Corporal Punishment - Research Paper Example

? Corporal Punishment Teacher               Corporal Punishment According to the National Coalition to Abolish Corporal Punishment in Schools, or the NCACPS, the term “corporal punishment” refers to the “physical pain inflicted on the body of a child as a penalty for disapproved behavior” (Dupper & Dingus, 2008). However, practically speaking, it refers to the violent way of hitting, spanking, punching, paddling and many other physical ways of carrying out a punishment on a child who is considered disobedient. Actually, despite the claims to its usefulness and practicality, corporal punishment has no benefits and is therefore not necessary in order to discipline children. Firstly, the rumored benefits of corporal punishment are not available in concrete terms. According to Dupper and Dingus (2008), based on the findings of the Society for Adolescent Medicine in 2003, “There is no data demonstrating that the use of corporal punishment is associated with enhanced social skills or self-control skills over time.” Perhaps, there are isolated cases where corporal punishment has had its positive effects in one or two children or even several groups of children. However, there have been no longitudinal or developmental studies or even case studies of children who have really improved throughout the course of time with constant corporal punishment. Perhaps, one reason for this lack of data is the fact that corporal punishment is banned in most states and countries, and so there is no way that a study can possibly be conducted at a natural setting. Moreover, corporal punishment is a taboo in many societies and that the child must be feeling more humiliated in a setting where he is aware that his punishment is being documented. Corporal punishment, therefore, proves to be lacking in proof and evidence that is supposed to warrant its use in schools and in the homes of children. Moreover, even if there is a case study or a developmental study conducted on the possible benefits of corporal punishment on the child, this will require close and constant monitoring, and this will entail the use of measures that will gauge abstract elements of the child’s personality. Simply speaking, it means that, during the course of the study, not only should the children’s performance at school or obvious change in habit will be gauged but also their way of thinking and all the internal mechanisms that are going on in their minds. This is to acknowledge the possibility that there are some cases of children who would physically appear reformed and renewed but who would actually channel their aggression and violent behavior towards other things like perhaps the killing of small animals or occasional telling of lies. In short, the approach that is required of any developmental study that is to investigate the usefulness of corporal punishment in children must therefore involve a very holistic and complete process. Moreover, developmental studies should extend even up to the time that the child already has his or her own family, because there may be cases of children whose negative behaviors may be successfully suppressed and controlled by corporal punishment, but may nevertheless be expressed only later on in adulthood, especially when the child becomes a parent to abusive children. Thus, if a developmental or case study on corporal punishment is ever conducted, chances are it will fall short when it comes to completeness or comprehensiveness of investigation. It will then be unfit for consideration in any discussion. Secondly, corporal punishment has no known long-term benefits. In fact, based on a study by Teicher in 2005, one of the most important proofs that corporal punishment does not seem to work and one of the reasons why developmental studies on it should be conducted is that “the same students are hit over and over again” (as cited in Dupper & Dingus, 2008). If the same students are being hit over and over again, then it means that the method of corporal punishment or corporal punishment itself is ineffective. It may perhaps elicit obedience or conformity for a relatively short period of time but it may be totally ineffective after all or in the long run. Perhaps, if the goal of corporal punishment is to elicit instant, short-term obedience and fear, then most instances of corporal punishment must be beneficial and practical. However, methods of discipline are usually carried out not for the reason that they should be carried out everyday but because one wants to instill in the child long-term discipline, or something that will make him unsuitable for punishment later on and something that will make him responsible in the long run. Corporal punishment then does not seem to achieve this purpose. There have been no reports, studies or in-depth investigations of corporal punishment as a method of discipline that has withstood the test of time in terms of instilling good values in children. What has withstood the test of time is the practice of corporal punishment but not its rumored good long-term effects. Therefore, if the same children are being hit over and over again, then the method is ineffective, and such method needs changing. Thirdly, corporal punishment is known to cause psychological problems in the child. A study by Hyman in 1995 states that the use of corporal punishment in schools has also been known to have “damaging physical and psychological outcomes that can affect some children for the