Wednesday December 1, 2004
Carrot and stick
A national coalition has called for a ban on corporal punishment of children. Hurting kids to teach them a lesson is "worse than useless," the group says.
Dr. Robin Walker of the Canadian Pediatric Society says Canadian children must receive the same legal protection from physical assault as Canadian adults, and as children do in a growing number of other countries.
A century-old law allows parents to spank for "corrective reasons." Last year the Supreme Court of Canada upheld Section 43 of the Criminal Code, which allows parents and teachers to use "reasonable force" when correcting a child.
The Supreme Court did not, however, give parents carte blanche. It ruled that Canadian parents must spare the belt, the ruler, and other objects. And it prohibited physical punishment of children younger than two and older than twelve.
The wrong message
Whether spanking is appropriate sometimes, I do not know. But I suspect almost everybody knows by now that beating the daylights out of children is not the best way to raise them.
At one time, people believed that children should be thrashed regularly. The Bible says, “Spare the rod and spoil the child.” It was, I suppose, a step forward when British law decreed that this “rod” must be no thicker than a man\’s thumb – the origin, some claim, of the phrase “rule of thumb.”
Punishment doesn\’t teach kids to avoid doing wrong. It teaches them to avoid getting punished.
Severe discipline doesn\’t work with pets, either. But neither, I\’m discovering, does simply rewarding them.
When we first got our present dog, she was somewhat erratic at coming when called. Sometimes she came; sometimes she shrugged and went on doing her own thing.
So I started carrying a bag of doggie treats with me. Now she comes galloping when I whistle. Not because that\’s the right thing to do. Because she wants her reward.
Reward and punishment turn out to have the same teaching value. They don\’t really teach right and wrong – or if they do, that understanding comes much later. Rather, they teach us to want the reward, and to avoid the penalty.
Keeping people in line To receive this column regularly via e-mail, send a request to [email protected]. E-mail subscribers also get excerpts from correspondence about these columns. Please forward a copy of this column to anyone who might be interested in subscribing.
If you want to order my books, you can call 1-800-663-2775 in Canada, 1-800-328-0200 in the U.S., or order them on-line at the Wood Lake Books website.
For a lighter look at ethics, faith, and life, I recommend Ralph Milton\’s weekly e-newsletter Rumors. You can subscribe to it at the Wood Lake Books home page in Ralph Milton\’s Site, or by sending a note directly to [email protected].
It\’s also worth pursuing Richard Fairchild\’s United Online site. Another site worth visiting is David Keating\’s \”SeemslikeGod\” page.
Author Keith Wright suggests that\’s a problem with traditional understandings of heaven and hell. We aren\’t good because goodness leads to a better, more satisfying life – we\’re good so that we can get our reward in heaven. (Though I\’ve never understood why streets paved with gold, long white nightgowns, and plucking a harp all day would be a particularly fulfilling way to spend eternity.)
The carrot or stick approach, argues Keith Wright, keeps people in line. But is that really the purpose of religion?
Is the purpose of kindergarten to keep kids in line when they walk down the sidewalk? Is the purpose of the military to have everyone march in step?
I\’d have to argue “No,” to all of those.
Surely the purpose of religion is to produce people who want to foster the common good, without being either coerced or bribed.
=====================================
Copyright © 2002 by Jim Taylor. Non-profit use in congregations and study groups permitted; all other rights reserved.
=====================================
PROMOTION PLUGS