The Application of Corporal Punishment among the Children in Australia - Term Paper Example

Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : Jail, Prison, Punishment Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx @2010 Introduction Corporal penalty being a contentious issue is highly debated within the Australian community. The entire Australian states as well as territories have various forms of legislations that permit reasonable chastisement on the side of parent or an individual acting as a parent, for instance a teacher. The study examines the application of corporal punishment among the children, the relationship between corporal punishments as well discipline and its legal landscape as a disciplinary means in Australia (Beswick 2008). Corporal punishment is the application of physical force on a child so as to control, correct as well as the disciplinary penalty imposed their body intended to cause some pain. Capital punishment which is also referred to as death penalty caused on the victims of crime has been abolished in Australia. The pros and cons both corporal and capital punishment is assessed. Pros of corporal and capital punishment In Australia, the level of physical punishment that a given parent or the child-carer is required to apply on a child is greatly subjected to the Australian legal regulations. Within most of the Australian states as well as territories, parental or the carer corporal punishment is lawful advocated for since it is intended for correction, discipline and reasonably based on the child’s age, reasoning capacity, mode of punishment and the harm caused. Increased parental warmth among the Australian children has reduced the risk of behavioral deficiencies such as pro-social behaviors among children in the age period of between 4-5 years, conduct and peer problems (Beswick 2008). Some outstanding ambiguities within the Queensland as well as in Western laws of Australia where important adjustments have been introduced in the education acts had previously permitted the application of physical punishment, although, not on the criminal codes that are still in principle and give the parent, individuals acting as parents authorities on the use of reasonable corrective measures. In some Australian jurisdictions the parent’s right to apply corporal punishments is supported through legislation such as the New South Wales, whereas, in others, the punishment is implemented through the common laws known as judge-made laws for instance, in Victoria. The perceived short of success in the reduction of crime has greatly resulted into a considerable support for the reintroduction of corporal punishment. Therefore, corporal punishment is very simple, visible and strong rendering it to be a useful and proportionate punishment for some crimes. This is simply because criminals should be given the kind of punishment that recognizes the truth that as a result of their crime commitment acts, it implies that they are surrendering part of their human rights. Corporal punishment within the official settings for instance, in schools as well as prisons of Australia, has been used as formal ceremonies, through a standardized procedure with solemnly emphasis of the occasion (Milfull & Schetzer 2000). It is sometimes used in stages in a manner that is ritual as an example to rest of inmates, acting as deterrent to the entire people who witness the punishment or occasion. Criminal defense in Australia for reasonable chastisement use the correction way to allow parents or those individuals that undertake the responsibilities of parents such as teachers, guardians who in most cases are charged with child assault during their care duties to effectively argue for the justification of the assault as being the use of reasonable force in correcting children (Milfull & Schetzer, 2000). Capital punishment which is also commonly referred to as the death penalty, has been advocated for by several supporters based on its understanding as the mode of retribution, cheaper compared to retaining criminals in jail, channel for deterrent, and prevents re-offending. In addition, an argument on the basis that certain crimes for instance circumstances where a victim is not shown leniency, absence of complete contraction concerning life sanctity principle in applying death penalty. The discussion on whether or not to reintroduce death penalty has been long thought of by the Australian citizens. Recent polls indicate that 70% of people, who were interviewed, supported the reintroduction of capital punishment to reduce crimes for instance, rape and murder. Although, other individuals argue that death penalty is an act of inhuman which breaches the rights of various Australian citizens, most people need to understand that if a person commits any crime which is as brutal as cruel and murder, it implies that such an individual has forfeited the entire rights entitled the rest of Australian citizens. Cons of both corporal and capital punishment Corporal punishment that leads to bruising or causes an injury which lasts for more than 24 hours is considered to be unreasonable and is perceived as the physical abuse. For instance, in 1900 Act of the New South Wales offense states that if force is used causes harm on the head, neck of the victim lasting for long, then such kind of corporal punishment is considered as unreasonable. As a result of the unreasonable corporal punishment, the police or human protection authorities are required to intervene. The entire Australian states as well as territories disregard the use of parental force as a method of correction on the child. Corporal punishment causes pains which are barbaric, resulting into throwback to such societies established on the military might, handling of criminals without human rights as well as slavery (Wood 2008). Maintenance of the parental consistency is a very significant component in the entire disciplinary strategies