Question: Should corporal punishment be used in schools?

Many students who misbehave in school come from unstable families Teachers can be trusted to use corporal punishment as an option. They will think about what to do on a case-by-case basis and try to understand why a child is behaving a certain way. Then, if they think it is appropriate and it would help, they may choose to physically punish the student. Sometimes students who misbehave come from families who are too soft on them and do not discipline them enough, so their teachers need to take the task of setting boundaries. For this type of students, corporal punishment may be very helpful.

Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment Definition: No problems there. \\\Next ill post a practical example. Lets say a teacher is teaching a class. A student in the class talks out of turn. He is given a WARNING, and then he does it again and is given another WARNING, now, he talks out of turn again, he is called up to the front (or after school, at the teachers discretion) and the teacher would use a ruler to hit the students palms. There, end of story! This is the only way to speak to children these days because if they were punished orally or given detention the student would be more likely to repeat that mistake again./// You have not stated any evidence that this is the only way to speak to children. Because you have no evidence I will provide it. Wife beating is no longer acceptable, but in 23 states it is legal for school teachers and officials to spank and paddle kids, a form of corporal punishment. "When a girl is spanked by her father or paddled by a male school teacher, she is being trained to submit," says Jordan Riak, a retired school teacher and the executive director of Parents and Teachers Against Violence in Education, a California-based nonprofit group dedicated to getting corporal punishment banned in U.S. schools. "When a school district permits teachers to paddle girls, it is setting those girls up to be victims of future male authority figures, whether it be a boyfriend, husband or employer," Riak claims. \\\That's the only language children understand, and they understand it instantaneously.That's how you can prevent children from spoiling./// There is the assertion, now where is the reasoning and evidence? \\\I'm good and successful today because my parents hit me when I did something wrong. That's why I'm doing well in life. I suffered no harm from my parents having beaten me./// Good and successful is from a point of view, and you have no clear evidence that because your parents hit you it is why you are successful. You may have not suffered any harm but you dont know about other kids who have different minds, a personal experience in this case is irrelevant. Finally, this debate is about schools, not your family. \\\It is only fear which restrains children from misbehaving. Show the something to be afraid of and they will behave. Corporal punishment has instantaneous effect. Children obey and behave absolutely right when punished./// It has been proven, even in government, that it is wrong to rule with an iron fist. You should rule with reasoning, such as "If you disrupt the class again you will be given after school detention on the minimum day" Or "You will have extra homework" definitely not saying "if you don't shut your trap you're gonna get a beatin'!" Because after a while, kids get immune to the pain. \\\Pampering and talking to them lovingly spoils them./// You don't pamper and spoil them if they did something wrong! \\\History of corporal punishment suggests that it has taught children to behave over last so many ages/// I agree! Golden eras such as the Nazi rule of Germany, where the kids in the Hitler youth were shot with automatic rifles if they deserted, that kept them faithful to Hitler! But seriously it has not helped... ==Points== I. Morally wrong Now, in 2010, physical punishment is considered too severe for serial killers, murderers, criminals of all kinds and ages, including juvenile delinquents, too demeaning for soldiers, sailors, servants and spouses. But it remains legal and acceptable for children who are innocent of any crime! There are laws preventing child abuse, therefore my opponent's case is not only immoral, but illegal too. There are no reliable statistics on the extent of crime a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago. From all reports, however, crime in the U.S. was extensive, especially violent crime and crimes among the young. The good citizens of 19th century America were also alarmed. They looked back to the good old days of simple rural life, before the growth of the cities. The crowded and crime-ridden Eastern cities were contrasted unfavorably with the "wide open spaces" of the West -- the West, that is, of Jesse James and Billy the Kid! Discipline in the one room schoolhouses was violent. Often the teacher engaged in a bare knuckle fight with the biggest student as a warning to the others of what would happen to them if they provoked his wrath. Horace Mann, the Father of American education, fulminated against the number of floggings per day, sometimes more than the number of scholars. Most of our great grandparents were satisfied with a fourth grade education and eighth grade was the end for all but five percent. The lawless mountain men of the Old West were recruited from the 14-year olds who high tailed it after one thrashing too many. Bands of outlaws stole horses, and plagued the defenseless. Public hangings and Iynchings were commonplace while pickpockets worked the crowds. Only the militia and the sheriff's posse maintained any semblance of order. I do not call this productive. II. Evidence Against Adrenalin output increases sharply during fear, anger and physical punishment. When this is prolonged or often repeated, the endocrine balance fails to return to baseline. The victim becomes easily angered and prone to poor impulse control and spontaneous violent outbursts. Car crashes caused by drunk driving are increased by a hidden factor. Bottled up anger, when combined with alcohol is the largest cause of the highway death toll which comes to 25,000 deaths every year, or one every 20 minutes. An investigation by Donald C. Pelz of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan in 1973 led to his finding that: "For the young male, anger toward the adult world is likely to find vent in dangerous driving ... Hostility tends to multiply with their attitude toward the educational system ... Those who had rejected the school system ... are likely to reject the highway system. " In fact he concluded that abiding anger was even more dangerous than drinking per se, but that the combination was the most deadly. The insult to high school boys of an embarrassing paddling raises the adrenaline level, which if repeated often enough stays high all the time. They are the timebombs whose battlefield casualties litter the roads and intersections of our country. A survey of 3,900 people in Houston as to what effect school corporal punishment had on their lives found that 76 percent of them said the effects had been negative and that they continued to resent what happened to them. That leaves about a fourth of them who were able to shrug it off and a mere handful who felt grateful for the timely punishment that "saved me from a life of crime." Thus, the one who testifies that "I was paddled when I was a kid and I turned out okay," must be labelled a survivor and congratulated on the strength of character that enabled him to make a life in spite of early mistreatment.

Corporal punishment in schools. cor"po"ral pun"ish"ment noun 1.physical punishment, such as caning or flogging. implemented: Verb 1.put (a decision, plan, agreement, etc.) into effect. School corporal punishment refers to causing deliberate pain or discomfort in response to undesired behaviour by students in schools. It often involves striking the student either across the buttocks or on the hands, with an implement such as a cane, wooden paddle, slipper, leather strap or wooden yardstick. Less commonly, it could also include spanking or smacking the student with the open hand, especially at the elementary school level. As of 2015, 31 states and the District of Columbia have banned corporal punishment in public schools, though in some of these there is no explicit prohibition. Corporal punishment is also unlawful in private schools in Iowa and New Jersey. In 19 U.S. states, corporal punishment is lawful in both public and private schools. Years ago, it was acceptable for a husband in the United States to beat his wife in order to get her to do what he wanted or to punish her. His asserting his authority through corporal punishment was accepted as a social norm. Should we be teaching school children that in this day in age it is appropriate for them to be hit when someone disagrees with them and their behaviour. Physical punishment can easily escalate and cross the line to abuse and serious injury, particularly when an instrument is used and public schools are required to use a paddle or ruler to implement corporal punishment. An estimated 1 to 2 percent of physically punished students in the United States are seriously injured, to the point of needing medical attention. According to the AAP and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, these injuries have included bruises, abrasions, broken bones, whiplash injury, muscle damage,brain injury, and in a few cases death. I am aware that this data is out of date but we should not ignore the fact that through the ages the number of children being smacked by their superiors is large during the 2005-2006 school year, 223,190 children had corporal punishment implemented in schools. It is because of these reasons I do not believe it moral to implement corporal punishment in schools. Sources: http://centerforparentingeducation.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.cnn.com... http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com... Society for Adolescent Medicine https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org...

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools I would like to start off with the definition of corporal punishment, acquired from [1]. "Corporal punishment, physical chastisement of an offender. At one extreme it includes the death penalty (see capital punishment), but the term usually refers to punishments like flogging, caning, mutilation, and branding. Until c.1800, in many parts of the world, most crimes were punished thus, or by such practices as confinement in the pillory or stocks, which combined physical chastisement with the humiliation of an individual possible in a relatively small, cohesive society. Flogging was especially prevalent, being used also to keep order among the institutionalized insane and in schools and the armed forces. " I would like to remind the voters that this argument is based on corporal punishment in schools, not military, law enforcement, insane institutions, etc. I begin my argument with a list of the pros of corporal punishment in schools, which is what I will base my argument on. These are found on [2]. Teaches students discipline Deters bad behavior No suspensions Limits amount of educational disruptions These are several pros that can be justified in any modern day school system. With students today becoming more rowdy and rude towards teachers, less time is used for teaching, and more is used for issuing detentions, write ups, scolding in class, or other forms of punishment. This naturally would hardly deter any common misbehavior, as they would soon go back to their usual antics. Looking at the graph on [3], this illustrates how education in The United States has dropped from 1900 to present day. Keep in mind, the beginning of the 1900's to the late 1970's, corporal punishment was a widely used form of punishment in all schools across America. The message sent was clear. You go to school to learn, and you respect the teachers who give you this information. If the respect is not given, then you were punished. This undoubtedly kept students in line, a reason for the higher test scores. [4] shows the states who still use the method of corporal punishment, rarely, yet still in effect. For those who think corporal punishment allows for students to be physically "beat" I would like to use this next topic to show what forms of corporal punishment there are, and the restrictions. [5] lists the types of corporal punishment, and although many seems harsh, the most commonly used forms are that of canning, paddling, flogging and saucing. There are, however, restrictions set on corporal punishment, as seen in [6]. Such restrictions include male teachers not being permitted to use this punishment on female students, and vice versa with female teachers to male students. I end my debate here, as I still would like to include more arguments in my next round. I again thank Con for his acceptance to the debate, and hope for a fun clean interesting debate. I would like to remind voters that I am simply playing the devil's advocate and minority voice, and that the arguments may not reflect my personal opinion. I ask that you vote based on content and not beliefs, as these may not directly resemble my values. 1. . http://www.infoplease.com... 2. . http://www.ehow.com... 3. . http://www.google.com... 4. . http://www.infoplease.com... 5. . http://privateschool.about.com... 6. . http://www.educationrightscenter.org...

should schools use corporal punishment I will begin my side by saying corporal punishment is highly unnecessary, and doesn't do anything besides implant more negative behavior. Also since you didn't specify what type of education, I must assume all grade levels(excluding college), and thus we will debate on that. First off, corporal punishment is a unnecessary act, and the schools have no right to hit a kid without consent of parents. Also since you never specified whether school had the parent consent. You have so many more punishments such as : Detention, sat. detention, in school suspension, suspension, and expulsion. I don't see why you need to enter the fist of "justice" into the picture. Secondly, striking the child isn't going to solve anything, all it is going to do is embarrass the child, and cause possible physcological problems. Also if the child is in high school and gets hit, then he or she may strike back. Also the allowing of corporal punishment in school leads to child abuse. What stops a teacher for beating the kid, or a student beating a teacher back in self defense. Thirdly, violence does not belong in the classroom. It does not help the education, and in fact probably harms it. The child will be more afraid of the teacher, they won't pay attention to the lesson plan. Also most associations are against corporal punishment, the one that caught my eye was The American School Counsellor Association. Hmmm, counsellors against the beating of children, didn't see that coming. If the people who are suppose to watch and help guide our children oppose why should it be used?

Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment First i'd like to start out with a definition. "Corporal punishment is the deliberate infliction of pain as retribution for an offence, or for the purpose of disciplining or reforming a wrongdoer, or to deter attitudes or behaviour deemed unacceptable. The term usually refers to methodically striking the offender with an implement, whether in judicial, domestic, or educational settings. " Next ill post a practical example. Lets say a teacher is teaching a class. A student in the class talks out of turn. He is given a WARNING, and then he does it again and is given another WARNING, now, he talks out of turn again, he is called up to the front (or after school, at the teachers discretion) and the teacher would use a ruler to hit the students palms. There, end of story! This is the only way to speak to children these days because if they were punished orally or given detention the student would be more likely to repeat that mistake again. Now, i will bring some evidence to support my arguments. An editor from childdisciplinewithlove. com states "[Corporal Punishment] That's the only language children understand, and they understand it instantaneously. That's how you can prevent children from spoiling. I'm good and successful today because my parents hit me when I did something wrong. That's why I'm doing well in life. I suffered no harm from my parents having beaten me. It has deterrent effect as well. If you beat one child in front of other children, not only that child learns to behave, others also learn a lesson to behave. Children try and test your limits. Show them some physical punishment so that they know it very clearly that each mistake of theirs will attract some physical punishment. •It is only fear which restrains children from misbehaving. Show the something to be afraid of and they will behave. Corporal punishment has instantaneous effect. Children obey and behave absolutely right when punished. Pampering and talking to them lovingly spoils them. There is no point in talking to them regarding solving any of their behavior problem because they are young and have no understanding of the worldly wisdom. So it's better not to waste time on taching them through talking. Just show them the fear of doing something wrong and they will do everything right. History of corporal punishment suggests that it has taught children to behave over last so many ages. " If you look at his last points it states that not only the child being faced with the punishment will learn but other children in the classroom will learn. Thank You.

Corporal Punishment in schools Accepted.Corporal punishment should be used in schools.Corporal punishment is defined as:"Physical punishment" http://www.google.ca...;

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Pro begins his argument by listing the supposed "pros" of corporal punishment. 1) Yes it can be argued that corporal punishment teaches kids discipline but I think that the reasons why it teaches discipline is appalling. Corporal punishment teaches kids to be disciplined out of nothing else but fear. There is no real or valid motive for a child to be disciplined as a result of corporal punishment apart from fear of physical pain. This is in effect isn't teaching children genuine discipline or the importance of discipline. Here are some other proven to work alternatives of disciplining students other than physical abuse (. http://www.webmd.com...). Why would corporal punishment need to be enforced as a means of discipline when there are plenty of other means. Not to mention the sheer problems associated with corporal punishment mentioned in my round 2 arguments. 2) You have no sources to back up the claim that corporal punishment actually deters bad behaviour. This article argues that corporal punishment doesn't deter bad behavior. (. http://getreadyforcollege.wordpress.com...) several case studies show that by repeated physical tortures children usually become even more adamant and might also start hating their elders as they do not understand the reason that why doing certain things are intolerable. On the other hand, disciplining without hitting would mean to first make the child understand that why certain behavior is acceptable and some are not. Teach the child some basic rules of the society and why are they to be followed. It has often been found that by giving logical reasoning to your child's answers, they can be stop many wrong deeds. This is also educating the child about conduct instead of making the child fear constantly. Here is a case study on both the negative physical and mental effects of corporal punishment:(. http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...) 3) I'm not sure how "no suspensions" is such a pro of corporal punishment. Firstly students can still get suspended if corporal punishment exists in their school but surely suspension is more beneficial to a child than corporal punishment. Suspension 1)Removes a problematic student from school. 2)Provides temporary relief to frustrated school personnel. 3)Raises parental attention to their child's misconduct. It does all these things without the physical and physocological effects of corporal punishment. 4) Also I don't see how corporal punishment limits the amount of educational disruptions. Taking the time to give out corporal punishment in whatever form is much more of a disruption than telling a student to be quiet for example. Again there are many other effective means of punishment other than having to resort to physical violence, which as I have shown, has a great amount of disadvantages. Pro tries to argue that there are restrictions to corporal punishment e. g male teachers not being permitted to use this punishment on female students, however I do not see this as a valid argument. There may be restrictions to corporal punishment but this isn't really making a case on your stance that it should be enforced in school. I would like to state that The United States is the only nation in the western world which still permits corporal punishment in its schools. And even having said that, corporal punishment is banned in schools in 31 states. Statistics show that corporal punishment is on a decline. (. http://www.corpun.com...) This is another point for my case. There is obviously a reason for this decline. People are coming to their senses are realizing that the disadvantages of corporal punish enormously outweigh whatever advantages there might be, which I feel I have shown I look forward to the final round.

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Corporal punishment means physical torture. This could be in the form of beating, canning, thrashing or even whipping. Corporal punishment is a common feature in schools. Several incidents of such punishment have been reported in the newspapers. Such kind of punishment can physically impair a student for his whole life. It may also affect him psychologically, disturb his mental balance. This kind of punishment should be stopped immediately. The method to discipline a child through corporal punishment was first practiced during the medieval period and is old-fashioned. Teachers should deal with their students patiently, advising and guiding them in every sphere of life. The term, 'Corporal punishment' means 'physical punishment'. It is a kind of punishment that affects the human body adversely. This could be in the form of beating, thrashing or even whipping'. Thus, punishment of this kind is physical torture to a student and should be condemned and stopped immediately. Moreover, such kind of punishment may sometimes physically impair a student for his whole life. Psychologists are of the opinion that such a punishment can affect a student mentally, for a very long period of time. In India Corporal punishment has become a common feature in schools. Several incidents of physical assault have been reported in the newspapers. For instance, a student of class XII from a popular school in Udaipur and a student from Delhi Municipality Corporation School died due to the beating, they received from their school teacher. This is shocking. In another incident, a class XI student in Ahmedabad accused a teacher of having hit him so hard that he suffered a temporary loss of hearing. Making a student kneel down or stand for hours, pinching and slapping are all set to be banned under plans to widen the definition of Corporal punishment in schools. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has suggested a code of regulations on the conduct of teachers in schools. A standout feature of the code is a total ban on corporal punishment. So far, only six Indian states have banned the cane in schools. Corporal Punishment is just another form of physical violence and has no place in an enlightened society. However there are numerous instances of milder punishment that go unnoticed. There is enough evidence to suggest that teachers, including those at elite schools, physically and verbally intimidate children, some of whom could be as young as five years old. There is unfortunately no national law banning cruel or unusual punishment in schools. The National Policy on Education merely says that corporal punishment is not permissible. Discipline is a must for students in schools and colleges. However, enforcing it through Corporal punishment is highly objectionable and rather, inhuman. This kind of punishment was generally practiced during the medieval period, and is very old-fashioned. Moreover, this is not the right procedure or technique to discipline a student. Teacher should realize that children at the school level are at an impressionable age. If they are subjected to such kind of physical torture, they may develop a fear (phobia) to approach or meet a teacher, or even attend the school. They will never respect and love their teachers which is very essential for the overall development of a student's personality. This is because a guru or a teacher is a role model for a student. He must set an example for his students through his behavior and actions. He must deal with his students patiently, advising and guiding him to excel in every sphere of life such as academics, sports, music and various other extra-curricular activities. A student must also be free and friendly with his teachers, ask questions, clarify his doubts etc. At the same time, he should always respect and obey his teachers. However, this obedience and respect cannot be demanded forcibly through corporal punishment. It can only come spontaneously through deep regard for one's teachers. Supreme Court states that 'children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and the they should receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear. National Policy on Education directs the school authority to take necessary action in the matter, so that the pernicious practice of affecting physical and mental health of children can be nipped in the bud. Corporal punishment does not have any positive effect on a student. If further worsens the situation. For instance, a student who is very naughty, or least interested in studies, when subjected to corporal punishment, may become more aggressive in nature. He may even leave the school and studies. Nonetheless, such a drastic decision can be disastrous for a child's future. Corporal punishment may even cause permanent physical disorders in a child. For example, hard slapping upon the ears can make him totally deaf for the rest of his life. Harsh whipping and canning in the hands and legs can damage the bones and muscles paralyzing him completely. There are some people who would say scolding of school children and verbal intimidation should not be outlawed. This argument is flawed. Verbal abuse could be as damaging and humiliating for children, especially the younger ones, as physical punishment. Parents often complain to schools authorities against abusing their children in school. But they are too often cowed by school authorities to raise their voice. In such a situation, there is no alternative but for the state government to interfere. To conclude, it must always be borne in our mind that teaching is one of the noblest professions where one imparts knowledge to others. The teacher must consider his students as his own children, and treat them as lovingly and caringly as possible. He should applaud a student's achievements, and help him to overcome his shortcomings by motivating him to pursue his interests. A teacher should be there to guide a student to become responsible, educated and a well-groomed citizen of a country. While handling students, it must always be kept in mind that they are like flowers. They have to be nurtured with great care to help them blossom and spread their fragrance.

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Corporal punishment means physical torture. This could be in the form of beating, canning, thrashing or even whipping. Corporal punishment is a common feature in schools. Several incidents of such punishment have been reported in the newspapers. Such kind of punishment can physically impair a student for his whole life. It may also affect him psychologically, disturb his mental balance. This kind of punishment should be stopped immediately. The method to discipline a child through corporal punishment was first practiced during the medieval period and is old-fashioned. Teachers should deal with their students patiently, advising and guiding them in every sphere of life. The term, 'Corporal punishment' means 'physical punishment'. It is a kind of punishment that affects the human body adversely. This could be in the form of beating, thrashing or even whipping'. Thus, punishment of this kind is physical torture to a student and should be condemned and stopped immediately. Moreover, such kind of punishment may sometimes physically impair a student for his whole life. Psychologists are of the opinion that such a punishment can affect a student mentally, for a very long period of time. In India Corporal punishment has become a common feature in schools. Several incidents of physical assault have been reported in the newspapers. For instance, a student of class XII from a popular school in Udaipur and a student from Delhi Municipality Corporation School died due to the beating, they received from their school teacher. This is shocking. In another incident, a class XI student in Ahmedabad accused a teacher of having hit him so hard that he suffered a temporary loss of hearing. Making a student kneel down or stand for hours, pinching and slapping are all set to be banned under plans to widen the definition of Corporal punishment in schools. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has suggested a code of regulations on the conduct of teachers in schools. A standout feature of the code is a total ban on corporal punishment. So far, only six Indian states have banned the cane in schools. Corporal Punishment is just another form of physical violence and has no place in an enlightened society. However there are numerous instances of milder punishment that go unnoticed. There is enough evidence to suggest that teachers, including those at elite schools, physically and verbally intimidate children, some of whom could be as young as five years old. There is unfortunately no national law banning cruel or unusual punishment in schools. The National Policy on Education merely says that corporal punishment is not permissible. Discipline is a must for students in schools and colleges. However, enforcing it through Corporal punishment is highly objectionable and rather, inhuman. This kind of punishment was generally practiced during the medieval period, and is very old-fashioned. Moreover, this is not the right procedure or technique to discipline a student. Teacher should realize that children at the school level are at an impressionable age. If they are subjected to such kind of physical torture, they may develop a fear (phobia) to approach or meet a teacher, or even attend the school. They will never respect and love their teachers which is very essential for the overall development of a student's personality. This is because a guru or a teacher is a role model for a student. He must set an example for his students through his behavior and actions. He must deal with his students patiently, advising and guiding him to excel in every sphere of life such as academics, sports, music and various other extra-curricular activities. A student must also be free and friendly with his teachers, ask questions, clarify his doubts etc. At the same time, he should always respect and obey his teachers. However, this obedience and respect cannot be demanded forcibly through corporal punishment. It can only come spontaneously through deep regard for one's teachers. Supreme Court states that 'children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and the they should receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear. National Policy on Education directs the school authority to take necessary action in the matter, so that the pernicious practice of affecting physical and mental health of children can be nipped in the bud. Corporal punishment does not have any positive effect on a student. If further worsens the situation. For instance, a student who is very naughty, or least interested in studies, when subjected to corporal punishment, may become more aggressive in nature. He may even leave the school and studies. Nonetheless, such a drastic decision can be disastrous for a child's future. Corporal punishment may even cause permanent physical disorders in a child. For example, hard slapping upon the ears can make him totally deaf for the rest of his life. Harsh whipping and canning in the hands and legs can damage the bones and muscles paralyzing him completely. There are some people who would say scolding of school children and verbal intimidation should not be outlawed. This argument is flawed. Verbal abuse could be as damaging and humiliating for children, especially the younger ones, as physical punishment. Parents often complain to schools authorities against abusing their children in school. But they are too often cowed by school authorities to raise their voice. In such a situation, there is no alternative but for the state government to interfere. To conclude, it must always be borne in our mind that teaching is one of the noblest professions where one imparts knowledge to others. The teacher must consider his students as his own children, and treat them as lovingly and caringly as possible. He should applaud a student's achievements, and help him to overcome his shortcomings by motivating him to pursue his interests. A teacher should be there to guide a student to become responsible, educated and a well-groomed citizen of a country. While handling students, it must always be kept in mind that they are like flowers. They have to be nurtured with great care to help them blossom and spread their fragrance.

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Corporal punishment means physical torture. This could be in the form of beating, canning, thrashing or even whipping. Corporal punishment is a common feature in schools. Several incidents of such punishment have been reported in the newspapers. Such kind of punishment can physically impair a student for his whole life. It may also affect him psychologically, disturb his mental balance. This kind of punishment should be stopped immediately. The method to discipline a child through corporal punishment was first practiced during the medieval period and is old-fashioned. Teachers should deal with their students patiently, advising and guiding them in every sphere of life. The term, 'Corporal punishment' means 'physical punishment'. It is a kind of punishment that affects the human body adversely. This could be in the form of beating, thrashing or even whipping'. Thus, punishment of this kind is physical torture to a student and should be condemned and stopped immediately. Moreover, such kind of punishment may sometimes physically impair a student for his whole life. Psychologists are of the opinion that such a punishment can affect a student mentally, for a very long period of time. In India Corporal punishment has become a common feature in schools. Several incidents of physical assault have been reported in the newspapers. For instance, a student of class XII from a popular school in Udaipur and a student from Delhi Municipality Corporation School died due to the beating, they received from their school teacher. This is shocking. In another incident, a class XI student in Ahmedabad accused a teacher of having hit him so hard that he suffered a temporary loss of hearing. Making a student kneel down or stand for hours, pinching and slapping are all set to be banned under plans to widen the definition of Corporal punishment in schools. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has suggested a code of regulations on the conduct of teachers in schools. A standout feature of the code is a total ban on corporal punishment. So far, only six Indian states have banned the cane in schools. Corporal Punishment is just another form of physical violence and has no place in an enlightened society. However there are numerous instances of milder punishment that go unnoticed. There is enough evidence to suggest that teachers, including those at elite schools, physically and verbally intimidate children, some of whom could be as young as five years old. There is unfortunately no national law banning cruel or unusual punishment in schools. The National Policy on Education merely says that corporal punishment is not permissible. Discipline is a must for students in schools and colleges. However, enforcing it through Corporal punishment is highly objectionable and rather, inhuman. This kind of punishment was generally practiced during the medieval period, and is very old-fashioned. Moreover, this is not the right procedure or technique to discipline a student. Teacher should realize that children at the school level are at an impressionable age. If they are subjected to such kind of physical torture, they may develop a fear (phobia) to approach or meet a teacher, or even attend the school. They will never respect and love their teachers which is very essential for the overall development of a student's personality. This is because a guru or a teacher is a role model for a student. He must set an example for his students through his behavior and actions. He must deal with his students patiently, advising and guiding him to excel in every sphere of life such as academics, sports, music and various other extra-curricular activities. A student must also be free and friendly with his teachers, ask questions, clarify his doubts etc. At the same time, he should always respect and obey his teachers. However, this obedience and respect cannot be demanded forcibly through corporal punishment. It can only come spontaneously through deep regard for one's teachers. Supreme Court states that 'children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and the they should receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear. National Policy on Education directs the school authority to take necessary action in the matter, so that the pernicious practice of affecting physical and mental health of children can be nipped in the bud. Corporal punishment does not have any positive effect on a student. If further worsens the situation. For instance, a student who is very naughty, or least interested in studies, when subjected to corporal punishment, may become more aggressive in nature. He may even leave the school and studies. Nonetheless, such a drastic decision can be disastrous for a child's future. Corporal punishment may even cause permanent physical disorders in a child. For example, hard slapping upon the ears can make him totally deaf for the rest of his life. Harsh whipping and canning in the hands and legs can damage the bones and muscles paralyzing him completely. There are some people who would say scolding of school children and verbal intimidation should not be outlawed. This argument is flawed. Verbal abuse could be as damaging and humiliating for children, especially the younger ones, as physical punishment. Parents often complain to schools authorities against abusing their children in school. But they are too often cowed by school authorities to raise their voice. In such a situation, there is no alternative but for the state government to interfere. To conclude, it must always be borne in our mind that teaching is one of the noblest professions where one imparts knowledge to others. The teacher must consider his students as his own children, and treat them as lovingly and caringly as possible. He should applaud a student's achievements, and help him to overcome his shortcomings by motivating him to pursue his interests. A teacher should be there to guide a student to become responsible, educated and a well-groomed citizen of a country. While handling students, it must always be kept in mind that they are like flowers. They have to be nurtured with great care to help them blossom and spread their fragrance.

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools I will now present my argument as defined. Arguments Against Corporal Punishment being enforced in school. 1). The more "spankings children" experience, the greater the chance that they will become aggressive and engage in other anti-social behavior. Source: (Study reported in Archives of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, August 1997 by Murray A. Straus, David B. Sugarman, and Jean Giles-Sims) 2). Poor children, minorities and children with disabilities are hit more regularly in schools, sometimes at 2-5 times the rate of other children. Source: (U. S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, Surveys from 1976-2003, Center for Effective Discipline. ) 3). Corporal punishment teaches children that violence is a way to solve problems. Research shows that this is indeed the message that kids receive whether it's inflicting, receiving or witnessing . Source: (Eron, Walder & Lefkowitz, 1971; Hyman & Snook, 1999; Lahey, Moffit & Caspi, 2003, Reid, Patterson & Snyder, 2002. ) 4). Studies have shown that corporal punishment of children is related to decreased morality, increased aggression, more antisocial behavior, increased criminality, decreased mental health outcomes, increased adult abusive behaviors, and increased risk of being victimized by abusive relationships in adulthood. Source: (Meta-Analysis of 88 corporal punishment studies (Gershoff, E. T. 2002). ) 5). Some statistics here: 78% of corporal punishment states achieved below the national average at the fourth grade level in reading. 75% of the corporal punishment states achieved below the national average in eighth grade level reading (Center for Effective Discipline, year: 2004). Sixty-seven percent of Ohio corporal punishment schools fell in the lowest 25% of schools on state school report cards in the 99-00 school year (Center for Effective Discipline, year: 2001). 6). Injuries often occur e. g bruises, broken bones. Children's deaths have occurred in the U. S. due to school corporal punishment. (hearing before the Juvenile Justice Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate. October 17, 1984) 7). Corporal punishment enforces physical aggression as an acceptable and good means of getting rid of unwanted behavior in our society. (Position paper opposing school corporal punishment by the Society for Adolescent Medicine (Greydanus, DE. et al, 2003). ) 8). More school shooting deaths were found in states allowing school corporal punishment than those who do not. (D. Arcus, 2002. ) 9). There is evidence that harsh physical punishments are damaging to children, emotionally as well as physically. (Mohr, WK and Anderson, J. A. 2002. ) Facts: 10). Schools are the only institutions in America in which striking another person is legally sanctioned. It is not allowed in prisons, in the military or in mental hospitals. 11). Many alternatives to corporal punishment have proven their worth. Alternatives teach children to be self-disciplined rather than cooperative only because of fear. (No source here, just kind of general knowledge). These are the main reasons why I believe that corporal punishment should not be enforced in schools. I look forward to the next round. Further online source: (. http://www.neverhitachild.org...)

