The purpose of the statute is clear. It is to allow corporal punishment as to parents, teachers and legitimate child caretakers which, without section 509, would fall under the definition of simple assault. However, corporal punishment may not exceed the bounds justifiable for maintenance of reasonable discipline, consistent with the welfare of the minor. The statute simply says pain inflicted as a result of discipline must not be excessive. The punishment must be justifiable and fit the misconduct.
Excessive discipline is contrary to the welfare of the child, even when discipline is justifiable.
In addition, we find, upon reviewing the charge as a whole, no reason to believe the jury was confused by the terms of the statute as delineated by the court. In rejecting this argument, we believe the legislature never intended 18 Pa. 509 to shield a school teacher from ever being convicted for simple assault as amplified by the statute. 509 Official Comment-1972. The legislation in question is an attempt to shield parents, principals, teachers and persons otherwise entrusted with the care or supervision for a special purpose from simple assault liability, where the degree and manner of force used and the attendant justifications are neither excessive nor unreasonable under the circumstances.