家庭求助：一冲动生气打了孩子，被起诉了，不能回家了，怎么办?

S-LED · Sep 23rd, 2009, 22:05

lz用了工具，出手又重当然不可以了。

Supreme Court says parents can spank -- within limits

http://www.canadianchristianity.com/...es/040205spank

By Frank Stirk

TWO Pro-family allies in the legal battle to defend the right of parents to spank their children appear to interpret differently the Supreme Court of Canada's decision last month to uphold Section 43 of the Criminal Code.

While Focus on the Family Canada hailed the ruling as "protecting families and parents from being labelled as criminals," the Canada Family Action Coalition (CFAC) denounced it as "an invasion of parenting."

In a 6-3 judgment handed down last Friday, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal of the Toronto-based Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth, and the Law (CFCYL) to strike down Section 43, which allows parents and teachers to exert "reasonable force" in disciplining a child. It argued the law is discriminatory, infringes the right of children to security of the person, and leaves children vulnerable to cruel and unusual punishment.

On the contrary, the justices concluded that the best interests of children would not be served by making criminals out parents and teachers who choose to administer a spanking in order to correct unruly behaviour.

"While children need a safe environment, they also depend on [them] for guidance and discipline," wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin for the majority. Eliminating Section 43 altogether, she stated, raised the spectre of parents being separated from their children "with its attendant rupture of the family setting."

But the justices also noted that court decisions based on Section 43 have shown little consistency in recent years -- and they attempted to prevent that in future by setting down some guidelines on when a spanking was permissible. As a result, it is now forbidden to spank children under two (because they are said to be too young to learn a lesson from the punishment meted out) and the only permissible instrument that can be used to deliver a spanking is an open hand.

Said McLachlin, Section 43 can only be used as a legal defence against an assault charge in cases of "sober, reasoned uses of force that address the actual behaviour of the child and are designed to restrain, control or express some symbolic disapproval of his or her behaviour. Degrading, inhuman or harmful conduct is not protected."

To CFAC president Dr. Charles McVety, these limitations are an "invasion of parenting [that] is not only outrageous, it is also severely flawed." In a news release, the Alberta-based pro-family group accused the Supreme Court of ignoring the advice of "many" child-rearing experts never to use the hand for corrective discipline. "The hand should be reserved for loving and caring," it states. "The court has now made criminals of those who obey such logical instructions."

The CFAC also dismissed as "outlandish" the ban on spanking children younger than two. "Every parent knows that a 23-month-old child has incredible learning ability," it said.

Focus Canada spokesperson Michael Martens, on the other hand, commended the Supreme Court for affirming the importance of parenting. "I think what they've done here is protected parents so that they will not be criminalized in a basic function of raising children," he said on CBC-TV's The National.

And unlike McVety, Martens did not foresee the new limitations on spanking included in the decision causing problems for parents. "The stipulations given by the Supreme Court," he said, "will help judges in the future to interpret whether or not something is abuse, and we do believe they are guidelines."

Some anti-spanking advocates took the opposite tack. CFCYL lawyer Cheryl Milne told Canadian Press that although they were "obviously disappointed" that Section 43 had not been abolished, the new guidelines still made it "a better judgment than the courts below, so we have gained some ground."

Yet to Dundas, Ontario, social worker and child development expert Gary Direnfeld, there is no such silver lining. "This is a sad day for Canadian children," he wrote. "Spanking doesn't teach children to internalize rules. It only teaches them to avoid being caught and worse, it models the very behaviour we may want them to stop."

But faith-based pro-family groups were not the only ones to stand before the Supreme Court in defence of Section 43. Canada's teachers did as well -- and not because they endorse corporal punishment.

"Sometimes we have to physically put a student on a bus at the end of a field trip," Manitoba Teachers' Society president Brian Ardern told the Winnipeg Sun. "Our concern was if you take Section 43 away, every time a student is physically touched [a teacher] could face criminal prosecution."

Many news media outlets also welcomed the ruling. "The judgment," said the National Post, "is a well-deserved blow to the busybodies who would define all spanking as assault, and who brought this case to court with over $100,000 in federal help" from the controversial Court Challenges Program.

The Globe and Mail stated: "Canadian parents, most of whom abhor the very idea of striking their own children and try to avoid doing so, will be relieved to learn that they still can use minor corrective force within the family without being fined or imprisoned."

"This is as it should be," said the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix. "What was required is a balance, which the Court appears to have achieved."

But anti-spanking advocates are not giving up. "Public opinion changes as we gain evidence and knowledge about these things," Peter Dudding with the Child Welfare League of Canada told the Toronto Star, "so I think the battleground will now shift to our political leaders and doing what is right on behalf of children."

Derek Rogusky, Focus Canada's vice-president of family policy, is equally aware that this fight over spanking will not go away anytime soon. "We have to be ready, to be watchful. We have to be prepared to go to court again," he told the Calgary Sun.

"What has just happened is a little bit of a theoretical exercise. For today, it is a victory."

