Corporal punishment tied to teen fighting
=========================================

* Julia Haskins

National bans on slapping or spanking youth may be associated with lower rates of violence among adolescents, a recent study suggests.

Published in October in *BMJ Open*, the study found that rates of physical fighting were 69 percent lower among teenage boys and 42 percent lower among teenage girls in countries with full bans on corporal punishment compared with countries that did not have bans.

Researchers said they could not determine a causal relationship between corporal punishment and adolescent fighting. However, the findings pointed to lower rates of adolescent fighting in countries with more comprehensive bans on spanking and slapping, according to the study.

Researchers examined 88 countries, some of which had full prohibition of corporal punishment in schools and at home, partial prohibition in schools only and no prohibition in schools or at home. Thirty countries in the sample had full bans on corporal punishment, compared with 38 that had partial bans and 20 with no bans.

Countries with partial bans on corporal punishment, including Canada, the U.K. and the U.S., had lower rates of fighting only among females. While researchers did not have an explanation for the difference in fighting rates among males and females in countries with partial bans on corporal punishment, they did suggest that such gender differences could be attributed to possible factors such as males experiencing more physical violence outside school.

Researchers were also surprised to find that the prevalence of fighting was mixed among low- and high-income countries. Cambodia, Myanmar and Malawi had the lowest prevalence of fighting among males, while Costa Rica, Tajikistan and China had the lowest prevalence for females.

The study contributes to a growing body of evidence admonishing corporal punishment, which has been linked to behavioral and mental health problems among children.

“The argument that’s used for corporal punishment is that it sorts out children’s behavior…and here’s this study like many others (showing) that it’s not only ineffective but also counterproductive,” lead study author Frank Elgar, PhD, told The Nation’s Health.

The study called for a public health response against corporal punishment that includes regulatory reform and educational campaigns. It noted that public health messaging must show that repealing laws permitting corporal punishment does not mean that children cannot be disciplined.

Data collection must also be improved, such as determining how many children are exposed to corporal punishment at home, said Elgar, the Canada research chair in social inequity in child health at McGill University’s Center on Population Dynamics. He said the research called for “some challenging discussions” about children’s welfare.

“Everyone appreciates that children have rights, and one of them is not to be victims of physical abuse,” Elgar said. “(If) we look at our own laws through that lens, I think this is a glaring oversight that needs to be corrected right away.”

In November, the American Academy of Pediatrics updated its policy statement, “Effective Discipline to Raise Healthy Children,” strengthening its opposition to corporal punishment in kids. According to the statement, “Aversive disciplinary strategies, including all forms of corporal punishment and yelling at or shaming children, are minimally effective in the short-term and not effective in the long-term.”

For more information, visit [https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/9/e021616](https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/9/e021616).

*   Copyright The Nation’s Health, American Public Health Association