Corporal Punishment

Posted by Milly Jons on December 12th, 2019

Corporal punishment refers to the use of physical means such as caning or whipping to punish any behavior deviating from set standards or rules in the society. The use of corporal punishment as a means of enforcing discipline and obedience dates back to ancient civilizations such as the Roman Empire or even Vikings. It is, therefore, not surprising that elements of the practice still exist in various parts of the world. The effectiveness of its use in enforcing discipline of children or students in institutional affiliations is a sensitive topic that requires sober objectiveness. In this regard, we can consider the case of Kamari Charlton, who was sentenced to caning in Singapore. The approach used involves comparing possible pros and cons to decide whether the application of corporal punishment is valid.

Corporal punishment is a common method of enforcing discipline or executing a punishment. The idea is that physical pain serves to invoke fear in the brain of the subject, hence, prevent the future undesired behavior. Use of physical means as a way of enforcing punishment has been in existence for centuries. It, therefore, makes sense to tolerate such a practice since it has worked before. In addition, corporal punishment ensures orderliness and compliance to the rules of society. It is, therefore, a form of tolerable law enforcement.

Corporal punishment is effective and quick. Considering the legal process of conflict resolution or punishment for infringement of laws, corporal punishment is an ideal compromise as it saves time and money, therefore, allowing both parties to resume their activities. Unlike imprisonment, which demands a great deal of financing, corporal punishment avoids the extra costs involved in correctional facilities. Based on these features and relating to Kamari Charlton’s case, perhaps it is advisable for the American government to allow the enforcement of the ruling by Singapore.

Corporal punishment has the effect of encouraging violence in society. The use of physical pain triggers fears on the subject. However, physical pain has a negative psychological effect on encouraging violent behavior. Individuals who are subjected to physical pain are more likely to be violent as compared to those who are not. Corporal punishment lowers the self-esteem of the subject. The overall effect of low self-esteem is unpredictable behavior. It may lead to an individual being less productive in society. When young individuals are subjected to corporal punishment such as in educational establishments, it may lead higher cases of dropping out of school. Corporal punishment is, therefore, a crude way of correcting wrong behavior.

Corporal punishment paves the way for child abuse in society. The mental state of the person executing the punishment is unknown. For example, an abusive parent could use it as an excuse to beat up his/her child. The same case applies to teachers in schools. The use of corporal punishment triggers hostile attitude towards the subject.

Evidently, corporal punishment has in overall negative effect. In the case of Kamari Charlton, the American government should intervene in order to protect its citizen. The American Constitution does not tolerate corporal punishment hence the same should not be applicable on Charlton. The validity of the investigation leading to the decision of the court is unknown. By allowing execution of the ruling, the government approves to use of corporal punishment. Regardless of the diplomatic constraints surrounding Kamari Charlton’s case, the government should defend the rights and freedoms of its citizens as stipulated by the American Constitution. The ruling against Charlton is unnecessary considering the existence of alternative methods such fining or even deportation. In conclusion, it is valid to argue that the American government should intervene in Charlton’s case.

The essay was written by the professional writer from quote checker https://plagiarismsearch.com/quote-checker-at-plagiarismsearch.html - Milly Jones.