Sep 23rd, 2009, 22:05	#1
S-LED Senior Member 注册日期: Dec 2005 帖子: 838	lz用了工具，出手又重当然不可以了。 Supreme Court says parents can spank -- within limits http://www.canadianchristianity.com/...es/040205spank By Frank Stirk TWO Pro-family allies in the legal battle to defend the right of parents to spank their children appear to interpret differently the Supreme Court of Canada's decision last month to uphold Section 43 of the Criminal Code. While Focus on the Family Canada hailed the ruling as "protecting families and parents from being labelled as criminals," the Canada Family Action Coalition (CFAC) denounced it as "an invasion of parenting." In a 6-3 judgment handed down last Friday, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal of the Toronto-based Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth, and the Law (CFCYL) to strike down Section 43, which allows parents and teachers to exert "reasonable force" in disciplining a child. It argued the law is discriminatory, infringes the right of children to security of the person, and leaves children vulnerable to cruel and unusual punishment. On the contrary, the justices concluded that the best interests of children would not be served by making criminals out parents and teachers who choose to administer a spanking in order to correct unruly behaviour. "While children need a safe environment, they also depend on [them] for guidance and discipline," wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin for the majority. Eliminating Section 43 altogether, she stated, raised the spectre of parents being separated from their children "with its attendant rupture of the family setting." But the justices also noted that court decisions based on Section 43 have shown little consistency in recent years -- and they attempted to prevent that in future by setting down some guidelines on when a spanking was permissible. As a result, it is now forbidden to spank children under two (because they are said to be too young to learn a lesson from the punishment meted out) and the only permissible instrument that can be used to deliver a spanking is an open hand. Said McLachlin, Section 43 can only be used as a legal defence against an assault charge in cases of "sober, reasoned uses of force that address the actual behaviour of the child and are designed to restrain, control or express some symbolic disapproval of his or her behaviour. Degrading, inhuman or harmful conduct is not protected." To CFAC president Dr. Charles McVety, these limitations are an "invasion of parenting [that] is not only outrageous, it is also severely flawed." In a news release, the Alberta-based pro-family group accused the Supreme Court of ignoring the advice of "many" child-rearing experts never to use the hand for corrective discipline. "The hand should be reserved for loving and caring," it states. "The court has now made criminals of those who obey such logical instructions." The CFAC also dismissed as "outlandish" the ban on spanking children younger than two. "Every parent knows that a 23-month-old child has incredible learning ability," it said. Focus Canada spokesperson Michael Martens, on the other hand, commended the Supreme Court for affirming the importance of parenting. "I think what they've done here is protected parents so that they will not be criminalized in a basic function of raising children," he said on CBC-TV's The National. And unlike McVety, Martens did not foresee the new limitations on spanking included in the decision causing problems for parents. "The stipulations given by the Supreme Court," he said, "will help judges in the future to interpret whether or not something is abuse, and we do believe they are guidelines." Some anti-spanking advocates took the opposite tack. CFCYL lawyer Cheryl Milne told Canadian Press that although they were "obviously disappointed" that Section 43 had not been abolished, the new guidelines still made it "a better judgment than the courts below, so we have gained some ground." Yet to Dundas, Ontario, social worker and child development expert Gary Direnfeld, there is no such silver lining. "This is a sad day for Canadian children," he wrote. "Spanking doesn't teach children to internalize rules. It only teaches them to avoid being caught and worse, it models the very behaviour we may want them to stop." But faith-based pro-family groups were not the only ones to stand before the Supreme Court in defence of Section 43. Canada's teachers did as well -- and not because they endorse corporal punishment. "Sometimes we have to physically put a student on a bus at the end of a field trip," Manitoba Teachers' Society president Brian Ardern told the Winnipeg Sun. "Our concern was if you take Section 43 away, every time a student is physically touched [a teacher] could face criminal prosecution." Many news media outlets also welcomed the ruling. "The judgment," said the National Post, "is a well-deserved blow to the busybodies who would define all spanking as assault, and who brought this case to court with over $100,000 in federal help" from the controversial Court Challenges Program. The Globe and Mail stated: "Canadian parents, most of whom abhor the very idea of striking their own children and try to avoid doing so, will be relieved to learn that they still can use minor corrective force within the family without being fined or imprisoned." "This is as it should be," said the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix. "What was required is a balance, which the Court appears to have achieved." But anti-spanking advocates are not giving up. "Public opinion changes as we gain evidence and knowledge about these things," Peter Dudding with the Child Welfare League of Canada told the Toronto Star, "so I think the battleground will now shift to our political leaders and doing what is right on behalf of children." Derek Rogusky, Focus Canada's vice-president of family policy, is equally aware that this fight over spanking will not go away anytime soon. "We have to be ready, to be watchful. We have to be prepared to go to court again," he told the Calgary Sun. "What has just happened is a little bit of a theoretical exercise. For today, it is a victory."
S-LED Senior Member 注册日期: Dec 2005 帖子: 838