for children in Australia. Corporal punishment that results into inconsistent parenting may confuse the children, influencing them to misbehave. The longitudinal research conduct indicates that any inconsistent parenting is related to behavioral problems among the children such as conduct as well as peer problems, low pro-social behavior, emotional difficulties and hyperactivity. However, if the parents are value the application of consistent disciplinary strategies, respective children effectively learns their parents’ reaction against bad behaviors. In addition, from the detailed research on the Australian children, a clear implication is examined that the behavioral problems are highly associated with increased parental hostility levels. Studies in Capital punishment indicate that its formal abolition in Australia was in 1984. In March 2010, the federal legislation rejected its reintroduction within the entire Australian states, territories with total focus on the prohibition of its rein station in any formulated jurisdiction (Beswick 2008).The government of Australia is officially against death penalty; however, in such cases where the victims are faced with that kind of punishment, it only intervenes in some specified cases. As a result of selective intervention in the clemency calls, the Australian government establishes the two-tiered policy as well as ambiguity in regard to its true position. According to Smith et al. (2004) corporal punishment may result into unfavorable child outcomes. Smith also examined that corporal punishment only teaches a person or a child in particular to keep away from such behaviors considered to be punishable through the application of force, instead of enabling the child to avoid engaging in undesirable behaviors in his or her entire life. This method of punishment also teaches individuals that problems are as well addressed through the physical aggression. In Australia, literature related to whether low rates in child maltreatment as well as deaths are to be used as illustrative benefits for banning corporal punishment and extend the bans on the entire forms this punishment on some other jurisdictions. Considerable uniformity on either to implement explicit ban on the application of corporal punishment within the Australian schools, or disregarding the provision of defense acts in education that provide defensive use of reasonable chastisement on such people acting as parents, has been introduced in the whole Australian territories and states. However, less consistency in relation to the specific level at which the Australian jurisdictions have banned the application of corporal punishment within the non-governmental schools, has been revealed in several studies in corporal punishments in Australian schools. Capital punishment is perceived as an inhuman, ineffective and fault ridden mode of punishing criminals in Australia. It is widely considered as the sad indictment to the Australian society to reach the criminal as well as legal extent of committing murder. Death penalty hinders the amendment activities of criminals associated with discrimination, political influences and media who are mistakenly convicted. Lack of ideal evidence that capital punishment is deterrent has limited the application of death penalty as the best method of punishment for criminals within the Australian communities. The Australian statistics reveal that significant consistency in homicide rates and population growth has observed since the capital punishment abolition Murder rates per person for a given population, has not increased which is an unequivocal confirmation that capital punishment is a non-deterrent and hold no effect on a given murderer. The previous, current as well as future human fault potentials meant that criminals, who are subjected to death penalty, could be proved to be innocent in later after careful investigations and that would be extremely late in reversing the death sentence punishment. Therefore, it is very unfortunate that such individuals who are subjected to death penalty are usually political influence victims. As a result, capital punishment is riddled with quite a number of problems that have large detrimental effects on the Australian society (Beswick 2008). Conclusion Corporal punishment is very contentious issue in Australia. Various groups of people advocate for the banning of corporal punishment based on the argument that the physical pain applied on the children or victims, causes damage and violates the rights of people in Australia. Whereas others argue in support to retain the right to use corporal punishment as a disciplinary method with suggestion to use other alternatives on the view that if the punishment is banned, it will criminalize the parents as well as overburden the child or people protection systems. Capital punishment is an inhuman, ineffective and very fault ridden method of punishing criminals in Australia. In addition, it creates a sad indictment to the Australian society in reaching the criminal as well as legal extent of committing murder. Bibliography Beswick, A., (2008), Death Sentences and Executions in 2008" published in Healey, J., 2010, The Death Penalty, The Spinney Press, Thirroul NSW Australia. Milfull, C., & Schetzer, L. (2000), Sufficient protection for Australian children's rights? Beyond the Corbett Bill: A comparative analysis of attitudes and legal responses to corporal punishment in the home, Sydney, NSW: National Children's and Youth Law Centre. Smith, A. B., Gollop, M. M., Taylor, N. J., & Marshall, K. A. (2004). The discipline and guidance of children: A summary of research. Dunedin, NZ: Children's Issues Centre, University of Otago and the Office of the Children's Commissioner. Wood, K., (2008), Call to abolish death penalty published in The Age 10 October 2008, reproduced in Healey, J., 2010, The Death Penalty, The Spinney Press, Thirroul NSW Australia, p.3-4. Read More