crime

As disciplinary measure

Prohibited in alternative care settings

SOME

YES

SOME

SOME

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Cambodia

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

China

NO

YES

YES

YES

[NO]

Cook Islands

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

DPR Korea

NO

NO

YES

[YES]

NO

Fiji

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Indonesia

NO

NO

SOME

NO

NO

Japan

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Kiribati

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

Lao PDR

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Malaysia

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

Marshall Islands

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Micronesia, Fed. States

NO

[YES]

YES

NO

NO

Mongolia

NO

YES

YES

NO

NO

Myanmar

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

Nauru

NO

[NO]

[YES]

NO

NO

New Zealand

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Prohibited in the home

Prohibited in schools

Australia

NO

Brunei Darussalam

State

Niue

NO

NO

YES

???

[NO]

Palau

NO

NO

YES

NO

NO

Papua New Guinea

NO

NO

YES

YES

SOME

Philippines

NO

YES

YES

YES

SOME

Republic of Korea

NO

NO

YES

YES

[SOME]

Samoa

NO

NO

YES

[NO]

NO

Singapore

NO

NO

NO

NO

SOME

Solomon Islands

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

Taiwan

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Thailand

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

Timor-Leste, DR

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

Tonga

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

Tuvalu

NO

NO

SOME

NO

NO

Vanuatu

NO

YES

SOME

YES

NO

Viet Nam

NO

NO

YES

YES

NO

Prohibited

1

15

25

17

1

Not prohibited

32

18

8

15

32

-

-

-

1

1

TOTALS

Legality unknown

Source: Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children (www.endcorporalpunishment.org), March 2009

15

16 POLICY BRIEF

| Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Endnotes Committee on the Rights of the Child, CRC General Comment No. 8 (2006): The 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), 2 March 2007. CRC/C/GC/8. Online. UNHCR Refworld, p. 4, (http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/ docid/460bc7772.html) 2 Ennew, J. & Plateau, D.P. (2004), How to research the physical and emotional punishment of children, Bangkok, International Save the Children Alliance. (http://www.scslat.org/search/publieng.php?_ cod_92_lang_e) 3 De la Cruz, T. et al. (2001), Trust and power: Child abuse in the eyes of the child and the parent, UP-CIDS Psychosocial Trauma and Human Rights Program, Manila. 4 Beazley, Harriot et al. (2005), Comparative research on physical and emotional punishment of children in Southeast Asia and the Pacific 2005. Regional Protocol, Save the Children Sweden Regional Office for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, p. 3. (http://www. violencestudy.org/IMG/pdf/220905-02.pdf ) 5 Save the Children-Sweden (Unpublished; 2005), Research on corporal punishment in Bagong Silang, Caloocan City and Cebu City, United Nations High Committee on the Rights of the Child (2007), Consideration of reports submitted by states parties under article 44 of the convention, Third and fourth periodic reports of States parties due in 2007, Philippines, para. 114, p. 37. ( http:// www.humanrights.gov.ph/docs/CRC_3rd-4th-2007%20periodic%20 reports.pdf ) 6 Beazley, H., S. Bessell (2006), et al., pp. 12-19. 7 United Nations Children’s Fund (207), Philippines Sub-Regional Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2007 8 Esteban, E. (2006), “Parental Verbal Abuse: Culture-Specific Coping Behavior of College Students in the Philippines.” Child Psychiatry and Human Development, Vol. 36, No. 3. (March 2006), pp. 243-259. 9 Lansford et al. cited in “Spanking Leads to Child Aggression and Anxiety, Regardless of Cultural Norm” Science Daily, 14 November 2005. 10 Esteban, op cit. 11 Adapted from Council of Europe, Abolishing corporal punishment. The key points. (http://www.coe.int/t/transversalprojects/children/pdf/ triptyqueCP_en.pdf ) 12 Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 1. 13 Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children (2008), Prohibiting corporal punishment of children: A guide to legal reform and other measures, General Comment No. 8, para. 3. 14 Global Initiative to End All corporal Punishment of Children and Save the Children Sweden, 2008, Ending legalized violence against children, Global report 2008, p.1. (http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/ pages/pdfs/reports/GlobalReport2008.pdf ) 15 The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, art. XV, sec. 2. 1

Ibid., art. II, sec. 1. Bernas, S.J., Joaquin G. (2003), The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, Manila: Rex Bookstore, p. 79. 18 Nery, et al., vs. Lorenzo, et al., G.R. No. L-23096.27, 27 April 1972, cited in Save the Children UK (2006), Philippine Laws Related to the Discipline and Punishment of Children, Quezon City: Save the Children UK Philippines Programme, p. 20. 19 Republic Act No. 7610, An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for other Purposes, art. 1, sec. 2. 20 United Nations High Committee on the Rights of the Child (2007), Consideration of reports submitted by states parties under article 44 of the convention, Third and fourth periodic reports of States parties due in 2007, Philippines, para. 116, p. 37. ( http://www. humanrights.gov.ph/docs/CRC_3rd-4th-2007%20periodic%20 reports.pdf ) 21 Save the Children UK Philippines Programme (2006), Philippine Laws Related to the Discipline and Punishment of Children, Quezon City: Save the Children UK, p. 118. 22 Department of Social Welfare and Development Administrative Order No. 141, Standards in the Implementation of Residential Care Services, part III, sec. 1.4. 23 Straus, M.A., Sugarman, D.B., & Giles-Sims, J. (1997). Spanking by parents and subsequent anti-social behavior of children. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 151, pp. 761-767. 24 Durrant, J. E. (2007), Positive Discipline: What it is and how to do it (Primer), Bangkok, Save the Children Sweden Southeast Asia and the Pacific, p. 1. (http://seap.savethechildren.se/upload/scs/SEAP/ publication/publication%20pdf/violence/Positive%20Discipline%20 Summary%20Brochure.pdf ) 25 Ibid. 26 Interview with Joan E. Durrant, Ph.D. (http://seap.savethechildren. se/upload/scs/SEAP/publication/publication%20pdf/violence/ Positive%20Discipline%20interview%20brochure24Aug07.pdf ) 27 Kohlberg L. (1964), Development of moral character and moral ideology. In: Hoffman ML, Hoffman LW, eds. Review of Child Development Research, New York, NY: Russell-Sage Foundation; pp. 383–431 28 Rustemier, S. (2006), Corporal punishment of children vs. alternative disciplinary approaches, Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. (www.ispcan.org/documents/VID/ Corporal-punishment-position-paper.pdf ) 29 Ennew, J. & Plateau, D.P. (2004), How to research the physical and emotional punishment of children, Bangkok, International Save the Children Alliance. (http://www.scslat.org/search/publieng.php?_ cod_92_lang_e) 30 Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, States with full abolition (http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/ frame.html) 16 17

PEOPLE COUNT

PLCPD POLICY BRIEF 2009

A publication developed by the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) for the Child Rights Network (CRN) with support from Save the Children. 2/F AVECSS Building, #90 Kamias Road. cor. K-J Street, East Kamias, Quezon City 1102, Philippines Tel. nos.: (+632)925-1800 • (+632)436-2373 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.plcpd.org.ph Executive Director: Ramon San Pascual, MPH Editors: Ernesto Almocera, Jr. and Ma. Cecilia de los Reyes Layout: Dodie Lucas

Since 1989

PLCPD Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc.