21. Corporal Punishment
Back to Gentle Child Training
It might, perhaps, be thought that, in a book which professes to show how an efficient government can be established and maintained by 'gentle measures', the subject of physical punishment could have no place. It seems important, however, that there should be here introduced a brief though distinct presentation of the light in which, in a philosophical point of view, this instrumentality is to be regarded.
'The Teachings of Scripture'.
The resort to physical punishment in the training of children seems to be spoken of in many passages contained in the Scriptures as of fundamental necessity. But there can be no doubt that the word 'rod', as used in those passages, is used simply as the emblem of parental authority. This is in accordance with the ordinary custom of Hebrew writers in those days—and with the idiom of their language, by which a single visible or tangible object was employed as the representative or expression of a general idea—as, for example, the sword is used as the emblem of magisterial authority; and the sun and the rain, which are spoken of as being sent with their genial and fertilizing power upon the evil and the good, denote not specially and exclusively those agencies—but all the beneficent influences of nature which they are employed to represent. The injunctions, therefore, of Solomon in respect to the use of the rod are undoubtedly to be understood as simply enjoining upon parents the necessity of bringing up their children 'in complete subjection' to their authority. No one can imagine, that he could wish the rod to be used when complete subjection to the parental authority could be secured by more gentle means. And how this is to be done it is the object precisely of this book to show.
In this sense, therefore—and it is undoubtedly the true sense—namely, that children must be 'governed by the authority of the parent', the passages in question express a great and most essential truth. It is sometimes said that children must be governed by reason—and this is true—but it is the reason of their parents—and not their own, which must hold the control. If children were endowed with the capacity of seeing what is best for them—and with sufficient self-control to pursue what is best against the counter-influences of their animal instincts and propensities, there would be no necessity that the period of subjection to parental authority should be extended over so many years. But so long as their powers are yet too immature to be safely relied upon, they must, of necessity, be subject to the parental will; and the sooner and the more perfectly they are made to understand this—and to yield a willing submission to the necessity, the better it will be, not only for their parents—but also for themselves.
The parental authority must, therefore, be established—by gentle means, if possible—but it must by all means be established—and be firmly maintained. If you cannot govern your child without physical punishment, it is better to resort to it than not to govern him at all. Taking a wide view of the field, I think there may be several cases in which a resort to the infliction of physical pain as the only available means of establishing authority, may be the only alternative. There are three cases of this kind that are to be specially considered.
'Possible cases in which it is the only alternative. Savages'.
1. In savage or half-civilized life—and even, perhaps, in so crude a state of society as must have existed in some parts of Judea when the Proverbs of Solomon were written, it is conceivable that many parents, owing to their own ignorance—and primitive condition, would have no other means at their command for establishing their authority over their children, than scoldings and blows. It must be so among savages. And it is certainly better, if the mother knows no other way of inducing her boy to keep within her sight, that she should whip him when he runs away, than that he should be bitten by serpents or devoured by bears. She 'must' establish her authority in some way—and if this is the best that she is capable of pursuing, she must use it.
'Teachers whose Tasks surpass their Skill'.
2. A teacher, in entering upon the charge of a large school of boys made unruly by previous mismanagement, may, perhaps, possibly find himself unable to establish submission to his authority without this resource. It is true that if it is so, it is due, in a certain sense, to lack of skill on the teacher's part; for there are men—and women too, who will take any company of boys that you can give them—and, by a certain skill, or tact, or knowledge of human nature, or other qualities which seem sometimes to other people almost magical—will have them all completely under subjection in a week—and that without violence, without scolding, almost without even a frown. The time may, perhaps, come when every teacher, to be considered qualified for his work, must possess this skill. Indeed, the world is evidently making great and rapid progress in this direction. The methods of instruction and the modes by which the teacher gains and holds his influence over his pupils, have been wonderfully improved in recent times, so that where there was one teacher, fifty years ago, who was really beloved by his pupils, we have fifty now. In Dr. Johnson's time, which was about a hundred and fifty years ago, it would seem that there was no other mode, but that of violent coercion recognized as worthy to be relied upon in imparting instruction, for he said that he knew of no way by which Latin could be taught to boys in his day but "by having it flogged into them."
From such a state of things to that which prevails at the present day there has been an astonishing change. And now, whether a teacher is able to manage an average school of boys without physical force is simply a question of tact, knowledge of the right principles—and skill in applying them on his part. It is, perhaps, yet too soon to expect that all teachers can possess, or can acquire, these qualifications to such a degree as to make it safe to forbid the infliction of bodily pain in any case—but the time for it is rapidly approaching—and in some parts of the country it has, perhaps, already arrived. Until that time comes, every teacher who finds himself under the necessity of beating a boy's body in order to attain certain moral or intellectual ends, ought to understand that the reason is the incompleteness of his understanding and skill in dealing directly with the child's mind; though for this incompleteness he may not himself be personally at all to blame.
'Children spoiled by Neglect and Mismanagement'.
