The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children

What does the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment do?: The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children was launched in Geneva in 2001. It aims to act as a catalyst to encourage more action and progress towards ending all corporal punishment in all continents. We encourage governments and others to "own" the issue and work actively on it, and support national campaigns with relevant information and assistance EG: briefing and reviewing the work of human rights monitoring bodies carrying out legal research and collecting and analysing other research and information on positive, non-violent discipline working directly with governments considering law reform working with UN agencies, human rights institutions and international and national non-government organisations campaigning to promote reform.

Non-violent childhoods: Guidance on Implementing Prohibition of Corporal Punishment in Domestic Settings This guidance will complement the others in the series by setting out solutions to some of the challenges of legislating and implementing reform in the domestic or private setting: Sometimes policy makers can be hesitant about what is seen as interference in the private family domain What happens ‘at home’ can be hidden, and hard to influence The definition of a home for a child can be very diverse, including fostering and private guardianship, multi-generational and ‘blended’ families.   “Violence is not a private matter that should be left to families to resolve, but a matter of human rights that states have a duty to uphold.” Know Violence in Childhood: A Global Learning Initiative, Ending Violence in Childhood: Global Report 2017

Contents and Questions for Discussion: Section 1: Key Considerations Guiding Implementation of the Ban In domestic settings This introductory section aims to explain the importance of a full and explicit ban on corporal punishment in all settings; it explains the serious negative consequences of the experience of corporal punishment, the positive impact of a domestic ban drawing on evidence of Baltic Sea States and explains how full prohibition can be achieved, including explaining the role of national action plans – providing a case study from Finland.

Section 2: Implementation of the ban adhering to common principles The next section explains how a ban can be proportionately implemented, taking in to account the negative impact of unnecessarily criminalising parents and carers; it therefore explains when use force is legitimate (e.g. in the prevention of harm) and the de minimus principle, and the concept of the ‘best interest of the child’ – it explains how these principles allow the interpretation of law in a proportionate way e.g. not all use of corporal punishment of children should result in the prosecution of the parent or carer, and in the best interests of the child e.g. preventing family separation if appropriate. Section 1 and 2 - Discussion Question: What advice and training, if any, is provided on the proper aim of the ban (as focusing on supportive and educational interventions, rather than punitive) for all those involved in child protection systems, including the police, prosecuting authorities and the courts?

Section 3: Common obstacles and success factors to overcome them This section sets out how negative perceptions of a ban, particularly the unnecessary prosecution of parents and carers, can be challenged, including setting out the key points that should be included in public education campaigns to ensure prohibition is implemented. Case studies from Sweden and Latvia are included. The section also explains the role of training for professionals (referring to the Guidance for Service Providers) and using a range of case studies, and discussing working with faith groups and children themselves, how reporting can be encouraged. Section 4: Appropriate Response to cases of corporal punishment Section 4 explores the proportionate response to incidents – including developing child centred services that can provide early intervention or preventative support, and how to set thresholds to identify serious cases that require intervention

Section 3 and 4 – Discussion Questions: What support and positive interventions are available as a first response to identified cases of corporal punishment? Can you share any positive outcomes/evaluations of these interventions? Setting thresholds – what is the process for deciding when the child’s best interests are no longer served in the home, and alternative care is required? What are the sanctions/responses to the continued use of corporal punishment by parents and other carers? How are identified cases of corporal punishment monitored and followed up?

Other feedback: Any critical issues missing? Areas that need more clarification? Further case studies? Any other questions?