Page 42 - Presbyterian Connection

Connection
REFLECTIONS
Equal Protection by Law from Violence for Canadian Children
42
PRESBYTERIAN
WINTER 2022
presbyterian.ca
By retired Naval Captain George Zimmerman, who served in the Canadian Armed Forces from 1972 to 2010. He has served as a Reserve naval officer and then, for 30 years, as a Regular Force Chaplain. A Presbyterian minister, the Rev. Zimmerman is currently serving St. David and St. Martin Church in Ottawa, Ont. This arti- cle was first published in the Hill Times, Ottawa, July 19, 2021.
Section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada should be repealed because it denies Canadian chil- dren the same protection from violence afforded adults. The horrific discovery of hundreds of unmarked graves of Indigenous Canadian children on properties of schools funded by the Govern- ment of Canada and administered by Christian church groups has rightfully shocked Canadians. The discovery becomes especially egregious when one realizes that the very laws that facilitated this atrocity remain part of the Criminal Code of Canada despite many internal and external efforts to repeal the offending Section. Section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada allows for the physi- cal punishment of children. The atrocities perpetrated on Canadi- an children of Indigenous families demonstrate how the narrative that lies behind this law can lead to the dehumanizing objectifica- tion of children to the point of callous abuse and desecration of their bodies.
Section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada must be repealed as soon as practicable to show that Canadians today place the safety of our young as a top priority.
World class studies, repeat- edly published by leading peer reviewed journals in psychology, psychiatry, education, athletics, and child development, have clearly shown that physical pun- ishment of children, as allowed under Section 43, does nothing to instill the self-control and person- al discipline needed for well-being of productive functioning adults. The evidence further shows there is significant risk of dangerous harm to the well-being of children being disciplined with physical punishment. Finally, there are well-researched more effective interventions that use positive
non-violent methods of needed discipline in raising children.
The studies are definitive. It is no longer a matter of the evi- dence; it is a matter of what now must be done in the light of that evidence. The result of this evi- dence of harm and violation of children’s human rights led the United Nations in 1990 to adopt the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which includes protec- tion of children from all physi- cal punishment. It is worth not- ing that Scotland, Wales, New Zealand, Germany, France, and Australia are amongst those who have taken the issue seriously. Inexplicably, Canada continues to lag behind 62 countries that have, to date, reformed their laws and developed public education to preclude the physical punish- ment of children. It is also sad that Canada lags behind develop- ing post-colonial nations on this issue. For a current list of nations see Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children (endcorporalpunishment.org). Canada appears to be offering lip service only.
Since 1989, there have been 17 private member’s bills placed before the Canadian House of Commons and the Senate to re- peal Section 43. All have failed. Canadian non-government organ- izations, with no real progress, have for years urged repeal. In 2004, the Children’s Hospital of
Eastern Ontario partnered with six national child well-being organi- zations to publish the Joint State- ment on Physical Punishment of Children and Youth. The Joint Statement is a seminal review of the research that convincingly documents the strong link be- tween physical punishment and lifelong harm of children. Such efforts have not yet seen repeal of Section 43 or concerted public education by the Government of Canada urging positive parenting using non-violent discipline.
The Joint Statement has been widely seen in most sectors. Its recommendations for the repeal of the law and more education on positive parenting are evi- dence based. The related direct connection to the narratives of colonial powers and the physi- cal punishment of children, which horrified the Indigenous peoples of Canada, have also been well researched. See the 2020 pub- lication Decolonizing Discipline (Michaelson and Durrant, editors, 2020). As does the Joint State- ment, the Truth and Reconcilia- tion Commission of 2008 urges repeal of Section 43 (Call to Ac- tion #6). The TRC identified Sec- tion 43 as not only a real danger to children, but a hated symbol of the harm done in Residential Schools.
Perhaps one source of the re- sistance in Canada to the elimina- tion of physical punishment as
a means to discipline our young comes from religious people with rigid dogmatic thinking. Some of these, pointedly, are congregants in the same religions which ran the Residential Schools. A most common defence of physical punishment as a means of disci- pline comes from small highly vo- cal groups who cite scriptures but have no academic understanding of these ancient texts.
This resistance does not stand up to scholarly scrutiny. It is an emotional-based opinion based on outdated narratives. The evi- dence against the value of physi- cal punishment of children is as incontrovertible as is the evi- dence showing the dangers of the non-use of seat belts, smoking, and exposure to second-hand smoke. Thankfully, even if slow in coming, there has been a steady movement in the long-standing theological Christian faith groups who are reforming their posi- tions on the physical punishment of children. Consider A Christian Theological Statement in Support of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call to Action #6 (2017) produced by an ecumeni- cal team comprising Anglican Church of Canada, Presbyterian Church in Canada, and United Church of Canada scholars.
Worldwide, there is a well- organized multi-faith organiza- tion dedicated to eliminating the physical punishment of chil-
dren called Churches’ Network for Non-violence. Recently, the Church of Scotland declared its position in favour of positive non- violent discipline while opposing physical punishment as a means of discipline.
At home, the United Church of Canada was an early endorser of the Joint Statement. Most re- cently, The Presbyterian Church in Canada carefully studied the issue over three years. In 2018, St. David and St. Martin Presby- terian Church in Ottawa not only endorsed the Joint Statement but requested that The Presbyterian Church in Canada consider do- ing the same. With the approval of the Presbytery of Ottawa, who also endorsed the Joint State- ment, the request was passed to the national church for considera- tion. The PCC responded with a professionally researched church report, publicly available, in sup- port of the Joint Statement, call- ing for the repeal of Section 43, and advocating for better educa- tion about child rearing with non- violent interventions as a means of teaching self-control. The gov- erning body of the national PCC, the General Assembly of 2019, received the report but sent it back for another look at the evi- dence supporting the recommen- dation to endorse the Joint State- ment. After a second examination of the literature, the research com-
Continued on page 43