3. I am even willing to admit that one or more boys in a family may reach such a condition of rudeness and insubordination, in consequence of neglect or mismanagement on the part of their parents in their early years—and the present clumsiness and incapacity of the father in dealing with the susceptibilities and impulses of the human soul—that the question will lie between keeping them within some kind of subordination by bodily punishment, or not controlling them at all. If a father has been so engrossed in his business that he has neglected his children, has never established any common bond of sympathy between himself and them, has taken no interest in their enjoyments, nor brought them by moral means to an habitual subjection to his will; and if their mother is a weak, irresolute woman, occupying herself with the pursuits and pleasures of fashionable society—and has mis-managed the children; the children will, of course, in general, grow up troublesome, turbulent, and ungovernable. And when, with advancing maturity, their increasing strength and vigor makes this turbulence and disorder intolerable in the house—and there is, as of course there usually will be in such a case, no proper knowledge and skill in the management of the young on the part of either parent to remedy the evil by gentle measures—the only alternative in many cases may be either a resort to violent punishment, or the sending away of the unmanageable subjects to school. The latter part of the alternative is the best—and, fortunately, it is the one generally adopted. But where it cannot be adopted, it is certainly better that the boys should be governed by the rod, than to grow up under no government at all.
'Gentle Measures effectual where Rightfully and Faithfully employed'.
However it may be with respect to the exceptional cases above enumerated—and perhaps some others, there can, I think, be no doubt that parents who should train their children from the beginning on the principles explained in this volume—and upon others analogous to them, would never, in any case, have to strike a blow. They would accomplish the end enjoined by the precepts of Solomon, namely, the complete subjection of their children to their authority, by improved methods not known in his day, or, at least, not so fully developed that they could then be relied upon. They who imagine that parents are bound to use the rod as the instrumentality, because the Scriptures speak of the rod as the means of establishing parental authority best known in those days, instead of employing the more effective methods which the progress of improvement has developed and made available at the present day, ought, in order to be consistent, to insist on the retention of the harp in religious worship, because David enjoins it upon believers to "praise the Lord with harp:" to "sing unto him with psaltery—and an instrument of ten strings." The truth is, that what we are to look at in such injunctions is the end that is to be attained, which is, in this last case, the impressive and reverential exaltation of Almighty God in our minds by the acts of public worship; and if, with the improvements in musical instruments which have been made in modern times, we can do this more satisfactorily by employing in the place of a psaltery or a harp of ten strings an organ of ten or a hundred stops, we are bound to make the substitution. In a word, we must look at the end and not at the means, remembering that in questions of Scripture interpretation the "letter kills, the spirit makes alive."
'Protracted Contests with Obstinacy'.
It seems to me, though I am aware that many excellent people think differently, that it is never wise for the parent to allow himself to be drawn into a contest with a child, in attempting to compel him to do something that from ill-temper or obstinacy he refuses to do. If the attempt is successful—and the child yields under a moderate severity of coercion, it is all very well. But there is something mysterious and unaccountable in the strength of the obstinacy sometimes manifested in such cases—and the degree of endurance which it will often inspire, even in children of the most tender age. We observe the same inexplicable fixedness sometimes in the lower animals—in the horse, for example; which is the more unaccountable from the fact that we cannot suppose, in his case, that peculiar combination of intelligence and ill-temper, which we generally consider the sustaining power of the protracted obstinacy on the part of the child. The degree of persistence which is manifested by children in contests of this kind is something astonishing—and cannot easily be explained by any of the ordinary theories in respect to the influence of motives on the human mind. A state of cerebral excitement and exaltation is not unfrequently produced which seems akin to insanity—and instances have been known in which a child has allowed itself to be beaten to death, rather than yield obedience to a very simple command. And in vast numbers of instances, the parent, after a protracted contest, gives up in despair, and is compelled to invent some plausible pretext for bringing it to an end.
Indeed, when we reflect upon the subject, we see what a difficult task we undertake in such contests—it being nothing less than that of 'forcing the formation of a volition' in a human mind. We can easily control the bodily movements and actions of another person by means of an external coercion that we can apply—and we have various indirect means of 'inducing' volitions; but in these contests we seem to come up squarely to the work of attempting, by outward force, to compel the 'forming of a volition' in the mind; and it is not surprising that this should, at least sometimes, prove a very difficult undertaking.
'No Necessity for these Contests'.
There seems to be no necessity that a parent or teacher should ever become involved in struggles of this kind in maintaining his authority. The way to avoid them, as it seems to me, is, when a child refuses out of obstinacy to do what is required of him, to impose the proper punishment or penalty for the refusal—and let that close the transaction. Do not attempt to enforce his compliance by continuing the punishment until he yields. A child, for example, going out to play, wishes for his blue cap. His mother chooses that he shall wear his gray one. She hangs the blue cap up in its place—and gives him the gray one. He declares that he will not wear it—and throws it down upon the floor. The temptation now is for the mother, indignant, to punish him—and then to order him to take up the cap which he had thrown down—and to feel that it is her duty, in case he refuses, to persist in the punishment until she conquers his will—and compels him to take it up and put it upon his head.
