Sparing the Rod : Explaining the

Prohibition of Corporal Punishment

through Operant Conditioning
Theory

Introduction
Discipline is recognized by both parents and children as a vital element in child rearing.
As a popular Biblical adage quips, sparing the rod spoils the child. It is but a normal feat for a
parent to chastise his erring child intending to prevent the recurrence of the wrongful act.
Tracing the roots. History tells us that the utilization of physical punishment had been
practiced by Filipino parents since time immemorial. This primarily sprouts from the belief that
children are 1born without the concept of right and wrong and as parents, it is their duty to instill
a notion of boundaries of behaviour at a young age. Physical punishment had always been a
household favourite for the fact that most parents believe that it is the sole means of inflicting
discipline as it is how their parents had disciplined them in the past.
What we have to know. As this phenomenon continues to exist in our locality, worse in
our own homes, it is imperative for us to be informed what corporal punishment is about, its
detrimental effects to the holistic development of children as explained by theories in psychology
and appraise the need to legislate laws prohibiting the same.
Corporal Punishment
Defined. Corporal punishment pertains to 2punishment or penalty for- an offense or
imagined offense, and/or acts carried out for the purpose of discipline, training or control,
inflicted by an adult or by another child, who has been given or has assumed authority or
responsibility for punishment or discipline. This includes inflicting blows on a childs body
through spanking, slapping, lashing with the use of brooms, belt, whip or stick, pinching and
pulling ears or hair. A group of Filipino children defined 3spanking as a form of punishment

when it hurts the child, happens without reason, causes the child to faint from the pain and could
cause the childs death.

Prevalence in the Philippines. 4A 2005 survey by Save the Children Sweden in the
Philippines revealed that 85% of Filipino children are being punished at home, 82% of whom
said they have been hit on different parts of the body. In areas covered by the UNICEF
Philippines, 53.6 million women admitted to have used psychological or physical punishment as
a form of discipline, 13% of whom admitted to have used some severe punishment on their
children (2006). In a 6perception survey conducted by Pulse Asia in 2011, 2 out of 3 parents
admitted to using corporal punishment as a form of "discipline" on their children. In a 2011
7

study by the European Union and Plan International, 82% of children in urban and rural areas in

the Philippines said they experienced at least one form of corporal punishment in their homes,
with spanking on the bottom being the most common method used.
Laws Against Physical Abuse on Children
Child Abuse Act. Republic Act No. 7610 of 1992 is a statute which aims to provide
8

special protection to children from all forms of abuse, cruelty, exploitation and discrimination

which may be deemed prejudicial to their development. This law specifically provides that
9

children are those who are below eighteen (18) years of age or those over but are unable to fully

take care of themselves or protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.
Violence Against Women and their Children Act. Republic Act No. 9262 of 2004
10

upholds the dignity of women and their children thus safeguarding the same from violence and

threats to their personal safety and security. Violation of this law involves causing physical harm
that may bring about injury and pain.

Anti-Corporal Punishment Act. This is a pending act of legislation docketed as Senate

Bill No. 363 which aims to consolidate enactments involving the prohibition of inflicting
physical abuse to children by 11promoting positive and non-violent form of discipline in lieu of
the customary means of imposing behaviour modification. It specifically provides for the
12

prohibited acts done towards children which are listed under Section 3(b):
1. Blows to any part of a child's body, such as beating; kicking; hitting; slapping; lashing;
with or without the use of an instrument such as a carie, shoes, broom, stick, whip or belt;
2. Pinching; pulling ears or hair; shaking; twisting jOints; cutting and shaving hair;
cutting or piercing skin; carrying, dragging or throwing a child;
3. Forcing a child, through the use of power, authority or threats, to perform physically
painful or damaging acts, such as holding a weight or weights for an extended period;
kneeling on stones, salt or pebbles; squatting; standing or sitting in a contorted-position;
4. Deliberate neglect of a child's physical needs, where this is intended as punishment;
5. Use of external substances, such as buming or freezing materials, water, smoke,
pepper, alcohol, excrement or urine;
6. Use of hazardous tasks as punishment or for the purpose of discipline, including those
that are beyond a child's strength or bring him or her into contact with dangerous or
unhygienic substances; such tasks include sweeping or digging in the hot sun or rain;
using bleach or insecticides; unprotected cleaning of toilets;
7. Confinement, including being shut in a confined space or material, tied up, or forced to
remain in one place for an extended period of time;
8. Any threat of physical punishment;
9. Any other physical act perpetrated on a child's body, for the purpose of punishment or
discipline, intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light;
10. Verbal assaults, threats, or intimidation;
11. Verbal abuse, scolding, yelling, swearing, ridiculing or denigrating;

