BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Physical chastisement is justified when used for disciplining.

Human nature enables them to be a social, meaning the requirement of one another in times of need and development. The bond between parent and child can firmly be said the strongest bond there is. So where does it have any space for physical chastisement. In the process of proper grooming and development of a child, parents are forced to take extreme measures. Parents have to use tough love on their kids when all other options fail. Most of the times these form are involuntary and unsatisfactory to both the parties. Physical chastisement should be used as a last resort for ‘stubborn children’. By stubborn we mean those children who repeatedly show deviant behavior even after counseling or detention which are the non-physical form of punishment. The level of punishment depends upon the intensity of the deviancy and maturity of the child in terms of various characteristics, such as age which we classy into three categories namely toddlers, kindergarteners and pre-schoolers. Physical punishment cannot always be equated with abuse. In UK, the “No-touch Policy” do not allow the teachers to even touch the students. This has evoked the children to be disobedient in school. They often threaten the teacher saying, “If you touch me, you shall have to face a law suit.” This has forced many teachers out of their profession. This trend also continues at home where innocent parents are being accused by the children for physical assault even over small verbal disputes. Children often tend to misuse their rights to threaten the adults. This disables the guardian to restrict them within certain degree of discipline. Threats of law suit by children to the guardians have resulted in leniency towards even the most extreme cases. Site: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/8630817/The-rod-has-been-spared-for-far-too-long.html
Requirement of Immediate Action

It is not physically possible to monitor every action of every child. Some spontaneous actions which may be unsupervised by the nearby guardian may require the attention of a stranger. In such cases it the action of the stranger may be violent and unwillingly resort to physical chastisement. Such incidents cannot be classified under scrutiny. Instead the unwilling volunteer performs an act of Good Samaritan. Though the right thing to do would be inform the concerned authority, it is very important for every citizen to remember their duties in times of such scenarios. There may be several instances where adults have to use physical force in order to avoid even greater violent accidents which may or may not be deliberate. For instance, if a child is holding a brick and is about to smash a vehicle’s glass, then the adult nearby will have to rather firmly grab the child in order to avoid the vandalism. In this case the adult cannot be accused of physical chastisement even if the child complains regarding the use of violence upon him in that immediate situation. Such acts of Good Samaritan invokes the guardian to be more careful from the next time, not only the guardian, even the child, when handled by a stranger, instills an feeling of shame and humility and declines on doing the same thing in the future.
Physical chastisement isn't an effective disciplinary tool

Every form of activity is to be properly addressed by a parent to their child. Some acts which seem helpful might turn out to be other wise and vice-versa. Similarly, every act of punishment by a parent whether verbal or physical is to be properly addressed and made clear to the child about its cause and consequences. Mostly Physical punishment is the last resort undertaken by any parent. All the actions of the parent if properly explained and described to the child, will be taken accordingly by the child. For example, if a child is knowingly involved in an act of theft of any magnitude and punished accordingly, he/she then associates pain with crime. This discourages the child to perform the same act in the future as he/she does not intentionally intend on getting punished by the guardian. If hitting were to be directly related to violence and if banning action was to be taken to all form of violence, then every form of martial arts, many forms of sports and many other physical activity are to be banned. The difference between violence and hitting someone is not only based on the understanding of the child, but also how it is presented to him/her. The sense of guilty feeling is to be taught to one child, if a child has already experienced pain performing certain mischief, then firstly they are reluctant to perform the task again and if they knowingly or unknowingly do the same thing again, then the guilty conscience will disable him/her to hiding it again and confess to the concerned authority. And about the overwhelming pain from the punishment, it can be firmly said that any concerned parent would not harm a child in an inhumane manner. Hence, the pain would be temporary and only but a reminder to what is wrong and what is right.
Religions support some form of physical chastisement

All the religions have their own principles. Although, many of these religions have regarded love and affection as a better option to chastisement, they do not restrict the idea of physical chastisement. As, we have previously mentioned and so do the religions, physical chastisement is justifiable when used as a last resort under limited circumstances. A verse of Bible says,” Foolishness is bond in the heart of a child, but a rod of correction drives them far from it.” This clearly reflects that the ‘rod’-which refers to the physical punishment, is a necessity. Despite Islam religion discouraging child abuse and clearly mentioning that children should be cared and loved by their parents, it also says; ‘Order your children to pray at the age of seven. And beat them [lightly] if they do not do so by the age of ten.’ This refers that children should be first guided with suggestion and counseling, but if they do not realize their bad deeds, they deserve light physical punishments from their parents. However, legalizing chastisement requires an understanding that molestation and torture are different from punishment. Guardians are well aware about this difference and are able to punish rather than torture or molest their own child. Most of the time children realize their mistakes. Hence, in this case they clearly understand pain and they know if they repeat the mistake, it might result in painful consequences. This avoids the child to repeat the mistake in the future.
The state has a duty to protect children