But instead of this, a safer and a better course, it seems to me, is to avoid a contest altogether by considering the offense complete—and the transaction on his part finished by the single act of rebellion against her authority. She may take the cap up from the floor herself and put it in its place—and then simply consider what punishment is proper for the wrong already done. Perhaps she forbids the boy to go out at all. Perhaps she reserves the punishment—and sends him to bed an hour earlier that night. The age of the boy, or some other circumstances connected with the case, may be such as to demand a severer treatment still. At any rate, she limits the transaction to the single act of disobedience and rebellion already committed, without giving an opportunity for a repetition of it by renewing the command—and inflicts for it the proper punishment—and that is the end of the affair.
And so a boy in reciting a lesson will not repeat certain words after his mother. She enters into no controversy with him—but shuts the book and puts it away. He, knowing his mother's usual mode of management in such cases—and being sure that some penalty, privation, or punishment will sooner or later follow, relents—and tells his mother that he will say the words if she will try him again.
"No, my son," she should reply, "the opportunity is past. You should have done your duty at the right time. You have disobeyed me—and I must take time to consider what to do."
If, at the proper time, in such a case, when all the excitement of the affair is over, a penalty or punishment apportioned to the fault, or some other appropriate measures in relation to it, are 'certain to come'—and if this method is always pursued in a calm and quiet manner but with inflexible firmness in act—the spirit of rebellion will be much more effectually subdued, than by any protracted struggles at the time, though ending in victory however complete.
But all this is a digression, though it seemed proper to allude to the subject of these contests here, since it is on these occasions, perhaps, that parents are most frequently led, or, as they think, irresistibly impelled, to the infliction of bodily punishments as the last resort, when they would, in general, be strongly inclined to avoid them.
'The Infliction of Pain sometimes the speediest Remedy'.
There are, moreover, some cases, perhaps, in the ordinary exigencies of domestic life, as the world goes, when some personal infliction is the 'shortest' way of disposing of a case of discipline—and may appear, for the time being, to be the most effectual. A slap is very quickly given—and a mother may often think that she has not time for a more gentle mode of managing the case, even though she may admit that if she had the time at her command, the gentle mode would be the best. And it is, indeed, doubtless true, that the principles of management advocated in this work are such as require that the parents should devote some time and attention—and, still more essentially, some 'heart' to the work. And those who do not consider the welfare and happiness of their children in future life—and their own happiness in connection with them as they advance towards their declining years, as of sufficient importance to call for the bestowment of this time and attention—will doubtless often resort to more speedy methods in their discipline than those here recommended.
'The Sting that it leaves behind'.
Indeed, the great objection, after all, to the occasional resort to the infliction of bodily pain in extreme cases is, as it seems to me, the sting which it leaves behind; not that, which it leaves in the heart of the child who may suffer it—for that soon passes away—but in the heart of the parent who inflicts it. The one is, or may be, very evanescent; the other may very long remain; and what is worse, the anguish of it may be revived and made very poignant in future years.
This consideration makes it specially imperative on every parent never, for any cause, to inflict punishment by violence, when himself under the influence of any irritation or anger awakened by the offense. For though the anger which the fault of the child naturally awakens in you, carries you through the act of punishing well enough, it soon afterwards passes away, while the memory of it remains—and in after years, like any other sin, it may come back to exact a painful retribution. When the little loved one who now puts you out of patience with her heedlessness, her inconsiderateness, and, perhaps, by worse faults and failings—all, however, faults which may very possibly, in part or in whole, be the result of the immature and undeveloped condition of her mental or bodily powers—falls sick and dies—and you follow her as she is borne away—and with a bursting heart see her laid in her little grave, it will be a great comfort to you then to reflect that you did all in your power, by means of the gentlest measures at your command, to train her to truth and duty, that you never lost patience with her—and that she never felt from your hand anything but gentle assistance or a loving caress.
And your boy—now so ardent and impulsive—and often, perhaps, noisy, troublesome, and crude, from the exuberant action of his growing powers—when these powers shall have received their full development—and he has passed from your control to his place in the world as a man—and he comes back from time to time to the maternal home in grateful remembrance of his obligations to his mother, bringing with him tokens of his affection and love—you will think with pain, of the occasions when you subjected him to the torture of the rod under the impulse of irritation or anger—or to accomplish the ends of discipline which might have been attained in other ways. Time, as you then look back over the long interval of years which have elapsed, will greatly soften the recollection of the fault—but it will greatly aggravate that of the pain which was made the retribution of it. You will say to yourself, it is true, "I did it for the best. If I had not done it, my son would perhaps not be what he is." He, if he remembers the transaction, will doubtless say so too; but there will be none the less for both a certain sting in the recollection, and you will wish that the same end could have been accomplished by gentler means.
The substance of it is that children must, at all events, be governed. The proper authority over them 'must be' maintained; but it is a great deal better to secure this end by gentle measures, if the parents have, or can acquire the skill to employ them.
Back to Gentle Child Training