Corporal punishment should be implemented in a school setting Before I really get started I want to comment on the rules. Rule 1, the Bible is not a valid source. Why would this be a rule? Does my opponent have a bias against the religious text that most Christians follow? Why does my opponent care so much about that with regards to this issue? That seems rather condemning of my opponent's biases. Rule 2, always state sources (if you do not give sources you automatically lose). This too is an interesting rule. Is there something magically true and perfectly right about sources? What if my source is a KKK website? I can still win the argument because I cited my source! This seems to betray another interesting bias. A bias towards automatic acceptance/reliance on "scientific" studies. No one can win a debate against someone who has already denied the validity of anything that is against what they already believe. Though I guess, to be fair, I'm not really aiming my arguments at convincing my opponent so much as you, the readers. And what am I going to try to convince you of?Well, first off, I know I'll never win on the very strong position "corporal punishment should be implemented in a school setting." There's no way I could convince you that public school teachers should spank (or otherwise physically punish) their students. I don't want that any more than you or my opponent does. What I will be arguing for is the more modest idea, "corporal punishment should NOT be OUTLAWED in a school setting." Study after study, which I'm sure my opponent will reference has shown that physically punishing children can have harmful results. I have no doubt that that general point is true. However, I would argue, and this is the main crux of my position, all those studies have been aimed at the wrong idea. They seem to be aimed at proving what we all know intuitively. That is, the more an adult hurts a child the worse that child will behave/develop. But, that's not what corporal punishment should be. The position paper of the Journal of Adolescent Health on this topic defines it as this: "Corporal punishment refers to intentional application of physical pain as a method of changing behavior [1]." (They're referencing Straus MA, Mouradian VE. Impulsive corporal punishment by mothers and antisocial behavior and impulsiveness of children. Behav Sci Law 1998;16:353–74.) Sure this is a fine general definition, but look at the source, "Impulsive corporal punishment by mothers ..." Corporal punishment cannot be impulsive. The effectiveness of any punishment system is in its comprehensiveness and consistency. If an authority says, "Don't do that or I'll ..." and then doesn't follow through and lets the child slide and continue to get away with whatever behavior the adult is trying to change, it'll never work. It doesn't matter if the threat is physical or non-physical punishment, if it's not carried out consistently and fairly, it's worthless. Impulsive punishment also won't work (again whether it's physical or otherwise). What is the goal of punishment/discipline? Are those two the same?Let's look at the issue from a totally different perspective. Let's think of discipline and punishment as two very different things. Discipline is a way to change behavior and is generally not physical. Punishment is retribution or the base result of breaking the rules/laws/regulation. Punishment can lead to or even cause a person to change his/her behavior, but that's not the primary goal of punishment. The goal of punishment is to mete out the consequences of wrong actions. Given that view, the goal of corporal punishment isn't to change behavior at all. Which means all those studies that my opponent will undoubtedly speak about, are wrong-headed in the first place. Discipline should use various methods get a child to change his/her own behavior. Punishment is the consequences for not changing one's behavior. Punishment need not be physical, and I would readily admit that in today's culture, physical punishment would probably lead to more problems than necessary. That's why I think the issue shouldn't be the encouragement of corporal punishment in schools, rather the permissibility of it. Think about how it looks from the unruly student's position if the worst punishment for misbehavior is expulsion from school. Taking away corporal punishment leaves school punishment toothless. The worst punishment for misbehavior at school is, not having to go to school anymore?! In many cases that's what the unruly student wants in the first place! Discipline should be multifaceted and non-physical to encourage growth and self-discipline. That's the goal after all, to get the child to control him/herself so as to not get punished because he/she doesn't do anything wrong. Discipline says, change, change, change, and here's how we, as your leaders, will help you change. Punishment says, you've done wrong, here are the consequences.Let's not hamstring the people who are supposed to be leading our children, in fact let's not hamstring ourselves by not meting out punishment when it is deserved.Sources:http://www.adolescenthealth.org...http://www.apa.org...http://www.huffingtonpost.com...http://www.newsmax.com...http://www.psychpage.com...;

If teachers and parents weren’t allowed to hit children, they would discipline them in better ways. The general standard of student behaviour and test results in many schools has declined since the state banned corporal punishments. Many teachers (in Britain) believe that is because corporal punishment was an efficient way of dealing with misbehaving students. Corporal punishment should be an option available to teachers – but not the only option and not one to be used all the time. A ban on corporal punishment would simply takes away from teachers a very effective disciplining method.

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school It should be aloud in school so children will have better discipline and pay attention more. Studies show that since corporal punishment was banned discipline in children has gone dramatically down.

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools NOTE: You didn't say USA only so I shall use statistics and facts from aroudn the globe (mainly UK).Now onto the main debate. In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement [1], 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment. We should adhere to the teachers requests.It is inevitable that bad classroom behaviour will filter into life outside school. You only have to look at the crime statistics to see that crime has increased dramatically since the abolition of corporal punishment. Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime [2]. Children’s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain. A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of “but you can't take away my freedom”, “you have no right” or “I have rights”. In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact. If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers. Detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior. If this is the only effective authority a teacher has for an out of control student then that teacher is and probably knows his/her authority is rather pitiful. Sources[1] http://tinyurl.com...[2] http://tinyurl.com...

Corporal punishment in schools. My support for corporal punishment in school rests on a single premise. There may be times even if rare when the use of the strap or other implement is necessary and beneficial.

All schools should bring back corporal punishment We are debating corporal punishment. "As I said previously, research indicates that corporal punishment may adversely affect a student's self-image and his or her school achievement. This is a school study. [1] Anyhow, can my opponent give a substantive difference between corporal punishment at home and corporal punishment at school, whereby the deleterious effects of corporal punishment at home somehow transmute into positive effects when delivered by a teacher? "Then you cut and paste corporal punishment to reduce anti social behavior. That is not what a school would spank for. "Does my opponent doubt that antisocial behaviour occurs in schools, or does he think that it is not an infraction of school discipline? Or is he claiming that schools who practice corporal punishment only do so for sociable violations? My opponent has yet to show that school shoootings and lack of corporal punishment are linked, especially bearing in the mind the two problems I pointed out that he has to overcome. "I've never heard a child justify hitting another child by saying that it's OK because mom and dad hit me. "Unlikely that they do justify it at all. However, it has been shown that corporal punishment leads to increased aggression in children. "Properly done, spanking causes no lasting physical damage. "The issue is psychological damage. My opponent raises concerns about correlative studies. Studies linking smoking and lung cancer are correlative. We could argue that people who are prone to lung cancer are more likely to smoke. However, we also have a better causal mechanism that explains the link. We understand the concept of carcinogens. It is the same for corporal punishment. There is a link between spanking and increased aggression. We could argue that children who are likely to become more aggressive are more annoying and are more likely to get spanked, but there is a body of theory that explains spanking as a causal factor. Aside from violence being known to be a stressor, corporal punishment itself is understood to be a stressor. [2]In a summary of scientific research, Elizabeth Gershoff explains some of the causal mechanisms:"Social cognitive theory suggests that children who are hit by their parents (and thus physically hurt by them) will develop a tendency to make hostile attributions about others that, in turn, increase the likelihood that they will behave inappropriately in social interactions. Finally, attribution theorists argue that, because corporal punishment uses physical force, its use by parents constitutes an external source to which children can attribute their compliance; corporal punishment does not promote internalized reasons for behaving appropriately. Children who have not internalized the reasons for behaving pro-socially thus have no reason to behave appropriately when their parents are not there to provide an external reason for doing so. "[3]Of the association between behavioural and emotional difficulties,"There is significant theoretical and empirical justification for assuming that at least some important part of this association is due to the causal impact of corporal punishment"[2]The use of Corporal Punishment has been associated with anger, fear, and humiliation in the child. Also of concern is the issue of trust between children and adults, and the child's ability to deal with situations without resorting to violence. [4]There is a link between corporal punishment and later wife beating. We could argue that children who are likely to beat their wives when they grow up are worse behaved than other children, but we have a body of theory that explains corporal punishment as a causal factor. Importantly, even if causation were not established, corporal punishment is ineffective at preventing children from growing up to be wife beaters, alcoholics, depressives, and suicide risks. So what is the use of continuing the practice? "would it mean that all forms of corporal punishment cause emotional and behavioral problems or only the more severe, abusive forms like hitting on the head or boxing the ears? "How is one form of attack abuse and not the other? What is "acceptable" violence against defenceless children? Anyhow, several of the studies I have presented have been specifically on spanking. Strassberg et al. (1994) found that milder forms of spanking in the home correlated with aggressive school behavior to a significant degree, and that child abuse correlated with aggressive behavior at school to an even more significant degree. Any child who had been abusively "hit" even once in their life was excluded from the "spanked" group, yet the correlation between spanking and school aggression remained significant. [5] A 2006 review found that"Research on the long-term effects of physical punishment are consistent, and overwhelmingly negative over a wide variety of child development outcomes. "[6] Lazelere has no case. "Parents that love their children and are involved in their lives may use spanking, but they will never use spanking in a way that harms their children. "My opponent confuses intention with outcome. However,"Rather than serve as a buffer, high parental support may create a context in which the child experiences incidences of physical punishment as inconsistent, confusing, and especially distressing. "[2]My opponent's hyperlink is broken. Corporal punishmment is not more effective even in the short term than other measures. [3][7] There is no case for it at all. [1] Society for Adolescent Medicine, Ad Hoc Corporal Punishment Committee. (2003). Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, pp385–393. [2] Turner, H. , and Finkelhor, D. (1996). Corporal Punishment as a Stressor among Youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 58 (1):155-166. Order (CV10) . http://www.unh.edu...[3] . http://scholarship.law.duke.edu...[4] . http://csmh.umaryland.edu...[5] Strassberg, Z. ; Dodge, K. A. ; Petit, G. S. & Bates, J. E. 1994. "Spanking in the Home and Children's Subsequent Aggression Toward Kindergarten Peers. " Development and Psychopathology, 6:445-461. [6] . http://www.msd.govt.nz...[7] . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Corporal punishment should be implemented in a school setting Rules: 1. Bible is not a valid source 2. ALWAYS STATE SOURCES (if you do not give sources you automatically lose) 3.

It is dubious that corporal punishment helps discipline children. Even the power of physical punishment to teach a child the difference between right and wrong is dubious; a young child may learn that the adult is displeased, but not why. Spanking will cause a state of extreme distress and confusion which makes it less likely they will analyse their behaviour with clarity. In older children disciplined at school, a physical punishment is likely to provoke resentment and further misbehaviour.

Corporal punsihment for children "Pro says that corporal punishment is quick and effective, but it's not." There are exceptions sure but exceptions don't count. " Kids start to feel bad and there is a point when some decide that they will not take that anymore and rebel or start to react negatively which prove that in long term cases it does not work effectively." This is a common or in other words a commonly heard case when children are abused. There is no evidence of this in schools when corporal punishment is applied nor in average families, instead this practice is held due to its quick and effective nature. "Aldo the other oart may go into depression because when they get hit or spanked they feel worse than when you talk to them and explain them what they did wrong and why it is wrong." Same objection as above. " Well you can discipline your students without using corporal punishment, for example, in school today they don't use corporal punishment and kids turn out okay." As I have pointed out, under the spoiled section theres a link where we read that society is becoming more and more violent. Extra Arguments: 1." Even in school when beating is uses the kids lose respect for the adult who is inducing the beating, also they lose self-respect and they start act mischievously" Both statements are unheard of when corporal punishment is moderated. 2. "They learn that it is not wrong to use force in human interactions." Elaborate. 3. "Kids also make many visits to the hospital for nerve damage or even broken bones." I proposed controlled corporal punishment and not battering.

It has been made illegal in so many countries for a reason. Corporal Punishment has now been completely banned in 24 countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Latvia, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Ukraine, Uruguay and Venezuela. Furthermore, there are numerous countries which are on their way to banning it such as Italy and Nepal, who have forbidden it by the courts but not by law as of yet. Corporal punishment is becoming widely discussed all over the world and the consideration to completely ban it is becoming a frequent query. Therefore, corporal punishment should not be reintroduced as evidently the fact that so many countries are against it portrays the negativity it brings and the banning of it in so many countries must be for a good reason. If there were any doubts all these countries would not have banned it and the UK would not have banned it in schools in the first place! To reinstate something which has already been thoroughly discussed years ago and of which the outcome was negative, would be absurd!

Corporal punishment of children Corporal punishment helps protect teachers and adults

THW reinstate Corporal Punishment in schools First I agree with Corporal Punishment should not be the only way to "encourage" pupils.. In my point of view, physical punishment should not only include hitting but should also include other kinds of physical actives; e.g running laps. In the modern society, as in more developed countries, Teachers will get in deep trouble for any corporal punishment towards their pupils, however, in many family, they still believe corporal punishment is the quickest way to punishment misbehaving child. If a child is about to preform a dangerous move, enforcing corporal punishment will make them remember better not to perform a certain activities in the future. Secondly, if verbal warning or shouting cannot stop the pupil misbehaving, physical punishment should take place. To argue your point on ruining the child teacher relationship, I believe as long as the reason of punishment was correct, it should not be any problem because there is a good purpose for the punishment.

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools I graciously accept.

Should corporate punishment be allowed in schools or academies Teachers in academies and schools use corporal punishments to change student's behaviour, but as soon as children get punished that way, the child will get mad and depressed. The child will start thinking that he is a bad person and a useless person. If they get punished like that too much they will become violent, and also they will become aggressive to their friends. Instead or punishing the teachers and parents should emphasis good behavior and applause them when they do something good, so they will feel better when they are prasied and will try better when their doing something positive. For example when a student is late for class the teacher should tell him or her to come a bit earlier next time. When teachers tell students to do something they will resist and maybe even ignore what teacher said if the teacher hits them instead of saying it in a good way. Some teachers hit them again if they don't listen. Then the student will try to quit the academy and if their parents are hitting them they might even decide to leave home.

The Reintroduction of Corporal Punishment Into Schools Hello to everyone reading. In this debate, I will be arguing that it is inappropriate and irrational to introduce corporal punishment into the entirety of the education system. I claim that corporal punishment is ineffective (and in most cases, harmful), leaves indelible psychological stains, and undermines the respect and benevolence within a teacher-pupil relationship. With the following contentions, I will elaborate on these claims.ArgumentsC1: Prohibiting Corporal Punishment Reduces AbuseWe can see in countries across the world that have prohibited corporal punishment in schools that this ban has reduced rates of abuse in the home. Since Sweden banned the use of corporal punishment in education institutions in 1979, the rates of support of this practice among parents have dropped form 50% to 11%, and in correlation with these rates, domestic abuse rates have fallen. By this example, we can conclude that when corporal punishment is banned in school, it reduces domestic abuse rates in the home, and is therefore productive and beneficial.C2: Corporal Punishment Has Long-Lasting Psychological EffectsBeing punished physically, even in a controlled, academic environment, is a shock to the system. This shock is amplified in young children. It has been concluded in numerous studies that corporal punishment increases the risk of dangerous and threatening behavior developing in the punished child. Corporal punishment has been linked to addiction and various other serious mental disorders.A study affiliated with the American Academy of Pediatrics found the following:"Harsh physical punishment was associated with increased odds of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug abuse/dependence, and several personality disorders after adjusting for sociodemographic variables and family history of dysfunction (adjusted odds ratio: 1.36–2.46)."This psychological harm can cause a growing resentment to authority, making it more challenging for the teacher to effectively impart knowledge to the students. Evidently, corporal punishment is ineffective in the short-term and long-term, and outweighs any of the (apparently) few benefits. As psychologist Elizabeth Gershoff writes:"Until researchers, clinicians, and parents can definitively demonstrate the presence of positive effects of corporal punishment, including effectiveness in halting future misbehavior, not just the absence of negative effects, we as psychologists can not responsibly recommend its use."C3: Corporal Punishment Undermines the Student-Teacher RelationshipStudents learn when they feel supported and comfortable in the teaching environment. Especially when the teacher utilizes corporal punishment, the students' trust in the teacher is severely damaged. As Edward Clark explains in his work "Creating a Context for Teaching and Learning", students do their best work when they are given positive reinforcement for successes rather than negative reinforcement for mistakes.Furthermore, when teachers attempt to impart lessons of acceptance and tolerance, students will not take these lessons to heart. Students will begin to associate teachers with the same type of violence they suffer at the hands of bullies and others which abuse them. This association, along with the natural resentment to authority explained in C2, effectively undermines the student's relationship to a teacher.C4: Corporal Punishment Can Be Used As A Tool for Non-EngagementCorporal punishment often draws away from the true nature of the problem, and instead focuses on the pure deterrence aspect. According to a principal of a school which uses capital punishment, many of the most commonly punished students are from struggling households where corporal punishment is more often administered. Physically punishing perhaps the most vulnerable students is not effective at teaching the underlying problem with their actions, often, it just escalates the problem itself.In states which allow corporal punishment as a means for teachers, 36% of these are above the national mean of state composite test scores, while 89% of the states that have banned this practice in schools are above the mean. This disparity has often been attributed to a lack of engagement to the student body by teachers, who use corporal punishment instead of engaging to find the root of the problem.-------------------------Overall, it has been proven and supported that banning corporal punishment reduces abuse in the home, and instituting this form of punishment in schools has negative psychological effects, undermines the relationship between students and teachers, and can be used as an excuse or cop-out for teachers instead of engaging with misbehaving students.It is resolved that the reintroduction of corporal punishment into schools would be inappropriate and irrational, for the above-mentioned reasons.-------------------------Sources(1) http://www.nospank.net...(2) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...(3) http://www.apa.org...(4) http://ojs.great-ideas.org...(5) http://www.newsweek.com...(6) http://www.gundersenhealth.org...