From the propositions point of view, every child is helpless and every child might require the help of the state in their life. If it is so, then countries with poor governmental jurisdiction, every child is to be poorly raised as they have very low standard governing body. This is not so. It is human nature that every family is closely knit together. The first sense of duty and responsibility is obtained in the family. It is in extreme cases that parents are inhumanely violent towards their children, and it is in those scenarios only that the state needs to interfere. The idea of imposition by the state in every action of a family is not democratic. Within the limit of the law, people should be allowed to take chances and risks in hope for a better future. Similarly, parenting might be flawed in one family but it should not be generalized within the whole community. State is just to act as a caretaker rather than an owner. The idea of freedom in a child is very limited. They are not actually aware about their choices in religion, finance and many other factors. The only needs they have are more of immediate nature, which might include fooding, playing games or watching TV. In the act to discipline a child, parents are to be allowed to take away such privileges suitable to the condition. The sense of democracy to a child is only limited in such privileges. So if acts of denying such facilities in the pursuit of proper mannerisms could be considered as seizing freedom, then freedom is very cheap and vague.
Why children misbehave.

Children unable to express themselves with words, will often try and draw attention to: a lack of routine and structure, needing more sleep, suffering from an allergy or illness, feeling hungry, needing exercise, wanting individual attention, wanting an intellectually stimulating environment, or simply needing more affection and love. Children will do whatever it takes draw a parents attention to these needs. They may start running around and making lots of noise or even pick a fight with their siblings. In all these cases, the child is not being 'bad' and doesn't deserve to be hit. It is more productive to try and identify and eliminate the cause of their child's stress. Sometimes this will be easy e.g carrying healthy snacks for when the children get hungry, or child proofing a home so that children cant access things that they are not supposed to. In other cases, it may require the parent to rethink the way they act around their children and how they have structured / planned out their children's lives. Obviously, even the most perfect parents will have children who misbehave, but the seriousness of the misbehaviour and the frequency of misbehaving can be greatly reduced. In instances where a child is being unreasonable, despite a parent attempting to do all of the above, parents can use time outs. Sometimes ignoring some behaviour (so long as it not dangerous) can be effective. In older children, the root cause of misbehaviour can be discovered through asking the child, and again the real problem can be tackled, which does not happen when a child is simply smacked. http://actagainstviolence.apa.org/understanding_child_dev.pdf
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development

Several responses: Childhood psychology is far more complex and nuanced than the theory we have been given by opp. Though, if we accept their interpretation of the theory: 1. This only applies to young children; presumably this means opposition accept that with older children who understand moral reasoning physical punishment is not necessary. 2. Note: Even with younger children, using their reasoning, at no point is it clear in Kohlbergs theory that the punishment *must* consist of hitting a child. Instead you could take away the child’s favourite toy, stop them from playing outside for the day, ban then from playing Nintendo 3DS etc. 3. Opp seem to think only bad behaviour should be punished. If the aim is to condition children into behaving well – why not also reward young children for behaving, which would act as a disincentive for bad behaviour. If opp's claim was that there was a certain childhood development stage, in which only hitting works - it falls. There are lots of ways you can make a child " focus on external consequences that certain actions may bring. "
Countries emerging from violent pasts, involving repression, civil war and political violence face t...

Countries emerging from violent pasts, involving repression, civil war and political violence face three options. Firstly, they can attempt to ignore the past, allowing those guilty of atrocities to go unpunished and perhaps even prosper under the new system. This approach leaves victims' families bitter and communities divided, making renewed violence all the more likely. Secondly, they can set up war crimes courts (as in the Balkans, Rwanda and Sierra Leone), but these may be seen as victor's justice, or as imposed from outside by the international community. Those threatened by such courts may refuse to lay down their arms, jeopardising any chance of a lasting peace settlement - as with Joseph Kony's long-running rebellion in Northern Uganda. Finally and often best, they can set up a form of Truth and Reconciliation Commission. This requires the whole country to face up to its past, to acknowledge that violence was done by all parties and that the victims were many, and to seek reconciliation through forgiveness at both personal and national levels.
It is important to uncover the real truth of what happened during the terrible years of violence and...