remainder of their lives” (as cited in Dupper & Dingus, 2008). Examples of this include conduct disorder and PTSD, or post-traumatic stress disorder (Dupper & Dingus, 2008). Conduct disorder, for one, may be misinterpreted by the teacher and may even become another reason for further corporal punishment, thus actually aggravating the mental and emotional aspects of the child who has most likely already been severely punished in the same way. Moreover, unrecognized and undiagnosed PTSD may become a cause of poor school performance and might also become another reason for corporal punishment. The child therefore is and will always be on the losing end whenever corporal punishment is being administered by the teacher, and this occurs especially in a setting where no one is aware of the mental and emotional consequences of the practice, such as PTSD or conduct disorder. Moreover, the bigger problem that will probably ensue from this is the development in the child of a certain type of personality that stems from the pain and violence that he has experienced as a receiver of corporal punishment. Furthermore, according to Dupper and Dingus (2008), the study by Hyman also found out that the child often exposed to corporal punishment in his or her school may exhibit some aggressive, oppositional or defiant behavior, and may not be able to solve problems rationally. This act of channeling one’s aggressive behavior that is suppressed by corporal punishment may actually at first only translate as a harmless oppositional, defiant, and aggressive behavior. However, it may soon blow up into something bigger than what it should be. The one on the losing end is still ultimately the child. Instead of his behavior becoming better, it is simply expected to get worse with corporal punishment. In fact, corporal punishment also leads to feelings of inadequacy and resentment, which in turn will most likely lead to anger, hostility, violence, aggression against peers and school authorities, according to a 1998 study by Hyman and Perone (Dupper & Dingus, 2008). Moreover, based on studies, corporal punishment does not seem to decrease defiant and aggressive behavior in the long run (Gershoff & Bitensky, 2007). A number of people, both children and adults, often revert back to their former negative selves some time after the fear of punishment has gone away. Moreover, according to McLoyd and Smith (2002), “Spanking was associated with an increase in behavior problems over time” especially among African American children. It is also believed that “physical punishment typically evokes anger and emotional distress in the child, which, over time, may diminish positive feelings” (McLoyd & Smith, 2002). These statements all mean one thing, corporal punishment seems to instill more violence than it can eradicate. Perhaps, it is because it is based on fear, and if the fear goes away, either the individual goes back to his original negative self or he becomes worse as a result of having to make up for the time that he was able to successfully suppress his violent behavior. Fourthly, corporal punishment is often associated with crimes and acts of violence in the same community, school or state where it is considered legal. In fact, according to Dupper and Dingus (2008), the incidence of corporal punishment in a particular area is associated with higher rates of child abuse fatalities in the same area, school shootings, youths awaiting capital punishment, student behavior problems, and acts of violence, aggression and homicide committed by children. Moreover, in that particular area, there is also a general atmosphere of student alienation, misbehavior, and a desire in someone to seek revenge. The biggest problem is that these instances of violence and aggression in the children are not recognized as effects of corporal punishment but may actually be even considered as a stronger motivation for teachers to inflict corporal punishment on the children. Thus, it becomes a vicious cycle, where the ultimate loser is no one else but the student himself. Fifthly, based on the aforementioned statements and based on a study by Owen in 2005, corporal punishment indeed “legitimizes the use of violent means to solve behavior problems” (as cited in Dupper & Dingus, 2008). This means that when a child sees that corporal punishment is freely administered even through violent means, he or she may think that it is then very much appropriate to inflict violence on someone regardless of the purpose of the punishment or act. Approving the use of corporal punishment in the home and at school is actually tantamount to approving the use of violence. The idea is actually using violence but only when necessary such as correcting the wrongs. This is what corporal punishment is actually ideally supposed to be. However, in the eyes of a child, who lacks the critical and analytical thinking skills necessary in determining what is ethically or purposefully right or wrong, any act of violence which is allowed and done by adults must be interpreted as right, correct and moral. Sixthly, corporal punishment encourages the idea of coercion. According to Ulman and Straus (2000), corporal punishment is often associated with child-to-parent violence. This is somehow connected with the idea that corporal punishment legitimizes the use of violence. The problem with corporal punishment is that as parents show their children the fact that violence is possible as long as it is used for punishment, children