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school I am going to go pro on this on, but not all the way. Let me explain, I believe that some slight forms of corporal punishment should be allowed, but not to the extent that you are talking about in your argument. In schools, children do not learn as much when they are being disrupted by other classmates. If a classmate is being a distraction, the others don't learn. If there are some very mild forms of punishment like a slap on the rust with a ruler or some other form of mild physical punishment, the student will be more likely to stop and quit being a distraction at other times. If physical punishment is only used as a last resort, being punished will become a thing that students (especially young students) not want. If a student knows they will only be lectured, they will be less likely to stop behaving that way than if they were lectured and mildly punished physically. When a student wants attention, sometimes they act out to get it. If they gen punished corporeally they wont resort to acting out in school to get the attention that they yearn. Also if it is used less often, and more conservatively, the student will not be psychologically harmed in the process.

All schools should bring back corporal punishment Everyone enjoyed my Christmas dinner. I've just taken an apple pie out of the oven, so I'm finished in the kitchen now. Merry Christmas to all at DDO.Right...I'll start by summing up the scientific evidence.Studies of corporal punishment show that those who are so disciplined have significantly higher lifetime rates of anxiety disorders, alcohol abuse, and one or more externalising problems. Those who are spanked are significantly more likely to become wife beaters.Other studies show that children who are disciplined with corporal punishment are more aggressive.These effects remain when studies discount those who have been abusively hit.Research indicates that corporal punishment in schools can lead to students having a negative self-image, and can negatively affect school achievement. There is a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.In the short term, corporal punishment has been shown to be no more effective than other methods of discipline.Even if corporal punishment did not cause the above mentioned problems, then it would still be ineffective at preventing them. However, there is a body of evidence and theory which shows that corporal punishment is a stressor and can lead to a violent reaction. This establishes causation beyond mere correlation.My opponent failed to show that any of the things he claimed were linked were in fact linked.There is also the human rights issue which speaks against corporal punishment. My opponent has been unable to say why it is not okay to hit others, including prisoners, but it is okay to hit children. That is because it is not okay. Violence against children must stop.

Corporal punishment in schools. I will concede the debate. I prefer debates as an exchange of opinions and not as a listing of competing links. That's fine but I prefer debating our own opinions not posting those of others and calling them facts. In addition Con had the much stronger case. As a general rule corporal punishment in schools is a poor idea. But that doesn't mean there aren't times when the strap or other implement shouldn't be used.

Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school No becuase it's just another form of bullying and bullying is wrong so if Corporal Punishment is used it makes things worse for a bullied child

Spanking In Schools I will now summarize this debate and make a closing statement. Con has presented arguments that are self-contradicting: Should spanking "be banned from everywhere," including children's own homes, or is it "the parents [sic] choice" whether or not to spank their children? I have shown that spanking should not be banned universally, and I have also demonstrated that if parents are allowed to spank their children, it is also their right to choose a school that will do the same in an appropriate manner as well. My opponent also mentions studies that have shown that spanking "causes problems later down the road," but he has failed to present any of the studies in his sources. On the other hand, I have cited sources that show that corporal punishment is very effective, and I have also presented a testimonial from a teacher who was grateful for the ability to apply it in class due to its effective nature. Con has thrown claims around willy-nilly throughout the debate, but has not been able to back up any of them. The one piece of evidence my opponent has presented, i. e. the case of a child who went home to her mother with bruises on her bottom, has been shown to be unconvincing at best. The mother of the child was upset that the school was not implementing corporal punishment correctly, not that the school was enacting corporal punishment. The child was most definitely at fault, and faced a few bruises on her bottom as opposed to something that might appear in her permanent record. If anything, spanking was the correct decision in this case; it just should have been implemented differently, which only shows that supporting corporal punishment is better than abolishing it, as it can then be refined and implemented better. In addition to successfully refuting all of Con's points, I have done the following:-I have shown that spanking is similar in many ways to other forms of punishment that society imposes; to oppose spanking in schools (or in general) would be to argue a much greater point about punishment in general. -I have shown that spanking provides teachers with another tool to keep their classes progressing smoothly. -I have shown that spanking has benefits, largely due to its immediacy and proven ability to keep children from misbehaving. -I have shown that spanking is actually a great alternative to other forms of punishment imposed in schools, in that it does not potentially ruin a child's future. In closing, from looking at the exchange between Con and me, one must conclude that corporal punishment in schools is appropriate if carried out correctly, just like any other form of punishment society must use at various levels of misbehavior, whether the punishment is to send a criminal to prison or even to punish a dog to keep it from becoming unruly. Spanking should not be eliminated from schools everywhere, and if anything, it should become a more widespread practice.

Corporal Punishment in schools Good luck, Lordknukle.*******Why shouldn't it be legal?Trust IssuesCorporal punishment in school facilities involves the hitting/beating of a student if they have disobeyed class room or school rules. If corporal punishment were to be implemented as a form of disciplinary action, there is no doubt that students would cease to disobey rules. However, this method can and will severely damage a student's trust with their teachers. As a result of this, the student loses that connection with their teacher to the point where they can't go to them a source of comfort. For example: James, 13 years old, has continuously interrupted the teacher with his distracting behavior. As punishment the teacher hits James in the face and is sent back to his seat. Because this damages their teacher-student relationship, the student will most likely avoid using that teacher as a source of comfort for other issues he may be having (bullying, grades, etc).Family/peer issuesI believe that is either extremely disobedient in class or has bad grades has either or both of these: Abuse/neglect at home Bullying inside and outside of school At home: Lets refer to the year 2006. This year, 61% (or 1.25M) children were victims of some form of neglect. These include not only physical, but mental, educational, emotional, and even sexual (http://pediatrics.about.com...). Neglect and abuse at home has a tremendous effect on a child, and to prove this, please take the time to read some of these stories: http://www.forthechild.org... For more statistics: http://www.childhelp.org... These children (mostly young) were all subject to some form of abuse. I'd like to point out one girl's story: Judy: This young girl (age 10) was moved to 20 different foster homes. Her crazed step father had sexually and physically abused her for many years. As a result she threatened to commit suicide in a school bathroom (no relativity). Take Judy's story and add the factor of corporal punishment in school. This would only add to here extremely bad situation and would have most likely ended up worse than it did.Bullying: http://www.makebeatsnotbeatdowns.org.... This link provides statistics on bullying. Feel free to scroll through. There is no doubt that students in fear of any form of bullying would not want to be beaten by their teacher for disobedience because: 1. Teachers and school faculty are the "bully police", so to speak. If they are physically punishing their students, the victims of bullying are less likely to go to those people for assistance. 2. Along with bullying, corporal punishment can cause the student to suffer from a depressive state of mind, resulting in possibly lack of loyalty and decline in curricular performance. Lesson learned...?What does corporal punishment in schools (and everywhere for that matter) accomplish? As I've said before, it is used to gain the expected behavior of the target. However, if this does work, another problem unveils itself. Not only does this inflict harm on the student, but it also teaches the student that you need to use physical violence to resolve disputes with peers, family, etc. This especially would become a problem when they are put in a position of authority.ResolutionOther methods (detention, suspension, etc.) can be far more effective, and for that matter, safer. Things like detention and suspension will not teach the student to resolve issues violently and will most likely not provoke depression (if not already being experienced from other matters). For detention especially, the teacher can assign tasks such as cleaning the desks, extra class work/homework, all the things that a student without detention would not want to do. As a result, the disobedient student would cease to break faculty rules.********Looking forward to your argument.Sources listed: http://www.forthechild.org... http://www.childhelp.org... http://pediatrics.about.com... http://www.makebeatsnotbeatdowns.org...

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Thank you Con for the swift response. I apologize it took so long for my answer, as weekends can be a bit hectic. Con states in his argument for number one that "The more "spankings children" experience, the greater the chance that they will become aggressive and engage in other anti-social behavior." Con supplies this quote with a source that includes a study done. I would like to point out to the voters that this study may be misleading, as the point of corporal punishment is to enforce order in the classroom. This sense of order may include students not talking, or being "anti-social" as Con states. Con's second argument states that children with disabilities get punished more than other children. This, my friend, is against the law. This is considered assaulting a cripple, or simply put Assault and Battery, "Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another." [1] Con's third argument is solid, and without flaw. Or one thinks when first reading it. For this argument, he states that students find the message that violence is the answer. This is almost comparing the case of violent video games increasing the chance of violent children. This has been debunked on more than one occasion, and whether or not you agree with the statement, in the analogy of video games, if a parent does not agree with the "rating" of the game, they remove the child from the situation. This can be done with schools as well. If a parent feels that their child is not going to develop well in a school, they remove their child from the situation. As for Con's arguments in 4 and 5, if the voters will note all sources listed, they have dates of more than a decade ago. These are not entirely reliable sources, as science has made and will continue to make new discoveries, therefore changing the statistics shown and stated by Con. Con fails to point out in six that again, this would be against the law. Bruises may occur, but for breaking a child's bones, this is classified as Assaulting a Minor and Child Abuse. The case of the child's death, is second degree murder. [2] Remember voters, the objective of corporal punishment is not to beat a child senseless, but to give spankings or paddlings for inappropriate behavior in the classroom. In argument 7, Con states that due to corporal punishment, it gives an acceptable means of aggression to solve problems in our society. This will simply be preparing students for the real world. Our society is filled will people who believe aggression solves problems. These people are called politicians, and often, these politicians make the decisions for our country, and will invade foreign countries. They do this in the belief that America can enforce what they want when they want on who they want due to their aggressive and gigantic military. Argument 9 is a bit humorous to the argument. The point of corporal punishment is not to tickle students and reward them for misbehavior. It is simply to show them the superiority and wrongdoing of their actions through a physical punishment, which will probably physically harm them, and embarrass the student, emotionally harming them. This is simply just the point of corporal punishment. But there is one simple solution to this problem. Students who don't misbehave don't get punished. The problem does not go back to the teachers, but to the students. Under Cons facts, Con states that schools are the only legal place that it is permitted to strike another. Con has obviously never watched a hockey game. Schools are one of many institutions where others can get hit, home is another one of these, again under the parents discretion. Con states in 11 that "Many alternatives to corporal punishment have proven their worth. Alternatives teach children to be self-disciplined rather than cooperative only because of fear. (No source here, just kind of general knowledge)." While Con's "general knowledge" might be correct from where Con lives, it certainly is not general knowledge across the country. He proves no information on detentions working. I'm sure many of the voters have seen "The Breakfast Club." The Criminal, played by Judd Nelson, obviously has no problem with getting Saturday after Saturday detentions. But later in the movie, when the principle brings him into his office, and they get ready to duke it out, Judd stands down giving the man the respect he desires. I thank Con for the debate acceptance and look forward to next round. Again voters please keep in mind this may not directly reflect my personal opinions on the matter of Corporal Punishment. 1. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... 2. http://criminal.findlaw.com...

Corporal Punishment in schools PositionCorporal Punishment should not be a tactic used by teachers to recieve the expected behavior of a student. R1: Acceptance + Position (No addition arguments, refer above for an example)Thank you and good luck in advance to Pro.

Corporal Punishment of Children Children should be subject to corporal punishment because of many reasons. One reason being it will get your point across without being to forceful. A little physical interaction with your kid will help them know their right from wrong. If they had a bad experience doing something good or bad they will tend to do it less or not at all. So if they did something bad and you used a little physical interaction to show that their actions are not tolerated and will not be tolerated. It could be only beneficial as long as the physicality doesn't increase or get to violent. Or if the child isn't old enough to receive such punishment for their behavior. However I also feel the parent should be allowed to be able to discipline their child however they want as long as they aren't endangering the child's life. Or like previously stated if they are old enough to receive such discipline and not to much physicality.

Corporal punishment in schools. Let me begin by saying that you have no evidence to support your claim. Your entire argument (despite how small it is) it is based entirely on an opinion. If we are spouting opinions I do not think hitting someone is necessary. I believe other punishments can be found for the child other than causing physical pain. " even if rare" If it is a punishment is with rare benefits, than you should weigh the estimated 2230 children in need of medical attention in 2005 alone, the 2 that died, and however many more that are emotionally scared by corporal punishment experiences. http://centerforparentingeducation.org...... https://en.wikipedia.org...... http://www.cnn.com...... http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...... Society for Adolescent Medicine https://en.wikipedia.org...... https://en.wikipedia.org......

Corporal punishment on children by thier parents. Parents should use corporal punishment on their children because children start off life with almost no knowledge as to what is good for them. They have instincts to be fed and physically comfortable, and demand attention. These are all good and ensure survival. But once the child reaches an age when they can act on their own, they retain the drive to get what they want to be comfortable, but lack discernment between what appears to be beneficial, and what actually is. For instance, tactile discovery is essential for development, but grabbing wires or a hot surface, or a wasp, or the cat's tail, or sticking of the fingers into electrical sockets, or eating a cigarette butt may be harmful beyond what should be allowed in trial-and-error exploration. If the child just wants to lick a bar of soap as an experiment, that might be considered tolerable because they would likely quickly refuse to do so in the future with no serious physical side effects. For those things that would result in serious injury, a slap on the hand is a good substitute for electrocution or a wasp sting. The same point gets across to the child, (doing that results in pain) but the physical harm is not permanent. The same thing applies to older children, but more often for behavioral reasons than to avoid physical harm. A slap on the bottom after stealing from another kid on the playground should instill psychological disincentive toward stealing now, rather than trying to retrain an adult who robs a house who never got the lesson. Or worse, the untrained, selfish adult steals and gets into a lethal altercation during a robbery, or is incarcerated for a long time.

Corporal punsihment for children Sorry for forfeiting but I was stuck without Internet for about one week because there were some malfunctions without the connection. Pro says that corporal punishment is quick and effective, but it's not. Kids start to feel bad and there is a point when some decide that they will not take that anymore and rebel or start to react negatively which prove that in long term cases it does not work effectively. Aldo the other oart may go into depression because when they get hit or spanked they feel worse than when you talk to them and explain them what they did wrong and why it is wrong. Pro also states that undisciplined kids may Become tyrants. Well you can discipline your students without using corporal punishment, for example, in school today they don't use corporal punishment and kids turn out okay. EXTRA ARGUMENTS: 1. Even in school when beating is uses the kids lose respect for the adult who is inducing the beating, also they lose self-respect and they start act mischievously. 2. They learn that it is not wrong to use force in human interactions. 3. Kids also make many visits to the hospital for nerve damage or even broken bones.

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools http://abcnews.go.com... This article shows the ineffectiveness of corporal punishment in schools. In closing, corporal punishment should be banned because it is ineffective and lowers students' IQ's. Other forms of punishment should be explored and tested. Good luck.

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools You have supplied zero evidence. I, for now, will remakr that we can consider all your assertions of corporal punishment's ineffectiveness and detention's effectiveness false.You are not permitted to suddenly limit it to one nation unless it is in you rdebate guidelines, which it wasn't.

All schools should bring back corporal punishment My opponent believes some negative things about children, but gives no evidence that children are worse than in previous generations. He presents no evidence that lack of corporal punishment is a factor in shootings. His whole paragraph is mere hidebound opinion.Let's look at some actual evidence. The most cited studies of spanking almost all found that spanking is detrimental to discipline:"Among the respondents without a history of physical or sexual abuse during childhood, those who reported being slapped or spanked "often" or "sometimes" had significantly higher lifetime rates of anxiety disorders , alcohol abuse or dependence and one or more externalizing problems, compared with those who reported "never" being slapped or spanked."[1]"The results generally indicated a linear positive association between physical punishment and child aggression.[...]The combination of infrequent reasoning and frequent spanking was associated with dramatically increased aggression."[2]"The findings were consistent with a socialization model in which higher levels of severity in parental punishment practices are associated with higher levels of children's subsequent aggression toward peers. Findings indicated that children who had been spanked evidenced levels of aggression that were higher than those who had not been spanked, and children who had been the objects of violent discipline became the most aggressive of all groups.[...]The findings suggest that in spite of parents' goals, spanking fails to promote prosocial development and, instead, is associated with higher rates of aggression toward peers."[3]"When parents use corporal punishment to reduce ASB [anti-social behaviour], the long-term effect tends to be the opposite. The findings suggest that if parents replace corporal punishment by nonviolent modes of discipline, it could reduce the risk of ASB among children and reduce the level of violence in American society."[4]My opponent doesn't say why he thinks it is necessary to physically punish children rather than warn them, reason with them, remove them from the situation, or otherwise discipline them. As a parent, I never found it necessary to spank my child. I fail to see what possible benefit can be derived from an adult inflicting violence on a defenceless child. How this is supposed to make a child reasonable is not explained by proponents of corporal punishment.I'm sure readers have seen on the streets parents losing their temper with their children and smacking them. Approval of corporal punishment gives an adult license to act out of temper. Anyhow, my opponent has to engage with the scientific studies presented to him.[1] http://www.cmajopen.com...[2] http://link.springer.com...[3] http://journals.cambridge.org...[4] http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com...

Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment I will let my opponent start out with arguments and definitions. Therefore my opponent is the affirmative and I am the negative. Please post.

Corporal punishment in schools. Here is a paragraph by paragraph response to your opening argument #1-- pertaining to the definition of corporal punishment: broadly defined corporal punishment includes torture and the death penalty. With that in mind opponents of corporal punishment of children and adolescents will define it as broadly as possible and in ways unfavorable to the use of corporal punishment. Most people understand when we talk about spanking a 16 year old girl we are not talking about torture and can distinguish the difference #2 To equate the corporal punishment of adults to that of children is simply an invalid analogy. Children are different then adults and can be treated differently. Yes it is true physical correction of adult women by their husbands is much less acceptable than it used to be but it is also true in the past adult women needed to get the husband's consent for a range of activities outside the home-- including but not limited to-- a driver's license, employment, a bank account. A minor still requires a parents consent for much of this. #3 Yes there are some risks involved in the administration of corporal punishment. But so are there risks in other disciplinary approaches some of which can be serious. Such risks can be minimized if strict rules as to the administration of corporal punishment are closely followed. These would include the strap or other implement be applied only to the child's or adolescent's buttocks, the implement not be such that when applied routinely will not cause any injuries besides some reddening of the skin and perhaps a few welts that will dissipate within a few hours There is also a risk that if used as the primary means of discipline corporal punishment will gradually become less effective and as a result the severity of it will need to increase. This is why corporal punishment should never be the preferred means of correcting children and teenagers #4 What is the definition of a serious injury? There is general acceptance when distinguishing between corporal punishment of a child and adolescent and the abuse of such that a serious injury means a fracture, an internal injury, or any injury to the head. When these happen it is usually the result of excessive force being used, an inappropriate implement being used or the child not being properly restrained when receiving correction. There are less serious injuries which opponents of corporal punishment will construe as serious but really aren't when what one is describing is an isolated incident or two.

All schools should bring back corporal punishment A society with raised aggression levels is more likely to have a President with raised aggression levels (especially when you consider that the President may be a parent). A President with raised aggression levels is more likely to press the red button. Therefore, a society with corporal punishment in schools is more likely to be obliterated by thermonuclear war. My opponent asks,"If [corporal punishment] didn't work then why would it have continued? "If human sacrifice didn't work, why was it continued for hundreds of years? If slavery doesn't work, why has it continued? If astrology doesn't work, why has it continued? If murder doesn't work, why has it continued? If assault doesn't work, why has it continued? My opponent not only has to establish a link between school shootings and a lack of corporal punishment, something he has thus far failed to do, but now he also has to do the same for gang rape. "For a union (liberal) organization such as teachers and living in a liberal society such as England it is AMAZING that 20% of the teachers would say they think it should be brought back. "Is my opponent aware that the UK had a right wing government from 1979-1997 (eighteen years! ), and has one again now? [1] The UK is a conservative country, and England even more so. The right wing Conservative Party received 36% of the vote in the last election, and the Labour Party 29%. Scotland and Wales are heavily weighted to Labour, so the difference in the share of the vote in England would be even higher. Teachers' unions are not party affiliated, and teachers are from across the political spectrum. My opponent cannot dismiss the opinions of the majority because he imagines he might disagree with their politics, and accept the opinions of the minority because he has a gut feeling that their politics might suit him better. "Being spanked has never been proven to cause violence when a person becomes an adult. "Corporal punishment has been shown to increase the risk of the victim becoming a wife beater in later life. [2]It has also been shown to lead to a lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence and externalizing problems. [3] I also refer my opponent back to the first round sources. Spanking has been proven to cause violence in children, and that is sufficient to condemn it. If my opponent has an issue with the methodology of any of my sources, he is welcome to tackle them individually. I trust that the readers of this debate will not give much credit to a blanket dismissal of scientific studies. "Yelling at a child causes more mental damage than spanking. "Unwarranted assertion, but irrelevant, as I am not claiming that yelling is a useful alternative to corporal punishment. "However, a parent who calmly spanks a child after explaining why the child is being spanked and does so only to create a foundation for other primary methods of discipline (such as Time Out) is never going to develop a pattern of violence in the child. Never"Assertion without evidence. The scientific literature I presented in round one on spanking would suggest otherwise. "The American Academy of Pediatrics admits that spanking can stop a child from misbehaving in the short-term. "Using a blog as a source is a bad idea. Cowing a child in the short-term does not outweigh damage done in the long term. The American Academy of Pediatrics,"urges parents, educators, school administrators, school board members, legislators, and others to seek the legal prohibition by all states of corporal punishment in schools and to encourage the use of alternative methods of managing student behavior. "[4]My opponent is right that there are (many) other factors involved in crime. I think it will be difficult for him to show that lack of corporal punishment is responsible for an upsurge in school shootings, gang rape and assault. My opponent does not say why it is not okay to hit other adults, including prisoners, but it is okay to hit children. Corporal punishment has no place in a humane society. It is violence, it is psychologically damaging, and it is detrimental to society at large. [1] . http://www.thuto.org...[2] . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...[3] . http://www.cmajopen.com...[4] . http://moourl.com...

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced it makes a direct link between a behavior and its bad consequences

Corporal punishment can be regulated within orderly framework. Corporal punishment must be used as part of a wider strategy and at the correct time: when other immediate discipline has failed; when the child understands their behaviour and has had an opportunity to explain it; and after an initial warning and opportunity for the child to repent. Crucially, the person delivering the punishment must not be angry at the time. This undermines much of the hysterical argument against corporal punishment.

should schools use corporal punishment Before I start this debate, I want to define the topic. First of all corporal. Punishment and schools a place where children get their education. So if you define the topic, it'll come out like this. Should places where they give children education use punishments. I think that we should use this corporal punishment. Corporal punishment has been use for a long time and nothing bad happened.

Corporal Punishment Is Wrong Here are a few of my arguments for corporal punishment. 1. Corporal punishment sets clear boundaries and motivates children to behave in school. If children are clearly given the fact that if they misbehave, they will be given corporal punishment, then this will make them more aware of what will happen to them and will make them think twice about their actions. A lot of the time corporal punishment is not told clearly enough to the child and they do not understand the consequences of their actions, and therefore misbehave. 2. Another argument for corporal punishment is that it is quick. Other forms of punishment such as detention or suspension in schools can hurt the student because the student can miss school, and waste hours on top of hours sitting in detention, while corporal punishment is quick and takes a second. So non corporal punishment can ultimately be a waste of time. 3. A study showed that kids who have corporal punishment misbehave less. In other words it deters misbehavior. If we have corporal punishment kids will not misbehave as much because of misbehavior. 4. Young children are not able to discern right and wrong to the decree that older age kids are. For example, if a young kid were to stick his finger in an electrical socket, then if you give them a smaller dose of pain, then it will teach them not to do life threatening things. Little kids don't understand being grounded. They don't understand their being punished. Rather with corporal punishment toddlers know that their experiencing pain and it teaches them not to do the wrong thing. 5. As corporal has decreased in public schools and home, you would expect to seem a decrease in misbehavior, but that hasn't been the case. This is why corporal punishment is better. It shows kids that they will be given physical pain if they misbehave. In conclusion, corporal punishment should be allowed. Sources used 1. procon.org 2. soapboxie

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced harms children with genuine behavioural disorders or other disabilities

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools Corporal punishment has shown to be ineffective by many studies and health care experts. It has also shown that students that have been subjected to corporal punishment have lower IQ's. while it is on the decline it is STILL legal in 19 states including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming. In all 50 states it is illegal to hit a prisoner, animal, or someone in the military, yet it is perfectly legal in those 19 states to strike a child. I welcome your arguments.

Corporal Punishment Is Wrong Round 2 are arguments only, so let's start with that. First, I'll start with parental corporal punishment. Parental Corporal Punishment1. Hitting is frequently done impulsively. A study shows that parents are more likely to spank or hit their child almost immediately. In 10 minute audio recordings, it seems like the child is getting hit without them explaining why they have done their behavior. Parents usually hit out of frustration without actually thinking about the severity of what that child has done. They also spank their child for minor infractions, not just major ones. The practice of hitting a child is recommended to be the last resort, however, according to these studies, they seem to be doing it impulsively. They also recommend doing it once or twice however these audio recordings show them hitting their child a lot more than that. Basically, parents are abusing or overexaggerating moments to use the practice of corporal punishment. To extend on this, Holden states: "From the audio, we heard parents hitting their children for the most extraordinarily mundane offenses, typically violations of social convention. Also, corporal punishment wasn't being used as a last resort. On average, parents hit or spanked just half a minute after the conflict began. " [1]2. Hitting causes externalization of behavior and increases in aggression. A study from Michael Mackenzie of Columbia University indicated that maternal spanking at age 5 was associated with greater aggression and rule-breaking by the time children were age 9. In addition, lower scores on vocabulary tests by the age of 9 were also associated with the use of spanking at age 5. [2]3. Hitting children affects their development. A study from Akemi Tomoda (et al. ) showed that harsh corporal punishment reduced children’s gray matter, which processes information in the brain. Another study showed that corporal punishment had a bidirectional relationship with a lower cognitive ability, meaning that parents tend to hit children with lesser cognitive ability more frequently (most likely out of frustration), and children who experience corporal punishment often had a lower cognitive ability as a result. These negative effects on the brain can surely be connected to the increased aggression and externalization of behavior found in the other studies. [2] [3] [4]3.1 Hitting causes mental illnesses. The study, named "Physical Punishment and Mental Disorders: Results From a Nationally Representative U. S. Sample," is released in the August edition of Pediatrics, which is online July 2nd. It states clearly that children who are spanked, hit or pushed have an increased risk of mental problems when they grow older. The research seems to show that the effect can range from mood and anxiety disorders to drug and alcohol abuse. Around 2% to 7% of children are affected by physical punishment. [5]Secondly, I'll talk about only one argument I have for school corporal punishment. Corporal Punishment in SchoolsCorporate punishment causes lower academic success. Aside from the infliction of pain and the physical injuries which often result from the use physical punishments, these violent disciplinary methods also impact students' academic achievement and long-term well-being. [6] Despite significant evidence that corporal punishment is detrimental to a productive learning environment, there is currently no federal prohibition on the use of physical discipline against children in public school. In fact, children in some states receive greater protection against corporal punishment in detention facilities than they do in their public schools. [7] For this reason and others, the ACLU and HRW are encouraged that this subcommittee is seeking to address the problems stemming from corporal punishment in schools. [8]Those are my arguments for round 2. Sources:[1] . https://www.sciencedaily.com...[2] . https://www.theodysseyonline.com...[3] . http://www.cnn.com...[4] . http://pubpages.unh.edu...[5] . https://www.medicalnewstoday.com...[6] See generally A Violent Education, at 57; Impairing Education, at 4-5. [7] Corporal punishment of children in juvenile justice facilities have been prohibited by the Courts of Appeals in several Federal Circuits. See Nelson v. Heyne, 491 F.2d 352 (7th Cir. 1974), cert. denied 417 U. S. 476 (paddling of children in juvenile detention was a violation of the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment); Morales v. Turman, 562 F.2d 993, 998 (5th Cir. 1977) (corporal punishment and physical abuse in juvenile detention facilities subject to prohibition as a violation of Eighth Amendment), rev'd on other grounds, 535 F.2d 864 (5th Cir. 1976), rev'd and remanded, 430 U. S. 322 (1977). See also,Santana v. Collazo, 533 F. Supp. 966 (D. P. R. 1982) (corporal punishment against juveniles in industrial schools and juvenile camps violates Eighth Amendment and is barred "for any reason"), aff'd in part and vacated in part, 714 F.2d 1172 (lst Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U. S. 974 (1984). The American Correctional Association has also issued standards banning use of corporal punishment in juvenile facilities. See also Steven J. Martin, Staff Use of Force in United States Confinement Settings, 22 Wash. U. J. L. & Pol'y 145 (2006). In addition, corporal punishment and other harsh disciplinary practices are prohibited in publicly-funded non-medical substance abuse and long-term medical care facilities. See, e. g. , 42 U. S. C. § 290jj (banning corporal punishment in "non-medical community-based facilities for children and youth. "); 42 C. F. R. § 483.13 (banning corporal punishment in long-term medical care facilities). [8] . https://www.hrw.org... s://media. rbl. ms. .. ; alt="" data-rm-shortcode-id="0VIPEM1514055278" /> s://media. rbl. ms. .. ; alt="" data-rm-shortcode-id="ZKWD5P1514055278" />

Corporal Punishment be Brought Back to Schools Before I start, let me just say this much: I'm against corporal punishment, this is just for fun since we just did this debate at school. Corporal punishment is when a teacher punishes a student physically for a mistake, and it needs to be brought back to schools. It is true that it has been misused in the past, but with new rules, corporal punishment would be a new and healthy part of a student's life. In this case, the ruler shall not be used, or any other tool used to strike the student, including the hand of a teacher. Instead, the punishment will be carried out in the form of running. Depending on the severity of the student's mistake and his/her physical status, the student will be required to run a certain distance. By doing this, it will not only ensure the student will not be abused by a teacher, and it is also good physical excersize. According to http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au..., running will help build strong bones, strengthen muscles, improve cardiovascular fitness. burn plenty of kilojoules. and help maintain a healthy weight. This way, not only is the student punished, it also helps maintain a student's good health. This form of punishment will also avoid missing classtime, which is a problem caused by detention or suspension. The running will be done before or after school, therefore no classtime will be missed, allowing the student to learn everything he/she is supposed to learn. It also costs no money to use this form of punishment. It is efficent both time and money wise. Therefore, corporal punishment should be brought back to schools in the form of running.

Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment First Of I would like to state a major flaw in my opponent(s) arguments, THEY ARE PLAGIARIZED. 75% of his points can be found here: http://www.naturalchild.org... This is poor sportsmanship but I would still like to continue. Repeatedly, my opponent has dressed his arguments by using slashes and back slashes. That is not the point of the matter right now but it just goes to show how he wants to "cover up" his "MISTAKE" Now on to some refutes, my opponent has repeatedly stated that I have no evidence, if he had read my argument closely you would be able to see that I am quoting actual PEOPLE! He also made a ridiculous refute by comparing this to the age of Hitler? Look, Hitler was different, he was a crazy radical that trained kids to kill the Jews, but this doesn't count as corporal punishment, ITS REFERRED TO AS WAR! Now my opponent states: "It has been prove, even in government, that it is wrong to rule with an iron fist. You should rule with reasoning, such as "If you disrupt the class again you will be given after school detention on the minimum day" Or "You will have extra homework" definitely not saying "if you don't shut your trap you're gonna get a beatin'!" Because after a while, kids get immune to the pain." Like I have stated before, if kids are given a punishment that they will probably forget within the week it is most likely they will repeat that mistake. Next, he also states "Kids become immune to pain" that is a completely blind statement, and is obviously very opinionated. Lastly, I would like to have my opponent clarify the following: \\\I'm good and successful today because my parents hit me when I did something wrong. That's why I'm doing well in life. I suffered no harm from my parents having beaten me./// Refute: Good and successful is from a point of view, and you have no clear evidence that because your parents hit you it is why you are successful. You may have not suffered any harm but you don't know about other kids who have different minds, a personal experience in this case is irrelevant. Finally, this debate is about schools, not your family. I would like to state, YET AGAIN, this is an editor from childdisciplinewithlove.org who is using his experiences IN SCHOOL to show how he became a better person. This is clear evidence supporting my arguments. For my closing statement I will go back to my opponents introduction. I have not yet once stated paddling as a form of corporal punishment, OR a male teacher hitting a girl. Since the motion has the word, CHOOSE, they are at full discretion to modify and change their policies. A child will learn, that they will not face pain if they are good, therefore making them better people late on in life. I have some statistics to prove this statement: One Kentucky study noted, "Out-of-school suspension and expulsion interrupt students' educational progress and remove students from school at a time when they may most need stability and guidance in their lives. Repeated out-of-school suspensions may make it impossible for students to keep up with the curriculum, complete class assignments, and advance from one grade to another." David Richart et al., "Unintended Consequences: The Impact of 'Zero Tolerance' and Other Exclusionary Policies on Kentucky Students", report prepared by the National Institute on Children, Youth & Families at Spalding University in Louisville, KY; the Children's Law Center in Covington, KY; and the Youth Law Center in Washington, D.C. Thank You, I am carman16 on the motion that schools should have the option to use corporal punishment.

