One day almost a hundred years ago, when my Mom was in school as a little girl, about six years old as I recall the story, she couldn’t resist the temptation of sliding down the banister from the 2nd floor to the 1st. Just as she was about to hop off at the bottom (having had a very smooth ride) she was met by the Principal who held a ruler in his hand, and was ready to rap her knuckles for her possibly dangerous, and certainly unacceptably bad behavior. Her twelve-year old sister was also at the base of that stairwell and she put her hand out to take the punishment. I think my Mom recalled and told that story to reinforce to us the great love and devotion she had for her sister- my aunt didn’t want her baby sister hurt, and she was willing to take the heat for her “crime”.
While reading the recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decision that a parent or guardian may not be held criminally liable for the use of force against a minor under his care and supervision, I recalled the story of my Mom and her sister and their Principal. The SJC explained that the use of force by a parent or guardian against a child was allowable if the force used (1) is reasonable; (2) is reasonably related to the purpose of “safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the minor”, including the punishment of the minor’s misconduct; and (3) neither causes, nor creates a substantial risk of causing, physical harm (beyond fleeting pain or minor, transient marks), gross degradation, or severe mental distress.” As I read the Massachusetts decision I also remembered learning about Sweden’s 1979 law that barred physical punishment as a means of disciplining children.
Social norms about crime, punishment and violence are certainly embedded in all cultures, but those cultures are not static. Despite the fact that violence is entrenched in the American culture, at the time Sweden’s 1979 law was enacted, it was reflective of a changed Sweden- socio-politically, economically and in terms of its evolving value system. Prior to the First and even the Second World War, Sweden was essentially a poor, agrarian society significantly influenced by German authoritarianism and Lutheran dogma. Childrearing included regular – often weekly – harsh beatings to “drive out the Devil and make room for God’s Will.” With postwar industrialization and urbanization, the religious influence on childrearing disappeared almost completely. And now thirty-five years after the anti-physical punishment law’s passing, Sweden appears to have predominantly rid itself of physical punishment of children. The law stated explicitly that a child could not be subjected to physical punishment or other humiliating treatment.
However, Sweden didn’t only pass a law. Soon after they banned the use of physical punishment as a form of discipline, they also established an educational campaign to teach both parents and children about appropriate alternative forms of discipline. The Swedish law was implemented in several ways. For one, attractive multicolored mailings explaining the legislation were sent to every family with a young child, as well as to schools and daycare centers. The booklet, produced and disseminated by the government, was available not only in Swedish and English, but also in the languages of the major immigrant groups. Entitled “Can You Bring Up Children Successfully Without Smacking and Spanking?” it emphasized that physical punishment has the potential for both physical and psychological harm, and that while parents sometimes get angry and need to express their anger, other options exist for venting rage and frustration. The booklet discussed various alternatives to physical punishment and listed sources for further assistance. It has been out of print for many years now as the government believes it is no longer needed.
Sweden’s example inspired passage of similar laws prohibiting parental use of physical punishment in Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Austria. Those and many other European countries banned corporal punishment in schools many years before — Austria, for instance, in 1870. In England, corporal punishment in schools was banned as recently as 1987.
Is such a shift possible in the collective American psyche? Are laws alone sufficient to create a collective cultural consciousness? In the U.S., are children deemed to have rights independent of their parents? If we wanted to keep children from being disciplined by physical force, would it be enough to create a law saying as much, or would it be imperative to simultaneously create education and marketing campaigns that reinforced the heightened rights of children?
Only three United Nations countries have not ratified the Convention on rights of the Child (CRC): Somalia, South Sudan, and…the United States. It’s interesting that we find ourselves in the company of one very new country, and one that’s basically law-less. The U.S, seems to believe that if we were to agree to participate in the CRC, we would create a national mandate, and by doing so we would limit states’ rights. The American emphasis on the individual over the community, be it individual people or individual states, seems to trump our ability to create a unified mandate relative to children’s rights.
If the Principal had been my mother’s guardian, would the rapping my aunt took meet today’s Massachusetts standard of acceptable physical punishment? Was the filial love lesson my Mom taught us the lesson her Principal meant to be her take-a-way? Is physical force used on a child an acceptable means of discipline?
Come to think of it, I never heard anything about the dangers of sliding down bannisters.