It is important to uncover the real truth of what happened during the terrible years of violence and/or repression. This can only ever be achieved with the cooperation of those responsible; they literally know where the bodies of the disappeared are buried. Without this collective revelation of grief and guilt, the families of the victims will never know the truth about their suffering, and so will not be able to mourn them with dignity. The nation must also confront its past so that those who did not commit violence themselves, but who supported violent groups or repressive regimes, even if only passively, can no longer claim, 'I did not know' but must acknowledge their part too and commit themselves to building a better society.
Compromise is essential to achieving peace and stability after years of conflict. This often has to...

Compromise is essential to achieving peace and stability after years of conflict. This often has to be negotiated, as in South Africa, and has to survive for long enough for trust to grow. A Truth and Reconciliation process allows for such compromises to be made, favouring no side over another and helping a move to peaceful democratic politics. It does not seek retributive justice but restorative justice, which gives value to the victims of conflict and requires their oppressors to address their sufferings. An amnesty is not easily given but has to be applied for individually, through a complete and truthful disclosure of past crimes. If information is withheld, or the crimes are found not to be politically motivated, then prosecution and punishment are still possible.
A Truth and Reconciliation process provides a national forum for facing up to the past, rather than ...

A Truth and Reconciliation process provides a national forum for facing up to the past, rather than one set up from outside by the international community. War crimes tribunals for the Balkans and Rwanda have taken years to achieve a very small number of convictions. They can often appear to be hijacked by international bodies such as NATO or the UN, attempting to impose a solution from outside (to salve consciences in the west) without real understanding of the particular circumstances of the individual nation.
Financial compensation was only part of the South African Commission's work. Although it has been s...

Financial compensation was only part of the South African Commission's work. Although it has been slow to arrive it is continuing to be distributed. More will be done over time, and the impact of reconciliation on polls is also a long-term process. Countries recovering from conflicts and repression typically have wrecked economies, so it is unreasonable to expect immediate results in this area. Lengthy war crimes trials deal with only a fraction of the abuses committed, and typically cost tens of millions of dollars (mostly in legal costs) more than a Truth and Reconciliation process, so they are even harder to justify.
Countries emerging from violent pasts, involving repression, civil war and political violence face t...

Terrible crimes deserve appropriate punishments. Ignoring the past may not be a good idea, but war criminals (especially the leaders of violent groups) should be brought to justice in public trials. This is the only way to ensure that dangerous men are not allowed to continue in society, where they may threaten and terrorise others when the opportunity presents itself again. It also allows punishment to be proportionate, distinguishing between those who planned violence and repression, and those who followed them, rather than granting all the same amnesty. Most importantly, it sends a message to other would-be warlords and dictators at home and abroad that justice will not be denied; the easy assumption of amnesties will only encourage future violence.
It is important to uncover the real truth of what happened during the terrible years of violence and...

Even the best Truth and Reconciliation process can only arrive at a partial version of the truth. This may take so many years that political development is halted while society relives the trauma through commission proceedings. Such commissions also impose a particular form of morality upon everyone, drawing upon specifically Christian traditions of confession, absolution and forgiveness that may be alien both to many victims and to the wider society. Even in an almost completely Christian South Africa many victims' families rejected the process for this reason; it is even less well suited to other societies and cultures.
Compromise is essential to achieving peace and stability after years of conflict. This often has to...

Truth and Reconciliation commissions are a mask, behind which political bargains can be made that allow the guilty to go free. Power is traded in return for amnesty. People may be required to confess to their crimes (although in South Africa middle-ranking bureaucrats were the main scapegoats while their political masters mostly escaped close scrutiny), but they will not be punished for them. South Africa is a unique example where violence was often committed by agents of the state for purely political reasons, and where the end of repression was negotiated rather than brought about through victory for one side. Elsewhere political and criminal or economic violence are hard to separate (e.g. Sierra Leone, Cambodia), and violence was ended by victory for one party, often with external help (e.g. Sierra Leone, Cambodia, again, but also Rwanda).
A Truth and Reconciliation process provides a national forum for facing up to the past, rather than ...