12. Child made to look or feel foolish in front of one's peers or the public; and
13. Other acts or words which belittle, humiliate, scapegoat, blame, ignore, or isolate the
child.

Operant Conditioning
Overview. Operant conditioning is 12learning in which a voluntary response is
strengthened or weakened, depending on its favorable or unfavourable consequences. Saying that
a response has been strengthened or weakened, it means that it has been made more or less likely
to recur regularly.
Learning the basics. 13B.F Skinner (1938,1953, 1958, 1966b, 1971, 1989; Skinner &
Epstein, 1982) is undoubtedly the most influential learning theorist in the field of behaviourism.
It is him who quipped that organisms acquire behaviours that are followed by certain
consequences. In one of his most popular ventures in the field, he devised a piece of equipment,
now known as the Skinner box, which is used in studying rat behaviour. 14In a controlled setup,
he created a metal bar that when pushed down, causes a food tray to unravel containing food
pellets. His study revealed that rats will learn to press the metal bars as it generates a favoured
outcome.
Salient Factors. Operant Conditioning 15may take the form of Reinforcement or a
Punishment. Reinforcement is the process by which a stimulus increases the probability that a
preceding behaviour will be repeated. A16reinforcer, or the stimulus that boosts the likelihood of
recurrence of behaviour, may be bonuses, toys, and good grades, depending on individual
preferences.

A positive reinforcer is a stimulus added to the environment that brings about an increase
in a preceding response. The paycheck that workers get at the end of the week, for instance,
raises the likelihood that they will return to their jobs the following week.
17

In contrast, a negative reinforcer pertains to an unpleasant stimulus whose removal

leads to an increase in the probability that a preceding response will be reprised. This is exhibited
by a person, who, because the loud volume hurts his ears, tones down the volume of his iPod.
Dealing with Punishment. Punishment should be distinguished from negative
reinforcement. It, as contrasted to the latter, 18lessens the probability of generating the same
response to the stimulus.
Most often, punishment is categorized in terms of its effect.19Punishment I involves the
introduction of a stimulus, typically an aversive one, for example, spanking and scolding.
Punishment II is the removal of a pleasant stimulus, such in loss of privileges after erring in a
task.

Discussion
Discipline vs Prohibition of Corporal Punishment. Majority of parents endorse corporal
punishment as a 20child-rearing practice and use it to discipline their children (Day, Peterson, &
McCracken, 1998; Gils-Sims, Straus, & Sugarman, 1995; Straus & Gelles, 1986). Corporal
punishment falls under Punishment I which is the presentation of a negative stimulus. In this
light, it is inferred that physical beatings diminishes the undesired behaviour of children. Most
parents assert that such form of discipline inculcates in the child the value of right and wrong.21A
study on the correlational relationship of physical discipline and behaviour problems across
cultural contexts revealed that the beatings generate adverse effects on child development. The
effect is fairly consistent across racial ethnic groups (McLoyd, 2002).
In this line of thought, various nations had strictly implemented a ban on corporal
punishment as a form of discipline. 22Sweden, in 1979, was the first to make it illegal to strike a
child as a form of discipline. Since then, many other countries in Europe have also instituted
bans, as have New Zealand and some countries in Africa and the Americas. 23To date, more than
100 nations all over the globe prohibits corporal punishment in schools, 31 of them ban it

elsewhere. The table below is an excerpt of a 2011 CNN report.

