A place where it is not okay to hit children: the role of professionals.

• Author: Lawrence, Julie
• Position: Report

Abstract

As a result of recent legislation that removes from the Crimes Act the statutory defence of "reasonable force" to correct a child, professionals have an increasingly important role in supporting parents to use effective and positive discipline. This study focused on how professionals approach the tasks of communicating, guiding and advising families with young children about disciplinary practices. The researchers convened 10 focus groups of people working in family support, child health, early childhood teaching and social work roles, in Northland, Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin. This paper describes how the participants work with and advise families about child discipline, how well prepared they are to fulfil this role, and how they understand the legal issues relating to family discipline. Parents did seek advice on discipline from professionals and acknowledged using corporal punishment. Most professionals disagreed with the use of physical discipline, but some expressed caution about telling parents directly that they thought smacking was harmful. Few of the professionals discussed the debate (current at the time of the research) regarding the proposed repeal of Section 59 with parents, and many did not understand it themselves. They believed that parents would need more support if the law changed. Only a minority had received training on the issue of child discipline. The findings suggest that those working with families with young children are in need of more resources and professional development to deal with this matter.

INTRODUCTION

The passing into law of the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 on 21 June 2007 has modified the policy framework for families and children. The law change has removed the defence provided by the previous law (Section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961) for parents charged with assaulting children. (2) The repealed Section 59(2) bans "the use of parental force for the purpose of correction", though the law makes it clear that the police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints if the offence is considered inconsequential and there is no pubic interest in proceeding. Beth Wood (2004), one of the leading campaigners for the repeal of Section 59, has argued that changing the law was not about "banning smacking", but rather "It is about changing the social norm--it is about making Aotearoa New Zealand a place where everyone knows it is not okay to hit children" (Wood 2004:31).

The "necessity for a mind-set change" (Ranby 2004:32) has also been recognised in the launch by the Prime Minister on 4 September 2007 of a comprehensive 14-million-dollar campaign to prevent family violence as an initiative of the Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families, which was established in 2005 (Ministry of Social Development 2007). The new campaign aims to change community attitudes towards family violence (including violence to children), and to support communities in taking action against family violence.

The research we report on here examines the role that professionals play in helping families stop using violence to control children's behaviour. In our view the law change and the public awareness campaign are only the first steps towards changing the mind-set. The professionals (social workers, Plunket nurses, early childhood teachers, family support agency workers) who have regular face-to-face contact with parents are in a potentially powerful position to help bring about change and support government initiatives. There is evidence that professionals working in a sensitive partnership with parents in the context of the complexity and stress of families' real lives can positively influence their parenting (Powell 1997, Smith 2005a).

Physical punishment is ineffective and has harmful long-term effects on children, especially if it is severe (Smith 2005b, 2006). It is a clear and preventable health risk for children and there are many less harmful but effective disciplinary strategies. But to what extent do professionals know about the harmful effects and how do they work with families on disciplinary issues?

Murray Straus (2000), a long-time advocate for the elimination of corporal punishment of children in the United States, expressed frustration that American professionals who work with children do not provide a clear message to parents that physical punishment is harmful and should be avoided. Professionals, in Straus's view, have an important role to play in stopping the use of physical punishment. He is critical that professionals in the United States are failing to get behind a no-corporal-punishment educational effort. He says:

To my surprise, most of the child maltreatment scholars and parent educators to whom I have mentioned no-spanking messages on milk cartons, on posters in pediatricians' offices, and a warning notice on birth certificates, they do not favour these steps. When I ask if they favour posters and warning notices about cigarettes, the answer is almost always yes. They typically go on to explain that a "negative approach" will not succeed for spanking because parents must be taught alternatives. (Straus 2000:1111)

Straus's explanation for these attitudes is that acceptance of the use of corporal punishment is embedded in the cultural norms and beliefs of American culture, and that professionals either share these views or are unwilling to challenge them. In the US, paediatricians play an important role in talking to parents about discipline (Sege et al. 1997, Wissow and Roter 1994). However, Wissow and Roter (1994) found that medical practitioners find it very difficult to talk to families about corporal punishment, and that parents are often reluctant to discuss private family discipline difficulties with doctors.

Although there is evidence of a tacit acceptance of physical violence in the home in New Zealand (Colmar Brunton 1995, Maxwell 1995, Ritchie 2002, 2004), there is little research on how professionals view it. An analysis of submissions to the Select Committee on the Crimes Amendment Bill 2006 shows that, of the organisations that made submissions, 88% (185 out of 210) were in favour of a change in legislation, in contrast to individual submissions, of which only 14% (194 out of 1,342) were in favour (Debski et al. 2006). Most of the organisations who made submissions were groups of professionals or advocacy groups. Fifty-nine organisations supported the Bill, including professional organisations such as the Royal Plunket Society, New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services, the Paediatric Society, Barnardos and Presbyterian Social Support. (3) Professionals working with families, therefore, are probably already aware of the negative effects of physical punishment, and are in a potentially powerful position to change attitudes.

In this paper we discuss the findings of a study on people who work with children and families, exploring these professionals' attitudes towards the physical discipline of children and how they advise parents in this area.

THE STUDY

The research reported here is from the first phase of a two-year study exploring disciplinary practices in family settings. Phase 1 took place over a period of 10 months, mostly in 2006, and was completed in 2007. (4) For the duration of the focus groups the proposed repeal of Section 59 of the Crimes Act was high on the national political agenda and there was much media attention surrounding the proposed repeal. This...