Achieving and implementing prohibition of all corporal punishment - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Achieving and implementing prohibition of all corporal punishment of children

Estonia, November 2017

Obligation on states to prohibit

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child obliges states to:

• take all appropriate legislative measures to protect children from all forms of physical and mental

violence (article 19)

• take all effective and appropriate measures to abolish traditional practices prejudicial to the health
• f children (article 24(3))
• ensure that school discipline respects children’s human dignity (article 28(2))
• ensure that children are not subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment (article 37(a)) The Committee on the Rights of the Child in its General Comment No. 8 (2006), on the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment, makes it clear that the Convention requires states to prohibit and eliminate all corporal punishment, including in the home.

What is corporal punishment?

UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 8, para.11:

• The Committee 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

• Hitting (“smacking”, “slapping”, “spanking”) with the hand or with an implement
• 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
• Other non-physical forms of punishment that are also cruel and degrading: punishment which

belittles, humiliates, denigrates, scapegoats, threatens, scares or ridicules the child

• In the view of the Committee, corporal punishment is invariably degrading

Global progress

Good news:

• 53 states worldwide prohibit all corporal punishment of children
• Another 54 states “committed” to reforming their laws
• 10 of the 11 states in the Baltic Sea Region have achieved prohibition

Bad news:

• Only 10% of the world’s children are fully protected in law from corporal

punishment

• In 34 states, corporal punishment is still lawful as a sentence for crimes

committed by children under state, traditional and/or religious law

Harm to children: how does it feel?

• “It hurts inside and outside”
• “I cannot make it – I am not as good as the other children”
• Through research and activities carried out all over the world, children are

telling about how much physical and emotional punishment hurts them and they ask adults to urgently stop it. Violence against children is felt as even worse when parents and trusted adults conduct it or approve of it.

• The impact includes feeling disempowered, self harm and lower school grades

and increased antisocial and aggressive behaviour.

• Causing physical pain to a child is a breach of children’s right to protection

from assault and their right to dignity.

Positive parenting

• Parent-child relationship based on care and respect
• Setting clear boundaries and structures. Parents and children discuss home

rules and develop trust and self-confidence

• Parents explains why they are upset and they listen to the reactions of the
• child. The child learn to speak about emotions
• “Parenting” in institutions and foster care to be based upon the same principle
• f each child having a care giver to confide in, discuss with and have trust
• Let the child know they are important and avoid comparing them with others
• Parenting is challenging - and it is ok to say sorry....
• Discussions in schools, preschools, health stations about positive parenting
• Politicians and community leaders being positive role models
• Campaigning and offering parenting programs
• Give children an opportunity to tell how they experience violent punishment

Positive impact of prohibition

• Research comparing the prevalence of, and attitudes towards, corporal

punishment before and after law reform is only available in a handful of states

• In some states, no research has directly asked children about their

experiences

• In other states, different questions or samples have been used in studies

carried out before and after prohibition, making strict comparison between data difficult

• But the evidence of changes in attitudes and practice is strong

Positive impact of prohibition (continued)

Sweden (1979): half of children regularly smacked in 1970s; a few per cent in 2000s Finland (1983): adult acceptance of corporal punishment 47% in 1981; 15% in 2014 Germany (2000): 30% of young people had been “thrashed” in 1992; only 3% in 2002 New Zealand (2007): approval of corporal punishment over 90% in 1981; 40% in 2013 Poland (2010): approval of corporal punishment fell 18% in five years (2008-2013) Latvia (1998): In 2010, 42% of surveyed adults were of the opinion that corporal punishment in the home should be forbidden, in 2017 it was 51%. In 2015, 33% of children stated that they had been smacked with a hand or some kind of object. The positive impact of prohibition of corporal punishment on children’s lives: messages from research (June 2015) available at www.endcorporalpunishment.org

Non-violent childhoods

Moving on from corporal punishment in the Baltic Sea Region

• Overall objective: promote full implementation of legal bans on corporal

punishment through collaborative, multi-stakeholder planning and action

• Draws on significant experience of states in the Baltic Sea Region
• Project partners: Children at Risk Unit, CBSS Secretariat, and the Global

Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children

• National partners: Ministry of Social Affairs, Estonia; Ministry of Social Affairs

and Health, Finland; Ministry of Welfare, Latvia; Coordination on the Rights of the Child, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, Sweden; Ombudsman for Children’s Rights, Poland

• Involves representatives and experts from all countries in the Baltic Sea Region

and other EU countries, including children

Non-violent childhoods

Moving on from corporal punishment in the Baltic Sea Region

• National consultations held in 2017: Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Poland
• Expert meetings in 2018 covering four areas:
• Communication of the ban and its purpose
• Effective campaigning
• Parenting programmes
• Service providers
• Guidance document developed for each area, plus a general guide on

implementing prohibition of corporal punishment, which can be used globally

• European Conference (November 2018)