The United Nations and other international bodies have great experience and expertise in dealing with post-conflict situations, including running war crimes trials. They can draw upon the lessons to be learnt from other countries and apply them in partnership with local politicians and lawyers. Their involvement is important because conflicts are rarely entirely domestic, but often spill over into neighbouring states, as in the Balkans, South-East Asia and West Africa. International courts can also avoid the suspicion of bias and corruption which an entirely national process can suffer.
The fashion industry leads opinion and so making a change to the kind of models used will have a big...

The fashion industry leads opinion and so making a change to the kind of models used will have a big impact. Only a few thousand people will ever attend catwalk shows or buy the incredibly expensive clothes they showcase. However, these include many leading celebrities whose lives are covered in every detail by tabloid magazines read by many millions. And the clothes themselves hugely influence high-street fashions, which in turn often only look good on unhealthily thin girls. Forcing the fashion industry to make changes will therefore ripple through society in a way no other action can do.
Size zero models should be banned.

Using female models that are size zero suggests that the only way to be beautiful is to be size zero. Size zero fashion icons have a dangerous influence upon follwers of fashion and can lead to physical and mental complaints. According to the National Institue of Mental Health, an estimated 0.5% to 3.7% of women will suffer from anorexia in their lifetime; 1.1% to 4.2% for bulimia and 2% to 5% for binge eating disorder. The majority of the population is not size zero and therefore using size zero models is discriminatory. However, if the media was to stop using images of size zero models, then cases of eating disorders would decrease.
Many models are under pressure from agents and designers to be thin. As a result, many develop eati...

Weight restrictions are ineffective. For example, BMI only takes into account weight and height but not bone density and fat percentage. Many models are teenagers who eat normally but are naturally skinny. Why should they be stopped from working? In some instances it has been more effective to ask the model to provide a certificate from a doctor proving they are healthy. Given that very young models (often 14 or 15 years old) are also exploited financially and sexually, perhaps it would be best to have minimum ages for modelling instead.
Fashion is promoting an unhealthy image for women to aspire to. Studies have found that most women ...

We cannot campaign against models when we do not hold other role models accountable. Many rock stars take drugs and we do not stop them performing/ producing records. Footballers get drunk, beat people up and sleep around, yet they are not banned from playing. Even with thin celebrities, fashion models are far from the only examples to be found. Many actresses and pop stars are also very slim, as are many female athletes (e.g. gymnasts, distance runners) – should they also be banned? And what about other kinds of female role models? Should we ban skinny teachers, doctors or businesswomen?
Very thin models need to be protected by the state from themselves. Many models are too young to be...

We should not pass rules and laws against thin models working. They are grown women who are capable of making their own decisions about their bodies and their careers. For many of them modelling has been a dream they have followed for many years – just like gymnasts, bodybuilders or actresses. Should we punish anyone who is single-minded in pursuing their ambitions, just because we disapprove of them? And any attack on women’s right of control over their own bodies risks removing their right to choose in other areas, such as abortion.
The fashion industry leads opinion and so making a change to the kind of models used will have a big...

The fashion industry is far from being the main opinion former. The media, and particularly tabloid newspapers and celebrity magazines is much more important in promoting views of women. The very magazines which run scare stories about size zero models also run unflattering pictures of female celebrities, criticizing them for putting on weight. If any industry needs to be the target of new laws, it should be the media.\ It is also wrong to blame fashion as one united industry. Although some designers often use very slim models, others aim to dress a more traditional, curvy shape (e.g. Versace). There are also differences from country to country in the kind of models which are preferred.\
Voluntary codes will never be effective. Designers will always claim that favourite models should b...

Even if we should act to keep worryingly thin models off the catwalks, writing new laws is not the best way to do it. Laws are a blunt instrument which cannot consider what is best in the case of each individual model. And fashion is an international business; unless all countries sign up to the same laws the problem will not be solved. Instead the fashion industry should develop its own voluntary code, to which all the leading designers and agents are committed. This will ensure willing cooperation with new rules, and also work across the whole world.
It is said by doctors that an adult woman is at risk of a large number of health problems if her BMI...

It is said by doctors that an adult woman is at risk of a large number of health problems if her BMI (body mass index) falls below the recommended 18. These include osteoporosis and loss of the menstrual cycle. If a young model is extremely skinny she needs medical help and should not be allowed to work until she is back to a healthy weight.