Prohibition of corporal punishment and alternative justifications for the lawful use of force against children in Australia

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL ISSUES Australian Journal of Social Issues Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1002/ajs4.299
Elizabeth Dallaston
{"title":"Prohibition of corporal punishment and alternative justifications for the lawful use of force against children in Australia","authors":"Elizabeth Dallaston","doi":"10.1002/ajs4.299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The prohibition of corporal punishment in Australia will require reform of the criminal law of assault to abolish defences in each Australian state and territory that permit the use of force on children for the purpose of punishment. This paper highlights the anomaly of those defences by undertaking a comparative doctrinal analysis with other Australian criminal law principles that excuse the use of force by parents and caregivers, including force for the purpose of management and control, and physical contact that is accepted by the community as part of everyday life. This comparison highlights the persistence in the corporal punishment defences of outdated notions of parental rights and authority over children, in contrast to broader trends in the law toward recognising that parents exercise responsibilities in the best interests of their children. In addition, this analysis confirms that abolition of Australian defences for corporal punishment will not criminalise parents and caregivers using force for purposes other than punishment.</p>","PeriodicalId":46787,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajs4.299","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajs4.299","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The prohibition of corporal punishment in Australia will require reform of the criminal law of assault to abolish defences in each Australian state and territory that permit the use of force on children for the purpose of punishment. This paper highlights the anomaly of those defences by undertaking a comparative doctrinal analysis with other Australian criminal law principles that excuse the use of force by parents and caregivers, including force for the purpose of management and control, and physical contact that is accepted by the community as part of everyday life. This comparison highlights the persistence in the corporal punishment defences of outdated notions of parental rights and authority over children, in contrast to broader trends in the law toward recognising that parents exercise responsibilities in the best interests of their children. In addition, this analysis confirms that abolition of Australian defences for corporal punishment will not criminalise parents and caregivers using force for purposes other than punishment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
澳大利亚禁止体罚和对儿童合法使用武力的其他理由
要在澳大利亚禁止体罚,就必须改革关于攻击行为的刑法,废除澳大利亚各州和地区允许为惩罚目的对儿童使用武力的辩护理由。本文通过与澳大利亚刑法中允许父母和看护人使用武力的其他原则(包括以管理和控制为目的的武力,以及被社区接受为日常生活一部分的身体接触)进行理论上的比较分析,强调了这些辩护理由的反常之处。这一比较凸显了体罚辩护中父母对子女的权利和权威这一过时观念的顽固性,而与此形成鲜明对比的是,法律的大趋势是承认父母为子女的最大利益行使责任。此外,本分析证实,废除澳大利亚的体罚辩护理由不会将父母和照料者出于惩罚以外的目的使用武力定为刑事犯罪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.00%
发文量
45
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Implementing the HEALing Matters program in residential out-of-home care: Evaluation of carers' commitment to promoting healthy lifestyle behaviours Work incentives in Australia: The distribution of effective marginal tax rates for working‐age Australians in 2023 Cryptocurrencies: Who is vulnerable and what are the vulnerabilities? Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1