However, this prohibition generates the idea of the encroachment of the right and duty of
the as upheld in Section 12, Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution;
Sec. 12 x x x The natural and primary right and duty of the parents in the rearing
of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall
receive the support of the Government.
Indelible Marks to Child Development. Corporal punishment has consistently been
associated with 24poorer mental health in childhood and adulthood (Gershoff, 2002) in the form
of depression (Csorba et al., 2001; Turner & Finkelhor, 1996) unhappiness and anxiety (Eamon,
2001; Lau et al., 1999) feelings of hopelessness (DuRantet al., 1994) anxiety alcoholism
(MacMillan et al., 1999). 25A new analysis of two decades of research on the long-term effects of

physical punishment in children concludes that spanking doesnt work and can actually wreak
havoc on kids long-term development, according to an article published Monday in
the Canadian Medical Association Journal (Rochman, 2012).
26

Several studies have found that parental use of physical discipline is positively related

to behavioural (e.g. aggression) and psychological (e.g. dysphoria, low esteem) problems in
children and adolescents (Smith, 2002).
Aggression is highly correlated with experiences of grave physical abuse incurred from
parents. 27When punishment involves pain, it elicit emotional activation in an individual, arousal
that may result in anger and aggression, especially in characteristically aggressive individuals
(Azrin, 1967; Berkowitz & LePage, 1967; Walters & Grusec, 1977).
End the misery. The abovementioned ill effects brought about by inflicting corporal
punishment make us realize that it is fitting for the country to disallow such form of abuse
altogether. Numerous studies conducted on different cultural contexts proved corporal
punishment as an ineffectual means to modify behaviour of children. Most experts advise against
physical punishment for school-age children (Doyle, 1990; Landrum & Kauffman, 2006; Zirpoli
& Melloy, 2001). More often than not, children tend to forget what they are punished for. They
focus more on the anticipation of receiving pain rather than deciphering why they had to undergo
the pain. This defeats the primary reason why they are chastised in the first place.
No Pain, Why Not?, Indeed, it is possible to rear ones child without undergoing the
horror of the beatings. In fact, countries around the globe have stringently prohibited corporal
punishment in schools and homes. Sweden, for instance, had been on it for 20 years and had
lesser tallies of children being sent to social work centers for rehabilitation which signifies less

juvenile delinquent. Fears of children growing up undisciplined and without self-control are
unfounded. In fact, youth crime rates have remained steady since 1983 while drug abuse, alcohol
intake, and suicide rates have decreased.
Conclusion
Child discipline need not be a painful experience. Psychology experts suggest millions of
ways to correct an erring child minus spanking and lashing. One could be by reprimanding the
child of his favourites, toy or television show for instance. This way, he may be able to
acknowledge his mistakes without succumbing to bruises and cuts in his skin. The reprimand
must also be coupled with a conversation informing the kid where he had gone wrong. With this,
we actually teach children how to handle faults like adults.
The Philippine legislature needs to heed the call of advocates for the ultimate abrogation
of corporal punishment in the country. Any kind, frequency or degree of physical violence
against children will never be acceptable in any way. Though existing laws already address the
supposed prohibition of physical violence, there is still a fleeting need to amend these statutes to
specifically cover corporal punishment especially banning it in homes. As laws such as the Child
Abuse Act and Anti Violence against Women and their Children do not particularly embrace
excessive chastisement, offended parties are not motivated to divulge their situation to authorities
as they are not given the assurance of being protected under the law. These hapless victims
remain in the shadows thinking their cases are futile.
The pending Anti-Corporal Punishment Bill must be given priority. Laws such as these
that promote the welfare of the youth must not be pushed into the sidelines. The 1987
Constitution, in Section 13, Article II, fully recognizes the right of the youth to be protected

upholding their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well being. Therefore, the
government should take cognizance of this provision as the children play a crucial role in the
countrys development.
In reiteration, the prohibition of corporal punishment does not deprive the parents,
guardians and the like of their right to correct their children. As they say, chastisement is okay
for as long as it is not excessive however, this poses a great question to us. When do we draw the
line? When is excessive inappropriate? When is enough, enough? Wouldnt it be much simpler if
we end corporal punishment all together?