The Canadian Spanking Laws

The Supreme Court of Canada Ruling:
The issue before the Supreme Court of Canada was whether section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada was unconstitutional. On January 30, 2004, in a 6-3 judgment, the Supreme Court released its decision in reference to s. 43 of the Criminal Code (Corporal Punishment) in the case of the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. The Attorney General of Canada, which concerned the use of force by parents and teachers to correct a child. The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the so-called "spanking law", s. 43 of the Criminal Code, which was first enacted by the federal government more than a century ago in 1892. However, its decision imposed new legal boundaries on the use of "reasonable" physical force to discipline children. Reasonable Force versus Unreasonable Force:
The Court's ruling at least sets out some guidelines as to "reasonable" acts versus acts that are considered unacceptable or harmful to children. This ruling, thus, provides guidelines for parents and for teachers concerning the use of corporal punishment by classifying actions as reasonable or not reasonable. For Parents:
Not reasonable force means that:

(a) Corporal punishment for children under the age of two is not reasonable and is harmful to them as it has no corrective value given the limits of their cognitive development;

(b) Corporal punishment of teenagers is not reasonable and is harmful because it can induce aggressive or antisocial behaviors;

(c) It is not reasonable to use implements or objects such as belts, straps, or rulers, etc., due to the physical and emotional harm the use of such objects cause;

(d) It is not reasonable to strike a child on their face or head due to the harm these physical acts can cause; and,

(e) Corporal punishment must not be inhumane or degrading or harmful and there must be no lasting bodily harm.
Reasonable force means that;

(a) A parent can only use "minor corrective force of a transient and trifling nature",

(b) Corporal punishment must be for "educational" or "corrective" purposes and not be motivated by anger, frustration, or abusiveness; and, Not For Hate Speech Or religion

(c) Inflicting corporal punishment is specifically forbidden.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• canada
• pagan
• satanic

[PhDeverit]

Just a handful of those helping to raise awareness of why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea:

American Academy of Pediatrics,

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,

Center For Effective Discipline,

Churches' Network For Non-Violence,

Nobel Peace Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu,

Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps,

Global Initiative To End All Corporal Punishment of Children,

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

[PaganTears2010]

@PhDeverit In Canada Parents Can Go To Jail For All Corporal Punishment of Children, It Was Defended By Children Services Of Canada

[PaganTears2010]

GodGunsGutsGloryVer3

Reply to your comment on: My Message to Youtube

Well, I spank my kids. The day comes when I can't is the day revolution comes.

Because like it or not, AMERICA was founded on Christian morals and embraced them until just recently.

Nothing good will come from liberals or homosexuals who want to decide who gets to have children and how to raise them.

[PaganTears2010]

The Last Part Is No Teacher Is Aloud To touch a child in Canada

[satanicwitch969]

@SweetDoug I Agree With You That The C.A,S Should Do something About The Crack Houses And Wemen Who Let There Children Live In That Kind Of Enviroment ...But I Dont Think Its Good To Slap Any Child In The Face It Sends A Message That Abuse Is Good And It Then Becomes There Way Of Life When The Said Child Grows Up And Has His Or Her Own Children And Thats Not Good For Anyone

[SweetDoug]

Why do the cops do nothing about the crack house down the street that I complain about or the CAS about the women and their children in it, but if the neighbour sees my sister slap her mouth, bitchy 10 year in the face for saucing, they send 2 goddamn cruisers and the CAS!??!

We need to take back our society from the leftist filth liberal progressives.

•∆•

V-V

[PhDeverit]

Using the same method of selective scripture reading, one could also cite the Bible as an authority for slavery, adultery, polygamy, incest, suppression of women, executing people who eat pork, and infanticide. Would Jesus ever hit a child? NEVER!" The Rev. Thomas E. Sagendorf, United Methodist Clergy

[PhDeverit]

People used to think it was necessary to "spank" adult members of the community, military trainees, and prisoners. In some countries they still do. In our country, it is considered sexual battery if a person over the age of 18 is "spanked", but only if over the age of 18.

[PhDeverit]

Please see above post for those who don't believe Jesus would condone child bottom-slapping.

[PhDeverit]

Most compelling of all reasons to abandon this worst of all bad habits is the fact that buttock-battering can be unintentional sexual abuse for some children. There is an abundance of educational resources, testimony, documentation, etc available on the subject that can easily be found by doing a little research with the recommended reads-visit the website of Parents and Teachers Against Violence in Education.

[PhDeverit]

In 26 countries, child corporal punishment is prohibited by law (with more in process). In fact, the US was the only UN member that did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

[PhDeverit]

Child buttock-battering vs. DISCIPLINE:

Child buttock-battering for the purpose of gaining compliance is nothing more than an inherited bad habit.

Its a good idea for people to take a look at what they are doing, and learn how to DISCIPLINE instead of hit.

Here are some good, quick reads recommended by professionals:

Plain Talk About Spanking

by Jordan Riak,

The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children

by Tom Johnson,

NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say

by Lesli Taylor M.D. and Adah Maurer Ph.D.