By today’s standards, most people even just two generations ago would have parents with criminal records.
And it wasn’t just parents who could physically abuse you with impunity. When I started elementary school in Regina, corporal punishment was still available to educators.
The “strap” sat on the teacher’s desk and I saw more than one of my classmates (may or may not have been one of them) get rapped on the knuckles with a yardstick (remember yardsticks)?
One of my most vivid memories of childhood is being pulled, by the ear, to the principle’s office by a nun.
To be fair, they probably didn’t know any better. “Spare the rod, spoil the child.” Remember that old chestnut.
Times have changed though. Boy, have they. If you don’t believe me, following is a cautionary tale from Yorkton Provincial Court.
On Monday, a 37-year-old woman pleaded guilty to four counts of assault with a weapon and one count of common assault.
The victims? Her five children. The weapon(s)? The old proverbial wooden spoon. That is to say, a belt, a broomstick, whatever was at hand, including her hand, which accounts for the one count of common assault.
Last December the woman’s six-year-old daughter told someone associated with the Big Brothers Big Sisters organization she was uncomfortable going home.
A police investigation determined that corporal punishment was a regular feature of the home environment. Child Protection Services seized the children and the mother was charged under the Criminal Code and put into counseling.
In a presentence report, probation services noted she said it was “old school discipline.”
I do not know this woman’s background, but I suspect there is a chance—somewhere between almost certainly and without a doubt—she was also subjected to the same growing up.
Of course, under the law, that is no excuse. The Crown called it “unacceptable.” The judge did too.
She was given a conditional sentence of 12 months, including a curfew for the first six and a slate of other conditions including no contact with her children except under supervision.
Canadian Society has come a long way, but it’s not easy to break the cycle of violence.
I still hear people of my age, and even quite a bit younger, saying things like, “I never would have done what these kids today are doing because I would have got a slap upside the head.”
And it is a very common thread in immigrant humour. Anybody who is a fan of standup comedy is probably familiar with the Indian-Canadian comic Russell Peters’ bit about threatening to call Children’s Aid on his dad, who responds: “I might get into a little bit of trouble, but I know it’s going to take them 23 minutes to get here and in that time, somebody gonna get a-hurt real bad.”
Arthur Simeon, another great immigrant comic from Ghana tells it this way: “My parents had six kids, but they made it clear they were okay with four. That’s why I’m so well-behaved.”
It’s funny stuff, but it’s no laughing matter.
It is still technically legal to spank your child in Canada, though.
Section 43 of the Criminal Code (“the spanking law”) reads:
“Every schoolteacher, parent or person standing in the place of a parent is justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances.”
Of course, anything that ambiguous is bound to be challenged, and it was, in 2004. The Supreme Court upheld the section with clarification, which is aptly summarized in the Wikipedia article “Corporal Punishment in the Home.”
“The majority [6-3] held that the person administering the discipline must be a parent or legal guardian, or in some cases, a school teacher (i.e. non-parental relatives such as grandparents, aunts, or uncles, as well as babysitters and other caretakers, are banned from spanking); that the force must be used “by way of correction” (sober, reasoned uses of force that address the actual behaviour of the child and are designed to restrain, control or express some symbolic disapproval of his or her behaviour); that the child must be capable of benefiting from the correction (i.e. not under the age of 2 or over 12); and that the use of force must be “reasonable under the circumstances”, meaning that it results neither in harm nor in the prospect of bodily harm.
“Punishment involving slaps or blows to the head is harmful, the Court held. Use of any implement other than a bare hand is illegal and hitting a child in anger or in retaliation for something a child did is not considered reasonable and is against the law. The Court defined “reasonable” as force that would have a “transitory and trifling” impact on the child. For example, spanking or slapping a child so hard that it leaves a mark that lasts for several hours would not be considered “transitory and trifling.”
That is a very high standard, as it should be.
