Cape Town - Moderate spanking of children as a form of discipline in the home was declared unconstitutional in 2019, but corporal punishment remains a form of discipline.
In 1996, the SA Schools Act banned corporal punishment in schools, while the issue of spanking in the home as a form of discipline remained contentious.
Stats SA last week released a report that found that in 2019, just over 1 million out of 13 million school-going children aged 5-17 reported that they had experienced some form of violence in school.
Spanking in the home as espoused by the Joshua Generation Church saw it taken to task in 2015 by the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), which found the church’s parenting manual that promoted corporal punishment, to be in violation of the Constitution.
The SAHRC conducted an investigative hearing into the church’s “doctrinal teaching that promoted the use of corporal punishment”.
The SAHRC found it was not permissible – even on religious grounds – to justify the use of corporal punishment in the home.
Ultimately in 2019, the Constitutional Court declared that the common law defence of reasonable chastisement violated a number of rights of the child, including the right to dignity, equal protection in terms of the law, freedom from violence, and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
Approached for comment on its current view, in-house counsel for Joshua Generation Church, advocate Nadene Badenhorst said: “The church’s view is that parents are the highest authority on matters pertaining to their children.
“Parents should therefore be able to read and interpret the Scriptures for themselves, with due regard to the relevant laws and implications thereof.”
The SAHRC said corporal punishment had long term negative effects on children.
“Research evidence shows that corporal punishment has a damaging effect on children’s neurological development and may compromise cognitive development, thereby resulting in increased aggression.
The trauma of corporal punishment may result in long lasting intergenerational effects and increases the risk of the child themselves perpetrating physical violence.
“The Children’s Act makes provision for non-abuse of children which would cover use of corporal punishment. The government, civil society, religious groups and private citizens should look at the positive outcomes of banning corporal punishment in the home and support initiatives focused on these efforts,” the SAHRC said.
Child rights organisation, Molo Songololo director, Patric Solomons said while corporal punishment was illegal in South Africa, it still happened.
“Unfortunately it is still widely practised. We still get reports from learners in school sports clubs and educators that people who are supposed to take care of them are still administering corporal punishment on them.
There is not enough enforcement, despite the policy being in place.
“Places where this is happening try to keep it under wraps. It speaks to a broader issue, where we see children as ownership. We need to beat them to correct their behaviour.
We’ve done the research, went into the impacts, it does not change behaviour. In fact, a violent act encourages the children to act out violently.”
Solomons said the country still had a long way to go to change the behaviour of adults towards their children, who hit to discipline, “but we know that is not the outcome, a lot of research has been done”.
Cape Times