Lessons learned from Swedish consultation

• The legal ban was the culmination of a lengthy process over decades of socio-

political developments and law reforms

• The law reform process went hand in hand with an evolving understanding of

children as members of society and rights holders

• The law was adopted with a specific budget for dissemination – the massive public

information campaign prepared the ground for implementation

• Primary purpose of prohibition was educational – the relation between educational

civil laws and penal sanctions in criminal law needs to be clarified

• Prohibition is associated with a zero-tolerance approach to violence against

children, but doubts remain with regard to the role of law enforcement

• Now need new approaches to encourage a more open dialogue in society and

prevent a taboo associated with corporal punishment and violence against children

Lessons learned from Swedish consultation

• Universal prevention is an effective approach – not stigmatizing, reaches all parents,

parents tend to listen to advice from health care professionals (e.g. midwifes trained to discuss family violence at pregnancy check-ups)

• Family support services are an important part of the welfare state (e.g. parental

leave programmes, provision of early childhood care services)

• A diversity of parenting training programmes are useful to meet the specific needs
• f each family (e.g. children with disabilities, parents with very young/teenage children,

families where intimate-partner violence occurs)

• Multidisciplinary and interagency cooperation is essential for early identification,

referral and follow-up to cases (e.g. Barnahus)

• Collaboration between different state and non-state actors for dissemination and

implementation of the law – includes active civil society, academia, Ombudspersons and other independent institutions, media

Lessons learned from Finnish consultation

• Campaigns and programmes against corporal punishment of children inform about

positive parenting and alternatives to corporal punishment

• The prevention of corporal punishment and support for parents and families became a

cross-cutting concern for social and health care services, in policy planning and in practice

• Good data collection mechanisms were useful to monitor the progressive

implementation of the law and inform policies and programmes, such as periodic school heath surveys and child victim surveys

• Law reform to clarify reporting obligations enhanced proactive reporting and referral
• A National Action Plan was a useful tool to bring the issue to the attention of national

ministries and institutions and to coordinate activities for the implementation of the law

Lessons learned from Finnish consultation

• Social and health care services for children and parents are provided in a single place

to enhance access, reach and impact

• Specialised services come to meet children and parents where they are, in the home,

in schools and in local family centres

• Social services are supported with a package of support and response measures

that can be tailored to the individual situation of each child and parent

• Public sector reform helps to make service provision more child-centred and child-

sensitive, inlcuding by training on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

• Universal screening services provide good opportunities to ask clients specifically

about violence against children, incl. corporal punishment, and facilitate identification

• The decision on whether or not criminal action shall be pursued against parents or

caretakers is informed by a best interests determination

Lessons learned from Latvian consultation

• Research has evidenced how weak social and emotional competence and empathy of

professionals working with children undermine their capacity to resolve problems and conflicts. Strengthening these professional skills is essential for the implementation of the legal ban.

• Follow-up to cases of corporal punishment in schools remains inconsistent. Clear administrative

procedures and regulations are to be developed for schools to handle incidents or suspicions.

• The national strategy for deinstitutionalisation is used to promote the implementation of the

legal ban in the alternative care sector, including by regulating the ratio of caretakers to children, reporting obligations, referral as well as training and supervision of staff.

• Health care sector data on injuries of children are critical for analysing prevalence and trends,

including with regard to corporal punishment. As this data source is still inconsistent, efforts are made to ensure mandatory data entry by all, including in- and outpatient clinics, paediatrics and family doctors.

• By locating specially trained social workers in hospitals, the identification and referral of cases of

violence against children, including corporal punishment, shall be strengthened.

Lessons learned from Latvian consultation

• Societies who are transitioning from an authoritarian regime to a democratic state are struggling with

low trust in state services and a fear-driven understanding of authority. These socio-cultural patterns influence parental authority within families so that the implementation of the legal ban is going hand in hand with intergenerational social transformations.

• Adults have not kept up to date with the evolving childhood. Today, children and the younger

generations demand respect for their needs and rights and their evolving capacities. Adults who are sensitised to the dynamics of childhood are better prepared to engage in respectful, non-violent relations with children.

• Journalists and the media are committed to maintain an active public debate on positive
• parenting. Media reporting has helped to inform, raise awareness and sensitise children and adults in

urban and rural areas.

• A solution has been found to engage parents of young children who were hard to reach by

social services in longer-term community-based programmes. By providing information, support, counselling and practical support, using simple language and regular group meetings, the programme has enabled them to use positive parenting, relate to their child’s development and communicate better.

Common challenges to prohibition

• “Corporal punishment didn’t do me any harm”
• “Parents have a right to bring up their children as they see fit”
• “There’s a big difference between a loving smack and beating a child”
• “Isn’t it only a problem in extreme cases of abuse?”
• “There are far worse violations of children’s rights – why focus on this one?”
• “Prohibition of corporal punishment will criminalise good parents and put more children in

care”

• “Why not just educate parents away from using corporal punishment, rather than

prohibiting it?”

Common challenges to prohibition

Answers to these questions and more are available in booklets from the Global Initiative and Save the Children Sweden:

• Download the booklets for free at

www.endcorporalpunishment.org

• Email info@endcorporalpunishment.org

to request hard copies to be sent to you

Thank you!