Better ways exist; corporal punishment is lazy way There are always ways to discipline children that do not involve violence, and which are inherently superior than resorting to violence. Resorting to violence is the lazy way out for parent or teachers.

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools My opponent supplies us by a new article from the famously liberal abc news. (I'm liberal myself but for this debate I have to admit that this is an extremely biased source). They essentially tear apart the idea of corporal punishment based on the 'theory' (for which no evidence is supplied) that corporal punishment increases aggression in children (which is ironic because you'd think having felt the force of violence that children would be less aggressive).Now I shall explain exactly why corporal punishment needn't be banned from SCHOOLS despite it's rightful ban in other places.As I said in round 1, " A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of “but you can't take away my freedom”, “you have no right” or “I have rights”. In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact." corporal punishment would allow the teacher, in a strictly monitored manner, to spank the child for not only the original reason but for the rudeness of the remark, is rather ineffective and useless (and my opponent supplied zero evidence otherwise).Also,, was my contention that "If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers. Detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior." The only point against this was that my opponent claimed to have first-hand seen reduction in repeats of detention as opposed to spanking issues but this easily could be because of more lenience in the school when it had detentions.I re-iterate that Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime. (Source R#1)

it will improve the lives of those who are bullied There is a real feeling amongst those who are bullied that telling the teacher will worsen the problem, not make it better. Victims of bullying fear repercussions. However, if there was a system of corporal punishment behind the teachers, then something could be done which would scare the bullies out of their bullying ways. This would open bully victims up as they would discuss bullying issues with teachers knowing that something definitive could be done. If a child thinks it's okay to hit because a teacher or adult uses corporal punishment then that child is slow and fails to realize the purpose and meaning behind such an action. Besides a good and effective teacher is not going to use corporal punishment all the time, but as a last resort when all else fails. A threat is no good unless there is some fearful truth behind it. Also, teachers are only ignorant to bullying matters because they know they cannot realistically do much to stop it. So in effect, bullying has gotten a lot meaner.

Corporal punishment is a good tool for disciplining unruly children Walter Williams. "Making a Case for Corporal Punishment". Bnet. Sept 13, 1999: "Regardless of what the experts preached, the undeniable fact is the 'uncivilized' practice of whipping children produced more civilized young people. Youngsters didn't direct foul language to, or use it in the presence of, teachers and other adults. In that 'uncivilized' era, assaulting a teacher or adult never would have crossed our minds. Today, foul language and assaults against teachers are routine in many schools. For some kinds of criminal behavior, I think we'd benefit from having punishment along the lines of Singapore's caning as a part of our judicial system."

Sets a terrible example to students Before I discuss this point, I would like to point out that the last point made by the proposition is almost entirely irrelevant to the motion at hand. Yes, school is a place of learning- but learning what? That we have the right to be violent towards others? Teachers are meant to be mentors and role models towards young, impressionable school children. What kind of example are we setting if teachers can physically punish students? Do the proposition WANT a generation of wrongly influenced, violent children???

school discipline Discipline (in nature) can be an effective tool in learning anything, to be quite fair. The reason discipline is taken away in public systems is really due to this fact. It may have the benefits of teaching people through a way they will remember, but it mainly causes a side effect of the person's moral. I've heard so many times how dads/moms disciplined their kid and those kids mainly result to having suicidal thoughts if not already committed that action. The less it is promoted, the better.

Corporal Punishment of Children Should be Illegal ===Definition===Corporal Punishment: Physical punishment, as spanking, inflicted on a child by an adult in authority.I propose that corporal punishment is tantamount to abuse and fosters a violent, unhealthy atmosphere for a child to grow up in. Furthermore, I find that corporal punishment not only has negative psychological, emotional and physical effects on the child, but is detrimental to the mental health of the punisher as well. As a result, I believe that corporal punishment should be made illegal. ===Rules===1. New arguments brought in at the final round will not count.2. R1 is for acceptance and R2 is for argumentation. 3. Claims of personal experience (ie. I was spanked and it made me more loving and compassionate) without the corroboration of reviewable sources will not count as valid examples.

Reinstate corporal punishment in schools We need it back in school to allow teachers the ability to immediately address situations that require attention. Our kids today are not held accountable for their actions. This generation capitalizes on the inability of teachers to enforce rules and apply consequences for breaking such rules.

Corporal Punishment in schools I will bring up my own points and rebut some of my opponent's points. I will elaborate on my rebuttals in future rounds, as I ran out of room. I would like the readers to notice that my opponent is often the logical fallacy called "Appeal to Emotion". I will expand on this accusation later in the debate. Before I begin my debate, I would like to say that I am not arguing for an extreme. I will be arguing for a moderate amount of corporal punishment. My 5 contentions will be:1. Corporal punishment serves as a deterrent2. Corporal punishment saves the child's future3. Corporal punishment is not abuse4. Corporal punishment increases productivity5. The Bible supports corporal punishmentBefore anybody starts bashing me on my biblical argument, I would like to point out that my opponent has not set any criteria for available arguments. Therefore, I will use whatever I want. The Bible is provided as more of a "bonus" contention. C1:Corporal punishment serves as a deterrentCorporal punishment by itself, is not different that another type of punishment. It is clear to everybody that punishment serves as a deterrent. If my opponent's tries to negate this, then he will have a very hard time. Just the idea alone makes sense. If I add a punishment onto an action, the person will be less likely to commit the action again. This applies to corporal punishment. If a teacher slaps person X for verbal abuse, then he will most likely not do it again for fear of being slapped. These practices successfully transition into a child's later life. .. . leading me to my next point C2: Corporal punishment saves the child's future Corporal punishment, in moderation, early in a child's life helps save their future. Dr. Walter E. Williams, a famous economist says (2):"Today, it's not uncommon for young criminals to be arrested, counseled and released to the custody of a parent 20 or 30 times before they spend one night in jail. Such a person is a very good candidate for later serving a long prison sentence or, worse, facing the death penalty. If you interviewed such a person and asked: "Thinking back to when you started your life of crime, would you have preferred a punishment, such as caning, that might have set you straight or be where you are today? " I'd bet my retirement money that he'd say he wished someone had caned some sense into him. That being the case, which is more cruel: caning or allowing such a person to become a criminal? " "Experts theorize that corporal punishment helps create more disciplined and hard-working students and civilians that develop to be more prudent financially. When a nation develops its students into responsible citizens, the entire nation ultimately benefits through increased productivity and efficiency in the economy. Students learn through corporal punishment that there are greater objectives and goals beyond themselves. They ultimately learn to contribute to the economy in a positive way. "(5)I know that we are talking about corporal punishment in schools, but this directly relates back to it. "Whipping" out any bad practices early in a child's life is acceptable as it saves them from committing the same mistake in a unforgiving and cruel adult world. Many children that would be corporally punished in schools are the "back-talkers", the interrupters, and verbal abusers. It is better to prevent these practices in childhood. In the adult world, verbal abuse and "back-talking" to your superiors is not tolerated. These practices can cause a child to lose their job, and even worse, their future. This discouragement of bad habits sets children up to succeed. Children are more impressionable than adults. Therefore, these effects will be amplified in them. (3)C3: Corporal Punishment is not abuseMy opponent's main arguments are centered around abuse and corporal punishment. Abuse is: "Use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose" (3) To prove that a corporal punishment is not abuse, I must show that there is at least one positive effect of corporal punishment. I have shown that corporal punishment saves a child's life in the future (and I will show how it increases productivity). Therefore, corporal punishment is not abuse. The logic goes as follows:1. Abuse consists of using something for a bad purpose of effect2. Corporal punishment helps children later in their life3. Therefore, corporal punishment is not abuse. This negates many of my opponent's points about abuse. C4: Corporal punishment increases productivityCorporal punishment increases productivity. According to Surinder Kahai: "Contingent punishment behaviors also have been found to be beneficial by promoting group drive and productivity"(6)"Contingent reward behavior has been found to promote group drive, cohesiveness, and productivity. Contingent punishment behaviors also have been found to be beneficial by promoting group drive and productivity " (6)This debate is not whether contingent punishment or contingent rewards are more efficient, simply about whether contingent punishment increases productivity. However, corporal punishment also serves as a incentive. Not everybody is going to get corporally punished. Corporal punishment also serves as a stimulant for those who don't misbehave. By not getting punished, they think that they are doing the correct thing. Therefore, they will keep doing it. This promotes good behaviour in those who already have it, and reduces bad behavior in those who misbehave. C5: The Bible promotes corporal punishmentThis serves as a "bonus" contention. According to the Bible:Proverbs 23:14. The authorship is traditionally attributed to King Solomon: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell. ""He who spareth his rod hateth his son, but he who loveth him is chasteneth him betimes. " (King Solomon, in the Book of Proverbs [13:24]. "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod of correction will drive it far from him. " (Proverbs 22:15)"Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod. And deliver his soul from hell. " (Proverbs 23:13)RebuttalTrust IssuesI fail to see how trust issues with teachers relate to students. A teacher is not there to provide a source of comfort, merely a source for teaching and learning. A school has guidance counselors which the students can go to if they have issues, not the teachers. I assume that we are not talking about corporal punishment in the very low grades. Since about Grade 3/4 and up, student/teacher relationships are merely focused on teaching. In Junior High School, High School and University, there is virtually no student/teacher relationship. Corporal punishment would not damage any trust issues with teachers as there aren't any. If the student has problems, there is always a guidance counselor. Family/Peer IssuesI would like to point out that my opponent is using "Appeal to Emotion" in this subtopic as he is listing random sad stories of children getting abused. My opponent has also listed statistics (which I doubt are correct, but I will accept them for this point) that are completely irrelevant to this topic. I have shown how Corporal Punishment is not abuse, therefore negating many of my opponent's points. ConclusionI am running out of room so I will quickly wrap this up. I have shown how corporal punishment serves as a deterrent to future misbehaving, saves the child's future, is not abuse, increases productivity, and the Bible promotes it. Vote PROGood luck to CON(2). http://findarticles.com...(3)http://www.kuluttajavirasto.fi...(4)http://goo.gl...(5)http://www.ehow.com...(6)http://www.leadingvirtually.com...

Physical Punishment. I agree that children should be punished by their parents. But as far as school punishment goes the school administrative staff should recommend a certain action against the child but should have no authority in dealing out any physical punishment. If a teacher hits a student the there will be a massive uproar with people who are anti-violence and child abuse supporters will start a big fuss. In all you will cause a lot of trouble for a little problem.

paddling in schools "it is the best thing to do when a child does something bad" - Pro"There is little research evidence that physical punishment improves children's behavior in the long term. In contast, there is substantial research evidence that physical punishment puts children at risk for negative outcomes, including increased aggression, antisocial behavior, mental health problems and physical injury." [1][1] Gershoff, Elizabeth (2008) What Research Tells Us About Its Effects on Children, Page 25, Conclusion

All schools should bring back corporal punishment As my opponent had posted an argument in round one, albeit a cursory one, I did the same. May I suggest for future debates that my opponent state that round one is for acceptance and avoid making an argument in round one.School shootings are obviously largely an American phenomenon. My opponent is going to have a hard time linking them to bans on school corporal punishment, for two simple reasons. One is that school corporal punishment has been banned in many countries, where school shootings are either very rare or have not even occurred at all.[1] The other reason is that there are nineteen US states where school corporal punishment has not been banned at all.[2][3][4]I am amused that my opponent has used a debate as a source. Not only is it a secondary source, it provides rebuttals for me of any points he gleans from it.Via my opponent's own source, in defence of corporal punishment:In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement, 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment.[5][6] Shrewd observers will have worked out that the large majority, four in five, believed that class room behaviour had not deteriorated and that education would not improve with the reintroduction of corporal punishment!I suggest the minority of teachers are the ones whose methods of discipline are ineffective and need more training at the very least.In the US, the National Association of Secondary School Principals has expressed its opposition to corporal punishment in schools.[7]Via my opponent's source, we can see that if there is any correlation between corporal punishment and crime, it is that use of corporal punishment coincides with crime. Of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in eight of them.Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the US, educators paddle children in one of them.Of the ten states with the highest percentage of the population in prison, educators paddle children in nine of them.Of the ten states with the lowest percentage of the population in prison, educators do not paddle children in any of them.[8]Crime in the UK (which is what my opponent is referring to with his 67% increase) has been rising since 1918. Plainly banning corporal punishment is not the reason for an upwards trend. Corporal punishment was actually banned in 1986.[9][10][11] There would then be a delay until children reached typical criminal age. Citing the crime increase since 1981 doesn't tell you anything useful.Part of the reason crime statistics have risen sharply is an increase in the reporting of crime. The British Crime Survey showed that the number of crimes was far higher in 1981 than that recorded by the police. There were three times as many thefts, twelve times as much vandalism, three times as many sexual offences, nine times as many robberies, and twice as many burglaries as the official statistics recorded.[12]"Children"s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain"Assertion not backed by evidence.My opponent claims that corporal punishment would be effective against bullying. Is my opponent claiming that bullying is a recent phenomenon, and does not actually occur in places which still have corporal punishment?My opponent claims that corporal punishment "worked for 7000 years." What does my opponent mean by "worked"? Does he want to hold up 5000 B.C as a glowing standard? Surely all my opponent can mean by "worked" is that the human race continued to exist. Anyhow, tradition is no reason to continue a practice. We can imagine a man in Mexico arguing for the reintroduction of human sacrifice on the basis that it was an honourable tradition.Violence committed by adults on defenceless children is not defensible. If an adult assaults an adult in this manner it is criminal. Guards are not permitted to paddle prisoners. Why is this seen as an acceptable way of disciplining children? If we cannot treat adults in this way, if to do so is abuse, why do some think children should be so dealt with? Also, what lesson can children possibly learn from corporal punishment, except might makes right?My opponent has failed to engage with the scientific literature that says corporal punishment achieves the opposite to its aims. If they cannot do so, everything else is moot. The debate is over. I'll add a couple of more sources for my opponent to engage with.Research indicates that corporal punishment may adversely affect a student's self-image and his or her school achievement.[13] Research has also shown a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased school truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.[14]I note that my opponent wishes to blame the hippies for everything, but that would be another debate.[1] http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...[2] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...[3] http://www.stophitting.com...[4] http://abcnews.go.com...[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...[6] http://debatewise.org... [7] http://www.principals.org...[8] http://www.nospank.net...[9] http://www.guardian.co.uk...[10] http://news.bbc.co.uk...[11] http://moourl.com...[12] http://www.historytoday.com...[13] Society for Adolescent Medicine, Ad Hoc Corporal Punishment Committee. (2003). Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, pp385–393.[14] Strauss, M. A. (2000). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families and its effects on children. (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment My opponent is a hypocrite, around the same amount of his arguments are PLAGARIZED also. \\\First Of I would like to state a major flaw in my opponent(s) arguments, THEY ARE PLAGIARIZED. 75% of his points can be found here: http://www.naturalchild.org...... This is poor sportsmanship but I would still like to continue./// They aren't plagiarized unless I do not state my source and I am going to state all my sources at the end of my rebuttal. I do not know if my opponent knows the definition of plagiarism but this is not what it is. \\\Repeatedly, my opponent has dressed his arguments by using slashes and back slashes. That is not the point of the matter right now but it just goes to show how he wants to "cover up" his "MISTAKE"/// My god, you really are new... Those are pointing out what you said, and it helps organize my refutations, they stand out more than quotation marks, many debater on this site use them. \\\Look, Hitler was different, he was a crazy radical that trained kids to kill the Jews, but this doesn't count as corporal punishment, ITS REFERRED TO AS WAR!/// You obviously did not read my argument carefully, I was using the Hitler Youth as an example, which there in the Hitler youth was, for a crime you were punished with bullets in your face. Crimes would include desertion, insubordination (back talk) and pretty much anything you can be given detention in school. \\\Like I have stated before, if kids are given a punishment that they will probably forget within the week it is most likely they will repeat that mistake./// If you have been beaten in your life by a parent you do not forget. It is a fearful memory that is full of pain, I am sure you would not forget this very quickly. \\\Next, he also states "Kids become immune to pain" that is a completely blind statement, and is obviously very opinionated./// Funny coming from someone who brought up personal experience as a point. This is not blind, if you are beaten repeatedly over the course of your childhood, you learn to take the punishment, as many kids have with other things. \\\I would like to state, YET AGAIN, this is an editor from childdisciplinewithlove.org who is using his experiences IN SCHOOL to show how he became a better person./// Ironic, an opinionated argument coming from the accuser of opinionated arguments. Personal experiences should not be used as evidence. Statistics should be used as evidence. \\\Out-of-school suspension and expulsion interrupt students' educational progress and remove students from school at a time when they may most need stability and guidance in their lives. Repeated out-of-school suspensions may make it impossible for students to keep up with the curriculum, complete class assignments, and advance from one grade to another./// Keyword "MAY" this MAY make it impossible to keep up with assignments? These are not statistics, this is an assertion, clearly my opponent cannot even follow the basic A.R.E. format and cannot identify statistics. I have refuted all of your assertions, now where is your reasoning and evidence? \\\Thank You, I am carman16 on the motion that schools should have the option to use corporal punishment./// yes you are The motion is negated. My points still stand. This is why the Negative has won this debate ===VOTE-CON===

