To spank a child or not

The public reaction to the Constitutional Court judgment on the issue of parental discipline of their children has more than anything confirmed the extent to which we remain divided about the type of change we need as a society. It seems that we remain trapped in the belief that any form of change is not an option.

The Constitutional Court judgment is seen as an affront to parental authority as if the court said that children must not be disciplined. All the court said is that the form of discipline which involves violence is contrary to the Constitution.

Spanking children is not the only form of discipline. The fact that some parents see this judgment as an erosion of their authority over their children raises a fundamental question of what parenting actually involves. It is a fact that parenting is a complex matter with or without spanking. To simply identify the ban on spanking as the erosion of parental authority is rather self-serving.

The Christian lobby group which sought to appeal the high court judgment on spanking seems to have got more than what it bargained for. Its case was based on what it believes is the authorisation given by the scriptures to use spanking as a disciplinary measure on their children.

The group also believed that it was part of their freedom of religion to exercise a right to spank their children as part of discipline and saw it as the most appropriate way to bring up their children. Well, they seem to have invited an amendment of the Bible to the extent that it gave such authorisation.

The Constitutional Court’s judgment has put paid to their wishes to have a choice between obeying the Constitution and the laws of God as they put it. Other groups, whether religious or cultural, must brace themselves for similar judgments.

The essence of the judgment is to assert the supremacy of the Constitution and to clearly define the context within which rights exist. It also removes the apparent contradiction between group and national values embodied in our Constitution we agreed to. This agreement includes the fact that we agreed that the apex court of our land must supervise our own understanding of our rights and make determinations on our exercising of these rights.

We should therefore not conveniently cry foul.

The scriptures, like culture, tradition and other things, are often used to define and justify things we should not do. As matters stand, the scriptures are used by some within the Christian community for things that are deplorable and disgusting. Some of those who claim to be Christians and derive their authority from the scriptures have turned out to be just petty criminals hiding behind the church, the Bible and Christianity to advance what is otherwise criminality.

At the same time, there are those who genuinely believe and religiously live by their belief in the scriptures and other practices that do not cause offence to others.

While the spanking issue was championed by a Christian belief, it is not simply about that. It is rather about parental authority generally.

The judgment affects all parents and society in general. It represents a contradiction between what parents generally believe to be one of the methods to instil discipline in their children and what the national social contract which applies to all requires. The social contract requires that we do not spank our children.

All what the apex court did was to reaffirm this position. Not that this affirmation has no consequence. It raises the bar higher for those who believe that they have a right to spank their children.

In the past and until the high court judgment in this matter, parents had a valid defence in law to a charge of assault involving their children. That defence was called moderate and reasonable discipline and included spanking.

The trouble has always been that these measures were often not that reasonable and moderate after all. Many children and parents can attest to the fact that parents often lost control and far exceeded what was reasonable and moderate disciplining, resulting in certain instances to actual injury of children.

But spanking is not the only offensive method used to discipline children. There are other abuses committed against children. Because of this defence, many parents escaped with impunity in circumstances where they ought to have been visited with consequences.

Those who advocate spanking as part of their right to raise their children in the most appropriate way will certainly argue that bringing up a child is a private relationship between the parent and the child.

That is in fact true. It is no different from those in other private relationships such as a marriage where external interference is not desirable. But these private relationships are in fact not that private. They are not just confined to the home. They extend to and affect the general public.

Spanking is a form of violence. Violence does produce a character out of people who are subjected to it. It affects relationships in communities and society. To argue that the spanking is between a parent and child fails to recognise that the child lives in a society and that the spanking will in due course affect society.

We live in a society where the abuse of women and children is pervasive. It may as well be that spanking is one of the building blocks of our violent children and society. We may be caught between the devil and the deep blue sea on this one, with very hard choices to make.

If our spanking is the training and breeding ground for violent adults in later life, then the apex court may have saved us from ourselves. But if reasonable and moderate spanking does in fact contribute to discipline, then we have lost an important tool in the upbringing of our children.

The obvious question is: What will then constitute moderate and reasonable discipline? It must be natural that every parent would rather have a disciplined and well-mannered child. But children’ behaviour is not only influenced by their upbringing at home.

Children interact with society and learn from what they see outside the home. To assume that children only live what they learn at home is delusional. What then is the role other factors outside the home environment play?

Until the high court judgment, teachers could defer to parents at home to instil discipline where their own efforts failed. What then happens when the efforts of parents also fail with the removal of the spanking?

Spanking is indeed not the only form of discipline or, for that matter, the most effective. However, what else is more effective under the current circumstances? It’s well and good to argue that there are other better methods. What remains to be tested is what parents and families must do in our current environment to instil discipline in their children.

Parents do speak to their children, they counsel them all the time and reprimand them verbally. What happens if this fails? Those who may feel that the apex court must create accommodation at Constitutional Hill for the defiant and recalcitrant teenagers who will answer back to their mothers and fathers when reprimanded may be justified, except that it is asking the impossible.

Read: Ramaphosa’s R1.1bn emergency plan to fight gender-based violence

The apex court is not oblivious to the realities faced by parents and children alike on the issue of discipline. The reality is that society has to revisit how it seeks to bring up children without resorting to violence. Children will always be naughty and in need of discipline one way or the other.

The judgment introduces an immediate need for society to reconsider how we restore a proper value system which will obviate the need to use rough methods to discipline and bring up our children. The idea that using force is an appropriate way to instil discipline has never made sense even before corporal punishment was outlawed in schools.

It is clear that the partnership between parents and care givers or teachers in particular is now more important than ever. The shifting of responsibility and deference by one to the other has almost come to an abrupt end. In equal measure hiding behind parental rights to bring up children the way parents want and in particular the use of spanking as a tool has also come to an end.

As society and parents grapple with bringing up children in a world infested with all sorts of challenges, a complete overhaul of our way of life must take place if we are to survive the calamity presented by the hurdles our children face which influence their discipline. Parents cannot simply lose control because they cannot spank their children. After all, it is not as if every parent uses this outlawed method.

Modidima Mannya is an advocate, writer and academic