A Comparative Analysis of the Corporal Punishment of Children: An Exploration of Human Rights and U.S. Law

Using a comparative perspective, this paper explores two approaches to child/adult relationships and the practice of corporal punishment: a human rights perspective and a traditional perspective reflected in U.S. law. Source material for our analysis draws on statutes, court decisions, and human rights conventions relating to the status of children and corporal punishment. Legislation and case law reflecting each perspective are presented and analyzed. Discussions of the nature of and reasons for differences include: the absence of human rights principles as a touchstone for U.S. law, the avoidance of linking corporal punishment and violence in the law, and the persistence of a colonial model of child/adult relationships structured around adult dominance and control of children. In contrast, a human rights model has at its core the human dignity of the child. This approach extends human rights to children and discourages corporal punishment and oppressive relationships between adults and children. Finally, this paper discusses the value of bringing a human rights approach to our understanding of child/adult relationships and the use of corporal punishment against children.