Teachers should be allowed to discipline students, eg use a ruler for a cane. First and foremost, we need to identify and evaluate the tools of discipline/education that a teacher in our present day has at their disposal. There are, as a matter of fact, a considerable amount of ways in which a teacher can address his/her student's misconduct: 1. Warning - if a student were ever to do something that is not aligned with school policy, the teacher would inform the student of their misbehavior firsthand, and then cautiously demand the student to stop before he or she gets into further trouble. 2. Referral - a teacher would write a student up if they continue to be school inappropriate. This paper is then given to the principal or assistant principal, where then the student is called down to receive counseling or further punishment. 3. Detention (In School Suspension) - disciplinary action in which a student is placed in a designated area for a certain period time either during school, after school, or during the weekends. While in detention, a student is required to do homework, think about their actions retrospectively, be very very bored, etc. 4. Lunch Duty - similar to detention but instead of staying in a classroom, a student has to walk around with a trash bin to pick up other students' garbage and uneaten food in the cafeteria. 5. Suspension - this punishment is given to a student if the infraction that they've done was quite reprehensible. They are mandated to be excluded from school grounds for a period time, from days to weeks. 6. Expulsion - the most serious disciplinary action of them all, expelling a student involves permanently withdrawing said delinquent from the school and sometimes, terminating the student's educational career completely. As you can see, there are several important details that can be drawn from the list. For one thing, there is more than one kind of disciplinary action. Teachers are not left defenseless in dealing with children without the use of corporal punishment. Another thing to note is that the further you go up in the line of punishments, the more serious they get. There is a trend and system available to a teacher so that he or she can choose how many or which punishment to use for each specific student or situation. For instance, say you have a student that talks out of turn in class. The reasonable thing to do is to give that student a warning and if the student doesn't stop, then you can enact further discipline. If there was however, a student who brought a gun or some other lethal weapon to school, then you skip the first five actions altogether and expel that student. I don't think how that second one would go down exactly, but you get my point. With these punishments and the differences between their levels of harshness, a teacher is more capable of looking at individual students and see what kind and arrangement of punishment is right for that student. In addition to the variety of discipline, there is also the issue of contemporary culture and the increased value of humanitarian ideals. From ancient times to the mid 20th century, corporal punishment was a culturally accepted from the household to the schoolyard, to the prison cells. It was tradition that any person who took an authority role was allowed to use physical punishment on people below their status or age. However, our current way of life and philosophy is very different from those prior. Back then, hierarchies were established for survival and efficiency. They needed things like feudalism and slavery to ensure societal maintenance .To make sure these systems and forms of government didn't deviate, they had to command with an iron fist, which meant barbarism and yes, physical punishment. During feudal times, civilizations didn't have the time to think about the minor "right or wrong" issues, as they were too busy fighting plagues and warding off sea raiders. It wasn't until the Renaissance that people began to delve into art, academics, and philosophy. Transitioning to colonial times, Enlightenment ideas were spreading like wildfire across the Western Hemisphere. These ideas were composed of thoughts and notions that spoke of equality for all and for everyone to be on the same grounds of humanity and opportunity. We, as developed countries, are on a course towards a future in which everyone wants to be the same. Its unrealistic, I know, for everyone can't be the same. It would be nice for society to stop at a limit, one that would prevent those radical liberals from causing anarchism, but given our Western Culture and liberal way of thinking, implementing corporal punishment in the education system would simply not work. Could they have worked if we changed our path of societal development? Maybe. I'll talk about how Eastern culture is successful or seems successful in their use of physical punishment in the next round. My last point is efficacy. Referring back to my first point, in order for punishments to be effective, they need to have the capacity to be both flexible and strict. A teacher must be able to change the level of punishment from lenient to harsh, at a moment's notice. If a teacher were to use corporal punishment, how will he or she regulate the severity of the punishment so that it can be suitable for that specific situation? Do they change the amount of pain to inflict on a child? (I just cringed while typing that, BTW). Is the number of strikes determined by how serious the infraction was? These regulations and assessments within the range of corporal punishment cannot be physically observed by the teacher or the school. How would they now that 10 strikes is fair for cursing in class when they can't precisely observe the effect of the punishment. Yeah, the kid could be crying and bruised, but how much more would it be different from 15 or 20 strikes or even near to the point of bleeding? There's also the issue of the educational aspect of corporal punishment. If a kid spoke out of turn and the punishment was 1 or 2 strikes, does the punishment help the student improve their character? No, because there is no thought or instruction behind the punishment. The teacher just hits the student, expecting the student to not break the rules. And because the student deosn't learn from the experience, he'll do it again and will be struck another blow. Corporal punishment is polarized; it can be either very psychologically and physically traumatic or just annoying and fruitless. And dont get me started on the difference between the physicality among teachers. Would it be fair if one kid get hits by a male teacher and a kid in another class to gets hit by a female teacher? I don't think so.

Corporal Punishment Is Wrong In this debate, I will be arguing that corporate punishment in schools, homes, or other places is a wrong way to teach your child a lesson. Definition, according to dictionary. comnoun 1. Law. physical punishment, as flogging, inflicted on the body of one convicted of a crime: formerly included the death penalty, sentencing a term of years, etc. 2. physical punishment, as spanking, inflicted on a child by an adult or authority. I will be mostly targeting home and school corporal punishment.

Abuses do not demonstrate corporal punishment is inherently wrong While it is true that corporal punishment can be abused, this does not demonstrate that it is always abused, or that it is inherently abusive. If it is used abusively, than measures should be taken to limit such abuse, instead of eliminating the practice altogether, which would be an over-reaction.

Corporal punishment being reintroduced to schools I disagree with this statement because teachers at school have no right to hit someone for any reason. If you don't get hit by your parents which created you why should a teacher hit you.

It increases the rate of crime and violence. Corporal punishment can be associated with higher rates of aggression, more substance abuse and an increased risk of crime and violence as many victims of corporal punishment tend to lash out and repeat this abuse as they don't know any better. In other words, it teaches children to use physical violence. The fact that corporal punishment increases crime and violence has been supported by the American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) which has stated that "the more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse and the more marital conflict they experience as adults." Hence, corporal punishment not only starts a vicious circle of violence but also affects the childs life and wellbeing once they become an adult. The government needs to work towards a less violent society, not increasing the amount of violence in society by reintroducing one of its founders.

I think corpral punishment should be eleagle in every country. Honestly, It depends on how the punishment is administered. You can't just go on about how bad it is by using uninteresting adjectives. -You spelt Illegal wrong, You also spelt Legal wrong -Thats cause there was no discipline at that school. Speaks volumes.

it works! Corporal punishment is the most effective way of maintaining school discipline and dealing with juvenile crime. I went to an inner city co-educational primary school in an industrial area during the late 1950s/early 1960s. Academic standards were high. Between 30% and 35% of its pupils passed the 11+ and went to grammar school. Discipline was strict. The headmistress caned or slippered boys and girls on the bottom. Corporal punishment was used for minor infringements of rules, for deliberate defiance and to prevent prosecution for criminal offences. It was more of a deterrent for girls than it was for boys who were always challenging authority and getting into mischief. I and three other boys received “six of the best” for disrupting lessons and refusing to do homework. Not wanting to be caned again, we settled down, worked hard and passed the 11+. The school's major disciplinary problems were caused by ten and eleven year old C stream pupils who lived on a new council housing estate At the beginning of the autumn term, the boys organised playground protection rackets. Some carried flick knives or knuckledusters given to them by elder brothers who had been in prison or borstal. One teacher was attacked with a broken bottle. Although uninjured, he had a nervous breakdown and was away from school for two terms. Girls had jam and marmalade rubbed into their hair. Both boys and girls had their clothes slashed with flick knives. Classrooms were vandalised and on two occasions boys were caught setting fire to coats in the cloakroom. At the time children as young as seven could be prosecuted and sent to approved school. The head was put under great pressure by the staff and the local authority to involve the police in these incidents but she always refused. Unlike many head teachers, she accepted responsibility for her pupils’ behaviour out of school hours. Most weekends she was called to the police station to deal with girls caught shoplifting and boys arrested for assault or vandalism. Often the only way she could persuade the victim to withdraw the charges was to agree to cane the delinquents and the punishments were carried out at school with parental consent. Using corporal punishment efficiently and effectively, she kept the members of the school’s criminal fraternity out of the justice system giving them a chance to escape from their back grounds and make something of their lives. One boy who was caned for vandalism obtained a degree in engineering. Another who had been whacked for rubbing marmalade into a girl’s hair went to university and graduated with a degree in economics. Because Dr. Phil is such an expert I guess his expertise is wiser than our ancestors and our elders who have effectively used corporal punishment to discipline their children- our parents and grandparents even. If we were to listen to them they would tell us that corporal punishment is not for everybody because some children can be settled with a reprimand and disapproving look. That being said, they would still rely on the expediency of the cane because all some of these bad kids need is a good spanking.

Corporal punishment of children Corporal punishment can make a valuable example of a student

harms children with genuine behavioural disorders or other disabilities I think it obvious that a child would not be introduced into a school without the parents being aware of any behavioural disorders or diabilities. What must be taken into account, is a vast majority of cases are attention seeking attempts; in this case, we are to isolate them. Of course, this is used today as a way of dealing with behaviour, but it seems unsuccesful in dealing with behaviour, as people think its cool to go against the system, such as gaining unnecessary ASBOs, or trying to impress friends or admirers. I find the most efficient way of dettering bad behaviour, is embarrasment. In Islamic counties, they use punishments, such as fingers amputated for stealing, public flogging for being abusive to higher authority or stoning for adultry. This is used as a detterance, not only to the person themselves, but to the general public also. It also makes an awareness on how foolish those individuals are, for trying to make themselves cooler, or more impressive. I am currently a sixth form student at a secondary school( high school in some cases), and i can see that younger years are getting "cockier" towards tutors. This is a observation of only a few years, whereas the scale we are talking is much longer. It is this point, where the point i made earlier on being abusive to authority, where corperal punishment should be reintroduced. Sure, children need to learn how to be independant without guidence, and need to learn from their mistakes, but isnt that what corperal punishment was for? Did it not show what will happen, if the individuals did make the wrong decisions? Like i said, corperal punishment showed the consequences of going against higher authority, children need to learn of these consequences, and experience them if they do attempt to go against that authority. As of the cases which include genuine behavioural disorders or disabilities, the school should know of these conditions; thus the right amount of discipline would be administrated.

Corporal punishment should be banned from schools Also, I am only talking about the US. While one in five is a lot, has the students' academic record changed? I'm assuming you're from the UK so I pose this question to you, do parents have the option as to whether or not their child can be paddled? Here in the South most of the schools have forms stating the guidelines of corporal punishment. Speaking of detention, there are numerous ways you can make it effective. I'm in college now, but when I was in school, detention was copying the handbook. Most students were never back in that detention room. Most students who were paddled, however, were in there lots of times because once again I will say this, corporal punishment is ineffective. Once again, thank you for debating me.

Corporal punishment of children Corporal punishment is justifiable as a last resort

Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Round One: Acceptance Round Two: Arguments Round Three: Rebuttals/New Arguments Round Four: Rebuttals, No Further Arguments

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced Allowing children to be hit sends the message that it is OK to treat children in this way.

All schools should bring back corporal punishment I was really hoping for a more intelligent opponent. In the first round you cut and paste a paragraph that included sexual abuse and spanking OFTEN. We are debating corporal punishment. Then you cut and paste corporal punishment to reduce anti social behavior. That is not what a school would spank for. Then you assume that I would rather spank than warn. I always talked to my children and let them know why they were being spanked just like my school did when I was little. Then you talk of parents losing temper and smacking kids on the streets, again this is about school corporal punishment. Being spanked does NOT show children they can hit others as stated below. I showed with historical fact that school shootings have increased over the last 40 years. Many schools were stopping spanking before the states changed the laws. Then you tried to make a false claim that crime is high in the 19 spanking states and low in the 31 non spanking. I showed the facts of low income inner city crime. Then you get stupid with human sacrifice, slavery, astrology, murder and assault. They believed it worked, people would rather slave than die, astrology holds truth, murder and assault are by weak minded people. Read this Some "experts" claim that spanking has no instructional value, teaches children aggression, is abusive, or harms children's emotional and psychological well-being . However, these are myths. Myth: Spanking has no instructional value. Reality: Some claim that spanking does not teach children how to behave. This is false. Suppose you spank your child for running into the street. Spanking is a punishment, and punishments stop behaviors. By spanking your child, you stop him from running into the street. So you have taught your child how to behave: you have taught him not to run into the street. But what if you spank your child for talking back. The critics would say, you teach your child not to talk back, but you have not taught her how she is supposed to talk to you. But you teach her how she is supposed to talk to you when you scold her before the spanking. Before spanking, you make sure your child understands what she did wrong and how you expect her to behave in the future. In this way, spanking does have instructional value. The critics might then ask why not just tell your child how she is to talk to you and skip the spanking. Unfortunately, telling children what to do is not always enough. Children often do not change their behavior unless the behavior has negative consequences--and spanking is a powerful negative consequence. Myth: Spanking teaches children to be aggressive. Reality: Some argue that if parents spank their child, the child will learn that hitting is OK, so the child will go out and hit other children. But this is absurd. I've never heard a child justify hitting another child by saying that it's OK because mom and dad hit me. What spanking teaches is that parents may swat their child on the bottom when the child misbehaves. It does not teach a child hitting another child is OK. Nor does it teach that hitting for a reason other than punishment is OK. Most children will see this. A child who is old enough to be spanked understand there are differences between him and mom and dad. Mom and dad can drive a car but he can't. Mom and Dad go to work but he goes to school. So he understands that mom and dad can do things liking spanking that he can't do. Moreover, parents can explicitly tell the child that their spanking him is different form his hitting another child. Myth: Spanking is abusive. Reality: Spanking is not abusive. First, abusive parents often don't love their children. They abuse their children because they regret having them, the children remind them of someone else, and so on. But for most parents, spanking is done out of love and care for the child. Second, abusive parents lash out at their children in anger, not caring if they injure the child or not. But parents that spank do not want to injure their children. Spankings are given to correct the child's behavior. Yes, spankings hurt, but they are done so as to cause no lasting damage. That is why spankings are given on the bottom, for the posterior does not contain any vital organs. Do some parents spank too hard and cause welts and bruises? Yes, and they have gone too far. They have crossed the line between punishment and abuse. But this merely shows that some parents misuse spanking, not that spanking is abusive. Properly done, spanking causes no lasting physical damage. Myth: Studies prove that spanking harms children's emotional and psychological well-being. Reality: Some researchers have reported correlations between receiving corporal punishment and behavioral and emotional problems later in life. However, these studies have several flaws. First, most are correlational. Correlational studies can tell us only that two things are related, but such studies do not tell us how the two things are related. Suppose we see there is a correlation between spanking and delinquency. A correlation only means that spanking and delinquency are related--it does not tell us how they are related. Correlational studies can not tell us what we really want to know: what causes what. It might be that children are delinquent because they were spanked. But it might also be that they were spanked because they were delinquent? A correlational study can not tell us which of these two possibilities is true. Therefore, such studies do not prove that spanking causes delinquency, anti-social behavior, depression or anything else because correlation studies can not prove what causes what. Second, many of these studies looked at corporal punishment, not just at spanking. And some studies had a very "inclusive" definition of corporal punishment. They defined corporal punishment not only as hitting on the bottom but also slapping in the face, hitting on the head, boxing the ears, and shaking, among other things. Some of the forms of corporal punishment included in these studies could be considered abusive such as hitting on the head or boxing the ears. So even if we could conclude from these studies that corporal punishment causes emotional and behavior problems, and we can"t because the studies are correlational, but if we could, would it mean that all forms of corporal punishment cause emotional and behavioral problems or only the more severe, abusive forms like hitting on the head or boxing the ears? Larzelere1 found that when abusive forms of punishment were excluded from the definition of corporal punishment, researchers were more likely to find a beneficial outcome to using corporal punishment rather than a negative outcome. So abuse, not spanking, harms children"s emotional and psychological well-being. We know that many children are spanked and turn out fine; they are not aggressive, delinquent, depressed or anti-social. Why? Simons3 found that what leads to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being is low parental involvement such as parents not loving or trusting their children, not knowing where their children go or who they are with, and not being consistent in discipline. Being spanked did not lead to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being. Parents that love their children and are involved in their lives may use spanking, but they will never use spanking in a way that harms their children. 1Larzelere, R. E. (1996). A review of the outcomes of parental use of non abusive or customary physical punishment. Pediatrics, 98(4), 824-828. 2See for example, Giles-Sims, J. et al. (1995). Child, maternal, and family characteristics associated with spanking. Family Relations,44, 170-176. 3Simons, R. L. et al . (1994). Harsh corporal punishment versus quality of parental involvement as an explanation of adolescent maladjustment. Journal of marriage and the family, 56, 591-607. http://www.angelfire.com...