develop the idea that the same thing goes for adults and for anyone else who they believe deserve punishment. Another thing is that every act of punishment is somehow also an act of coercion because the receiver does not want it and is only forced to receive the punishment. This will then most likely lead to the idea of hurting one’s parents and forcing him or her to do even certain things that he or she may not be able to do. Coercion will also most likely teach the child to do the same thing not only to his parents and to other people and animals, but especially even to himself. The child will then be likely to force oneself to conform to anything that he believes is worth conforming to, and it follows that he will punish himself severely if ever he thinks he is not able to conform to it. Seventhly, corporal punishment does not seem to have produced diligent students but rather the opposite. In fact, the students who receive corporal punishment perform at lower levels in terms of “ability, academic achievement, and social competence” (Dupper & Dingus, 2008). This is now a question of perspective. Is the goal of corporal punishment the production of children or students who are diligent and obedient, or is it the encouragement for children to become good and effective students? Thus, although corporal punishment may be able to produce a few obedient students, it certainly defeats the purpose of education if it does indeed produce students who have poor academic performance. The ultimate goal of education is always learning and not the development of kindness and obedience. If ever the educational system or the educational institution seeks to develop kindness, obedience or any of the Christian values in the student, then this is definitely merely instrumental in his success in the academe. This means that if corporal punishment does indeed produce obedient but poor students, then it is clearly a very ineffective method of disciplining children. Eighthly, corporal punishment will likely destroy the child’s life sometime later in his life. According to Holden (2002), if the corporal punishment was “sufficiently painful,” what will most likely result is “various neurological stress reactions” as well as intense emotional arousal, especially with the emotions such as fear, anger, humiliation, embarrassment, and sadness. As the child grows up with this type of emotional make-up which he has developed as a reaction to his experience of corporal punishment, it will definitely be very difficult for him to be able to cope with life’s pressures later on, especially with his interpersonal relationships. Furthermore, according to Mulvaney and Mebert (2007), there is actually “more convincing evidence for…antisocial and other problem behavior” among children and adults who have received corporal punishment. Such antisocial and other problem behavior will definitely make life miserable for the child as he grows up and when he eventually turns into an adult. Corporal punishment, indeed, is not an effective means of disciplining children at home or at school, and is therefore unnecessary and has no value. There are many reasons to prove this. First, there is no concrete evidence from developmental studies proving the positive effects of corporal punishment on the child itself, and even if there is, it is most likely lacking in substance due to several variables that are difficult to gauge. Second, corporal punishment does not have any known long-term benefits which are scientifically based. Third, corporal punishment is most likely to cause psychological problems in the child. Fourth, corporal punishment is often associated with crimes and acts of violence in the area where it is legalized. Fifth, corporal punishment, no matter what the purpose is, legitimizes the use of violence at least in the eyes of a child, who still obviously lacks critical thinking skills. Sixth, the practice of corporal punishment encourages coercion or the act of compelling someone with force. Seventhly, corporal punishment is most likely to make the child perform poorly at school, no matter the amount of obedience it instills in him. Lastly, and obviously not the least, there is a great likelihood that corporal punishment will destroy a child’s life when one grows up. This is because of the numerous psychological problems that it brings about. References Dupper, D. R. & Dingus, A. E. M. (2008). Corporal Punishment in U.S. Public Schools: A Continuing Challenge for School Social Workers. Children & Schools, 30(4), 243-250. Gershoff, E. T. & Bitensky, S. H. (2007). The Case against Corporal Punishment of Children. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13(4), 231-272. Holden, G. W. (2002). Perspectives on the Effects of Corporal Punishment: Comment on Gershoff (2002).” Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 590-595. McLoyd, V. C. & Smith, J. (2002). Physical Discipline and Behavior Problems in African American, European American, and Hispanic Children: Emotional Support as a Moderator.” Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 40-53. Mulvaney, M. K. & Mebert, C. J. (2007). Pastoral Corporal Punishment Predicts Behavior Problem in Early Childhood. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(3), 387-397. Ulman, A. & Straus, M. A. (2000). Violence by children against mothers in relation to violence between parents and corporal punishment by parents. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34, 41-60. Read More