Michael Abrahams | Corporal punishment and religious hypocrisy

Speaking at the justice ministry’s Child Diversion Forum recently, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck expressed the Government’s desire to ban corporal punishment in homes. Chuck stated, “We are against any form of punishment using a beating. It must not happen in the schools, but it must also not happen in the homes.” He added, “It is wrong! In other words, we must not use straps and whips and belts, especially belt buckles, to beat any child.”

This initiative aligns with the Geneva Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is celebrating its 35th anniversary this year. However, Chuck’s position was met with resistance. One of the loudest voices was the Association of Christian Communicators and Media (ACCM), which argued that the Government’s approach is an “overreach”.

The ACCM stated, “This effort to curtail long-standing and acceptable disciplinary tools available to parents is a direct overreach by the Government and can only be seen as an effort to replace the role of parents in the home.” They also posited that “Families that subscribe to Christian values and are supported and empowered by specially designed programmes are positioned to have better outcomes in terms of the discipline and academic performance of their children.”

The attitude of the Christian organisation is unfortunate but not surprising. It demonstrates how religious dogma and doctrine trump data, research, facts and evidence. The ACCM refers to “acceptable disciplinary tools” and “Christian values”. Yes, corporal punishment has been institutionalised and normalised in this country. However, being ‘acceptable’ does not necessarily mean it is beneficial or right. For example, female genital mutilation is accepted in several cultures, and although thoroughly investigated, any rational person will not need to consult research findings to realise the harm it does. Similarly, research over many years from various geographic locations, involving many subjects, has found that corporal punishment does more harm than good. Also, what does ‘Christian values’ have to do with beating children?

NOT STRONG ENOUGH

The argument by many that they were beaten as children and are ‘okay’ is not strong enough to support the practice. First, if you were beaten and you are okay, good for you. But it does not mean the practice is a healthy one. If someone says that every Friday night they go drinking with their friends in Kingston and then race one another to St Ann on the North-South Highway and have never been involved in an accident, they are fortunate. But we all know that drinking and driving is not a good idea.

Second, many people who think they are ‘okay’ are not. I am sure we all know at least one person who is ‘off’ but thinks they are perfectly fine. Indeed, mental health professionals will tell you that many people with mental illnesses, such as personality disorders, mood disorders and psychosis, have no insight into their psychopathology.

Some will confidently declare that it is a good thing they got beaten, as it kept them out of trouble and that if we stop beating children the society will descend into chaos. However, a study conducted in this country found that every person in prison for murder at the time had received corporal punishment in childhood. So, corporal punishment does not necessarily keep you on the straight and narrow. Also, over 60 countries have banned corporal punishment of children in the home, and these bans have not resulted in increased levels of indiscipline or violence in these states.

THREAT TO PROGRESS

This pushback against banning corporal punishment is one of many instances where religion poses a threat to progress. It is unfair to impose rules and regulations based on your beliefs on others. First, some of what is written in scriptural texts may be outdated. Second, the faithful’s interpretation of some of these passages may be flawed.

For example, in defending corporal punishment, church folk often refer to Proverbs 13:24: “ He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” But shepherds used rods to guide sheep, not hit them. Ironically, one of the most popular Bible verses is Psalm 23:4: “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.” The shepherd’s rod is not a weapon.

What I find interesting is that the ACCM says it is an overreach to ban an act that has the potential to traumatise children in the home, but endorses a law that dictates what type of sexual behaviour is permitted in the bedroom, specifically the buggery law. This law prohibits anal sex, including among heterosexuals, and the ACCM vociferously and stridently opposes repealing it. If legislating the type of punishment you are allowed to use with your children is overreach, why isn’t legislating sexual behaviour among consenting adults?

Thankfully, the ACCM does not represent all Christians, and there are many who do not support beating children. I agree with and fully support the corporal punishment ban, but it has to be paired with public education. Many Jamaicans have been socialised to believe that corporal punishment is the best way to discipline our children; and it is the only tool many of us know. It would be unfair to suddenly criminalise Jamaicans who love their offspring, truly want the best for them, and utilise corporal punishment as a disciplinary tool. Parenting should be taught in schools and beyond, including teaching effective alternatives to corporal punishment. We need to understand that discipline does not equate to punishment, and that the latter does not require you to hit the most vulnerable among us.

Banning corporal punishment in the home is a move in the right direction. It is about protecting our children and improving the quality of life in our society. It is not an overreach. `

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X , formerly Twitter, @mikeyabrahams.