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced Many students who misbehave in school come from unstable families

Corporal punishment of children Corporal punishment is a good tool for disciplining unruly children

It has been made illegal in so many countries for a reason. Many countries out-lawed homosexuality, female workers and abortions, but this does not mean that all of those countries were correct to do so. It only means that these countries were in agreement against something, it does not mean that what they were all advocating was logical or reasonable. The amount of countries that do or do not have corporal punishment out lawed has no bearing on this debate. Yet have any of these countries provided effective supports to parents in helping them discipline and punish out-of-control children? They tell parents that corporal punishment in wrong, but when their child acts out or gets in trouble with the law, they blame the parents. Is that fair? If they want to outlaw corporal punishment then they need to provide supports that are just as effective in deterrence as corporal punishment for parents and teachers to use. Since they have not (other than waging a war on kids with zero-tolerance laws and imprisonment) then what right do they have over how a parent disciplines his/her child or wants his/her child to be disciplined by teachers? The only thing I can agree on is providing regulatory law like Section 59 of New Zealand's Crimes Amendment Act of 2007, that allows only corporal punishment used for reasonable disciplinary action to legislate against other forms of child hitting or California's right to discipline laws, to protect against potential abuse. Of course, as it applies to parents it should apply to teachers as well.

Teachers should be allowed to discipline students, eg use a ruler for a cane. I believe your whole round 2 should be invalid, as you didn't address the socio-psychological pros n cons to your argument. Moreover the alternatives you have suggested are HIGHLY INEFFECTIVE. Whilst in detention, a student typically doesn't learn from their mistakes, esp. if its not solitary detention. A warning is a "joke", especially if the child's parents are not authoritarian. The only reasonable alternative is expulsion, but that is highly disruptive in terms of logistics, child development and reputation of the school. Therefore strict discipline is the best way forward, as long as no malice is involved, as mentioned. Speaking of socio-psychological effects, if the recipient was to be traumatised and embarrassed by the events, (s)he should be given counselling support by the academic facility to adjust their attitude. (In r4 we will expand on our points will further analysis, after you refute my r2 argument)> ps. also assess the comments section (voters) as this debate expands in to it.

Discipline should be instilled by parents not school. I assume your argument is entirely from <http://www.cyc-net.org...;. I understand that in many developing nations where standards of living are not up to modern standards, inappropriate punishments are often carried out by parents and schools alike. However, initial argument topic explicitly states that parents should carry out disciplinary actions. I believe that your argument in a way depreciates your own view, because the article states that parents are equally to blame. Also, in developed countries, where rights of children are protected, it is not common for this to happen. Therefore, we can assume that these schools will be responsible when carrying out punishments. Finally, discipline does not solely include physical punishments. In developed nations, often times discipline by school means detention, suspension, or other "civil" punishments. Therefore, I still believe that schools must be allowed to authorize discipline to certain degree.

Corporal punishment being reintroduced to schools I appreciate the chance to argue this topic. For semantic clarity, the two possible debate-friendly meanings of this debate's title read as follows: "Corporal punishment is being reintroduced to schools" - versus "no it isn't." "Corporal punishment should be reintroduced to schools" - versus "no it shouldn't." "Corporal punishment being reintroduced to schools" is like saying "Flowers being picked." One cannot agree or disagree, the sentence is worded as hypothetical. Based on my opposition's first round arguments, until otherwise specified, I will assume he means to use the latter, *should be* phrasing. That said, although public schools do not typically practice corporal punishment, it was never legally un-introduced from schools. 1. Parents are entitled to corporal punishment "Corporal punishment of minors within domestic settings is still lawful in 49 of the United States. Delaware outlawed it as child abuse in 2012" http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. Teachers are entitled to the same teaching methods as parents according to "In loco parentis," a legal doctrine adopted by both the United States and Britain. "this doctrine can provide a non-biological parent to be given the legal rights and responsibilities of a biological parent if they have held themselves out as the parent" http://en.wikipedia.org... A doctrine that was never removed cannot technically be reintroduced. To 'reintroduce' corporal punishment, we would have to first ban it, then reintroduce it. I argue that we should not reintroduce it because that would require us to take the time to unnecessarily ban it.

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced The administration of corporal punishment made us grow up to become responsible citizen.

THW reinstate Corporal Punishment in schools So we see that con has also brought into this scene that corporal punishment is physical use so i simply see that this would not work because it hardly benefits the student being punished and it also doesn't teach him that what he was doing was wrong. Secondly we see that this is a mistrust issue thus far and i see that the child would resent the teacher for and we cannot deny this fact because we are talking about teenagers at the moment and they are at a stage of mistrust and hatred to most figures in their lives. Now onto how I believe it will affect the child. I see that this entire idea of corporal punishment revolves around the fact that it creates a strict environment but i see that you cant create a safe learning environment out of fear children wont seek to do their best, learn what they can and wont try to be creative because of the fact that they will be scared that these ideas will result in corporal punishment. It oppresses the children and creates an environment where they can as parents think it is fine to do something similar to their children if they had it done to them. Rather i see that by giving them positive reactions to their positive behavior over punishing their negative behavior they will strive to be better and do positive things thank you

Corporal punishment in the families!!! In conclusion. allowing Corporal punishment against children is discriminatory against them because of their age as it denies them equal protection under the law. It can also subject them to cruel and demining treatment which violent their rights. I believe that it has no place in society as it can be detrimental to children for all the reasons outlined in my sources by: Causing low self esteem Making children feel lonely, abandoned or sad Teaching them to be victims Interfering with the emotional, intellectual and sensory learning process Increasing the risk of poor mental health in later life Teaches that violence is an acceptable way of dealing with violence There are less violent methods of parenting which are more effective such as positive reinforcement for disciplining children. Additionally, counties which have banned it such as Sweden which made banned it have experienced no negative effects from banning it, therefore there is no reason not to if it protects both children and society. Why should it be okay to hit a vulnerable child, when if the same was done to an adult you could be charged for assault?

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced If teachers and parents weren’t allowed to hit children, they would discipline them in better ways.

Corporal punishment I accept!My argument? It works!

The administration of corporal punishment made us grow up to become responsible citizen. When Corporal punishment is administered it doesn't just blow over. kids develop grudges and plot and plan. Some join gangs too. Also its not effective. kids do get rebellious.

Corporal Punishment Should Be Reintroduced It brings fear in the person

There is a difference between corporal punishment and child abuse. Corporal punishment is designed to punish specific acts of significant misbehavior and delinquency. It is not a wanton and unreasonable act of violence. Child abuse, on the contrary, is the unjustified and unreasoned beating of children. The act of child-abuse is not meant to punish a child, but is inflicted without restraint or concern for the general welfare of a child. The intention of corporal punishment, on the contrary, is meant to instill a level of discipline in a child that is necessary to their future. It is in the child's best interest, whereas child-abuse is clearly not.

The Reintroduction of Corporal Punishment Into Schools I accept.

Corporal punsihment for children O Observations My opponents title: 1."Corporal punsihment for children" Has the word punishment misspelled. 2.We will be focusing on corporal punishment in schools "This debate will be more about how corporal punishment works at schools". I am free to assume that there's no corporal punishment outside of school and vice versa. 3.I can begin in round one "My opponent will start this debate with his arguments" O Burden of Proof Is equal. O Definitions Corporal Punishment: "physical punishment, as spanking, inflicted on a child by an adult in authority." Dictionary.com Child: "a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children." Dictionary.com O Notes Interestingly my opponent said "Corporal punsihment for children". That's right we're talking about punishment for children and not against them. One must realize that corporal punishment and child abuse are two different things .One acts as an attention getter in a controlled atmosphere, while the other is used intentionally to harm the child in a physical manner. My opponent may not under any circumstances say what kind of corporal punishment I support. In this debate you have mentioned no specifics hence I get to add my own details. O Arguments 1. Quick and Effective Corporal punishment is quick and effective. I don't think that this can be argued. 2. Being Spoiled Undisciplined children are in danger of becoming tyrants. Todays society is a good example: http://www.leaderu.com... 3. Parents We can argue until the bears take over this site but ultimately its our parents choice: " Many school districts also offer parents an opportunity to state whether or not they wish corporal punishment to be used on their sons and daughters. Typically, the parents fill out a form which is filed in the school office. In many districts this is an "opt-out" system. In others an "opt-in" system applies, whereby no student is so punished without explicit parental consent." http://en.wikipedia.org... Thank you

Spanking In Schools Hi there, Grantholben! I look forward to having a spirited debate with you. Since capital punishment is already enacted in many states (Source 1) and you're looking to make the claim that those states should change their policies, the burden of proof is on you; I only need to refute each of your arguments, but I will also bring in a few of my own here and there to emphasize my point of view.The first argument you presented was that "spanking shouldn't be allowed in schools because it's the parents [sic] choice weather [sic] or not to spank their child." While I agree that parents should have the final word on how their children are treated in many cases, it should be noted that society has a responsibility to ensure that each individual's rights are not infringed upon by others. If a man commits a mass murder, for example, it shouldn't be up to his parents to decide how to punish him; we have a legal system in place to ensure that others' rights are not infringed upon, and we as a society take care of the problem by entrusting his fate to others. The man would be sent to prison for life or possibly be executed, depending on the circumstances of the crime and the state he committed the crime in.Similarly, if a boy in a school is putting others in danger or disrupting the class in some way, the parents should not always be the final authority concerning how he is punished. In some cases, the teacher needs to punish the student to make sure the classroom doesn't fall into chaos. A teacher needs to do his or her job, and all of the other students have a right to education without interruption from the boy. In fact, if all else fails and a spanking is deemed the only way to convince the boy to listen to the teacher and learn, then it's a win-win-win: the teacher is able to teach; the other students in the class can learn in an ideal, disruption-free environment; and the boy can snap out of his disruptive behavior and study with the other students.Then, as an example of your first point that I just refuted, you brought up the example of "a girl from Texas who got spanked…and had bruises." You listed cnn.com as your reference. That being a rather large website, I believe we can agree that it would be somewhat unreasonable for me to have to comb through the website to find the exact information you intend to convey. However, I thought I'd take the time for you to find what I believe is your source, or at least, the same story. (Source 2) In the story, the mother is upset that her child was spanked at school, and I do sympathize with her, but you've presented a gross oversimplification.First, the mother was not upset that her child was spanked; she was upset that her child was spanked by a male instructor. The school policy was that "females swatted females, and males swatted males." Had a female instructor spanked her with appropriate strength, this would not have been an issue, because 1.) it would have been in line with school policy, and 2.) it would have been with sufficient strength for the misdeed the girl committed (more on the "misdeed" later). Nowhere does the mother disagree with corporal punishment; in fact, she wants it enforced and controlled. "Men are too big and strong to be hitting 96-pound girls," she says. As you stated earlier, parents have the choice of whether to spank their children, correct? This mother wants her child spanked, but she wants it done in an appropriate manner by a third party. She knowingly put her daughter in this school because it had the rules and environment that she deemed appropriate. You can't take away the mother's right to choose a school she believes is right for her daughter.Now, about the "misdeed" I mentioned earlier. The girl wasn't just minding her own business when the teacher walked up and spanked her; she was "letting another student copy her work." In many schools, this can get a student expelled. Students should not be denied education, because that only leads to crime (Source 3), which, I believe, you'll agree is a bad thing. If a spanking can keep a student in school and allow her to understand her wrongdoings to avoid doing them again, there is no reason not to continue to do so in schools. Which is less acceptable to you--a child who becomes more likely to commit crimes and leads a terrible life because she was expelled from school, or a child who suffered a few bruises on her bottom but grows up with a full education and becomes successful in later years?Finally, your last sentence: "Spanking is not the best in general but definitely not in schools." This wasn't entirely clear to me, but my best guess is that you intended to say that "spanking is not the best form of punishment, and it therefore does not belong in schools." If this is the case, you are saying that spanking is an effective form of punishment to some degree, but it does not belong in schools. Spanking is not the best, but it does work somewhat. In that case, why take it away? Schools should have a variety of methods to encourage students to cooperate with teachers and learn the material; why limit them arbitrarily? Corporal punishment is fast and can be done on the spot. These conditions make it a better deterrent than anything that forces students to wait a few weeks before being punished. (Source 4) It's similar to why a dog should be punished for pooping in the house as soon as possible; it will have no idea what it is being punished for if you wait a week to do it. Do you like dogs? I love dogs, but if one needs to be punished, I wouldn't hesitate to. An unpunished dog bites, pees everywhere, and is generally unruly.Children won't forget like dogs do, but it does become more difficult for them to understand their misdeed if they are not punished as soon as they are caught. Any child psychologist or educator can tell you that in a few weeks, a child simply won't care about what happened after what seems like ages to their young minds. Therefore, spanking is a form of punishment and a deterrent that should not be taken away from schools as an option to discipline children.Your move.Sources:1 http://en.wikipedia.org...2 http://www.dailymail.co.uk...3 http://www.all4ed.org...4 "Timing of Punishment as a Determinant of Response Inhibition," Child Development 34 (1963): 207-14

Physical Punishment Punishment should not be given as physical assault is illegal and I do not believe teachers want to go to jail. Pro seems to give a number of guidelines to follow, but who will be there to monitor them? No one. Teachers are free to abuse it all they like. Maybe they had a bad day and decide to hit some kids. Who would be there to stop them? No one. How can we judge whether it's 'too violent'? We can't. It is also impossible to rationally deduct that physical punishment will directly lead to a child questioning all future decisions. Pro has given no reasoning or evidence for this.I will now provide some psychological evidence that beating a child is bad for their development.Physical punishments result in long term effects of depression, anxiety, substance abuse in later years, and a slew of other problems[1].They result in a higher incidence of health issues in adult life such as cardiovascular disease[2].Children who are hit are more likely to grow up to be aggressive[3].It simply teachers children to avoid getting caught rather than attacking the heart of the issue - not doing it at all[4].There is no evidence that physical punishment is beneficial[5].[1] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[2] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[3] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[4] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...;[5] http://www.cmaj.ca...;

Corporal punishment School and home corporal punishment(example spanking) on children should be banned. I will let my opponent present his/her arguments first or to simply accept and then me present my arguments.