Child Disciplinary Practices versus Child Rights in Zimbabwe: Viewed through Social Work Lenses

Q3 Social Sciences Qualitative Sociology Review Pub Date : 2022-01-31 DOI:10.18778/1733-8077.18.1.06
Tapiwa Simango, Itai Mafa
{"title":"Child Disciplinary Practices versus Child Rights in Zimbabwe: Viewed through Social Work Lenses","authors":"Tapiwa Simango, Itai Mafa","doi":"10.18778/1733-8077.18.1.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although parents are a vital cog in instilling and maintaining child discipline, very little information exists about the methods they employ. Using a qualitative approach, this paper explored the methods used by parents in Zimbabwe—an African context—to discipline children, elucidating their implications on children’s rights. The findings show that parents in Zimbabwe use both violent and non-violent disciplinary methods such as verbal reprimand, beating, and spanking, which, at times, violates children’s rights in the process. The use of non-violent means has also depicted a violation of children’s rights through deprivation of food, denial of playtime and shelter. Evident from the findings was, again, the existence of multiple-layered contestations on child discipline within the socio-cultural discourse—the most popularized being the debate on corporal punishment versus child rights violations. Through social work lenses, the paper provides a basis to dispel an anachronistic thought, which rationalizes the instrumentalization of punishment to achieve child discipline, underscoring the need for child rights-oriented discipline.","PeriodicalId":53708,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Sociology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.18.1.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although parents are a vital cog in instilling and maintaining child discipline, very little information exists about the methods they employ. Using a qualitative approach, this paper explored the methods used by parents in Zimbabwe—an African context—to discipline children, elucidating their implications on children’s rights. The findings show that parents in Zimbabwe use both violent and non-violent disciplinary methods such as verbal reprimand, beating, and spanking, which, at times, violates children’s rights in the process. The use of non-violent means has also depicted a violation of children’s rights through deprivation of food, denial of playtime and shelter. Evident from the findings was, again, the existence of multiple-layered contestations on child discipline within the socio-cultural discourse—the most popularized being the debate on corporal punishment versus child rights violations. Through social work lenses, the paper provides a basis to dispel an anachronistic thought, which rationalizes the instrumentalization of punishment to achieve child discipline, underscoring the need for child rights-oriented discipline.
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
津巴布韦的儿童纪律实践与儿童权利:从社会工作的角度看
虽然父母在灌输和维持孩子的纪律方面起着至关重要的作用,但关于他们使用的方法的信息却很少。本文采用定性方法,探讨了非洲国家津巴布韦的父母管教孩子的方法,阐明了这些方法对儿童权利的影响。调查结果显示,津巴布韦的父母使用暴力和非暴力的管教方法,如口头训斥、殴打和打屁股,这些方法有时会侵犯儿童的权利。非暴力手段的使用还通过剥夺食物、剥夺游戏时间和住所来侵犯儿童的权利。从调查结果中可以明显看出,在社会文化话语中存在着关于儿童纪律的多层次争论——最普遍的是关于体罚与侵犯儿童权利的争论。通过社会工作的视角,本文为消除一种过时的思想提供了基础,这种思想将惩罚的工具化合理化以实现儿童纪律,强调了以儿童权利为导向的纪律的必要性。
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
Qualitative Sociology Review
Qualitative Sociology Review Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: For a long time, we have observed an increased interest in qualitative sociology, and the use of an interpretive frame to understand human actions, social processes, meanings and definitions, and new social theory generally. In order to enable a free flow of information and to integrate the community of qualitative sociologists, we have decided to create an open-access, international scientific journal. Qualitative Sociology Review publishes empirical, theoretical and methodological articles applicable to all fields and specializations within sociology.
期刊最新文献
“Am I Going to Die?” Considering the Preparation for Research on an Example of Hospice Patients Transitioning (on the) Internet: Shifting Challenges and Contradictions of Ethics of Studying Online Gender Transition Narratives Ethical and Methodological Dilemmas in Qualitative Research Conducted among Vulnerable Groups—Guest Editors’ Introduction The Conceptual Metaphor as an Ethical Kaleidoscope in Field Research Researching Vulnerable Groups: Definitions, Controversies, Dilemmas, and the Researcher’s Personal Entanglement
×
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