Cumberland Sentinel, Pennsylvania, 5 January 1997

Parent questions paddling policy

Carlisle Area School Board President Fred Baldwin says the board should "investigate" why the school district's discipline code still allows paddling of students.

Baldwin's comment was in response to concerns raised by North Middleton Township parent Phil Drumheiser during the board's policy/personnel meeting Thursday.

Drumheiser asked that the district "reconsider" allowing paddling and corporal punishment.

He says his request is not prompted by any known recent incident of a district student being paddled.

Instead, he became aware the district still allows paddling and corporal punishment by reading an elementary student handbook he received at home. The handbook includes a reference to the discipline code.

Atlanta Inquirer, Georgia, 11 January 1997

Don't Spare The Rod In Disciplining Children

We were not the least surprised to read recently that a study showed more than four out of five Americans who were spanked as children report that it was an effective form of discipline. An informal survey of our staff showed the same results, and practically every adult we talked to told us essentially the same thing.

The same adults also mentioned that spanking a child today could get one into serious trouble. These days a person spanking a child may be charged with abuse, especially if the spanking takes place at school. Gone are the days when parents gave teachers permission to spank children who were unruly, possibly because of the actual abuse that often takes place.

For many years, it has been public policy not to spank children even when their conduct is at its worst, it being felt that corporal punishment should not be used under any circumstance to correct bad behavior. There are those who believe that failure to spank is one of the reasons for lack of discipline at school and in the home.

Talk to practically anyone "from the old school" and you will hear things like "I wish I had a dime for every time I got a whipping. I'd be rich."

"I used to get a whipping at school and get whipped again when I got home," others will tell you, "And it wasn't called brutality or abuse, " terms that you hear all the time these days. Listening to these people, most of whom I have nothing but praise for the individuals who administered the whippings, one has to wonder why corporal punishment currently meets with such disfavor.

At the same time, one realizes that on occasion some over-zealous person whips too hard and seriously injures a child. In these cases, it is understandable that parents rise up against the use of corporal punishment.

Knowing that parents have spoken out against corporal punishment and that such action is generally frowned upon in today's society, some disobedient children relish the opportunity to challenge those who would consider whipping them. They even have Dr. Spock to back them up. Despite Dr. Spock's advice not to whip children, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recently released a special report which suggests that spanking may not be harmful to a child's health.

Additionally, several pediatricians believe that spanking, done in a relatively healthy family environment, is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems. That view supports the work of numerous research scholars, pediatricians and child psychologists who have made considerable effort in recent years to distinguish between the responsible use of disciplinary spanking and the kind of abusive physical punishment so fiercely criticized by Spock and others.

Disciplinary spanking was what a local public school prinicipal was doing until she was arrested three weeks ago following a complaint filed by the parents of a child who had been spanked. Her use of paddle had been widely known, and most parents had signed a document saying they approved of paddling their children. After the principal's arrest, several parents came to her defense, vowing that they would fight to insure that she be retained.

These parents may have been influenced by a University of California study which found that parents employing a balanced disciplinary style of positive reinforcement and firm control (including spanking) experienced better results with the children than those employing highly authoritarian or highly permissive disciplinary approaches.

We agree with AAP that spanking should be used mainly as a backup to correct deliberate and persistent problem behavior that is not remedied with milder measures.

Salt Lake Tribune, Utah, 23 January 1997

Bill Takes Sting Out Of School's Corporal Punishment Law

By Hilary Groutage, The Salt Lake Tribune

A bill that would remove a much-ignored portion of a Utah law regarding corporal punishment in schools has been endorsed by the Senate Education Committee.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. David Steele, R-West Point, would eliminate language in the existing law that allows teachers and administrators to spank children if they have parental permission to do so.

Doug Bates, attorney for the Utah State Office of Education, said the proposed amendment would eliminate language added in floor debate during the 1992 Legislature. The Utah State Board of Education essentially ignored the legislation and passed a policy banning corporal punishment altogether.

Bates said that since parents cannot give permission for their child's civil rights to be violated, the measure should be changed.

But Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, hesitated a bit.

"I remember growing up when the 'board of education' -- a paddle -- was prominent in the classroom, hanging up there where we could see it. We were a lot better behaved. I know it's a different world now," he said.

Sen. Scott Howell, D-Sandy, said schools should not be responsible for disciplining children anyway.

"It's the responsibility of the parents. P-a-r-e-n-t-s," he said.

The committee endorsed the bill unanimously and sent it to the House for consideration.

Salt Lake Tribune, Utah, 23 January 1997

Editorial

Hands Off Those Students

Utah lawmakers could find worse ways to spend their time -- like designating the cherry the state fruit or the Dutch oven the state pot -- than repairing a long-flawed statute permitting corporal punishment in public schools.

Sen. David H. Steele, a professional educator, is sponsoring a bill this session that would eliminate one of the exceptions to the rule against hitting schoolchildren.

Yes, believe it or not, Utah law now allows public school personnel to physically assault students. All educators need is written permission from the child's home.

Legislators initially inserted that provision into law at the behest of parents who complained that the public schools might be too soft on disruptive children. Apparently believing that children need tangible, embarrassing reminders of who's boss, these parents insisted on the right to retain for their children the bad old days of teachers cracking knuckles with rulers and principals paddling bare bottoms.

Problem is, of course, such lessons also teach children that hitting is the appropriate way to solve problems and persuade people to cooperate. Yet no one in the adult world is allowed to use physical force this way.

Employers certainly don't whip their workers into line. Even convicted felons are protected against what is deemed cruel and unusual punishment.

Treating children differently implies they are less worthy of respect, less human. Educators also expose themselves to liability if they strike the children too hard and cause injury.

There may be times when physical restraint is necessary to stop a student's violent outbursts, and the law now allows for that. But with the many non-violent ways for controlling schoolchildren, there is simply no excuse for using corporal punishment to discipline students.

Utah legislators should strongly support Sen. Steele's straightforward proposal, Senate Bill 101. While they're at it, however, they would do well to get rid of another exception to the rule. Private schools, which now can use corporal punishment if they duly notify parents, have no more business inflicting pain on minors than anyone else does.