PEOPLE COUNT P L C P D P O L
Parenting
without
punishing
A Policy Brief on the Proposed
Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
By Carlos O. Tulali
Introduction
Corporal punishment is often defended in the
name of tradition and, at times, even in the name
of religion. Physical punishment as a discipline
method is also defended by touting its supposed
beneficial impact on children’s behavior.
Discipline is frequently confused with punishment,
particularly by caregivers who use corporal
punishment in an attempt to correct and change
children’s behavior. But there are several differences
between discipline and punishment (refer to Box 1).
Discipline for children involves training and helping
them develop judgment, a sense of boundaries,
self-control, self-sufficiency, and positive social
conduct. Discipline, unlike punishment, teaches
children to learn from their mistakes rather than
making them suffer for those mistakes. In fact,
imposing suffering actually shifts the focus from the
lesson that needs to be learned to who is in control.
As a result, with punishment, the focus is on the
parent controlling a child’s behavior, as opposed
to discipline wherein the focus is on the child
controlling his own behavior.
There are two types of punishment typically used
on children: punishment involving verbal reprimand
Expanding choices, uplifting lives through responsive population and human development legislation
I C Y B R I E F
and disapproval, and punishment involving physical
pain, as in corporal punishment.
Corporal punishment has been commonly used
in many societies and the form it takes varies
according to culture and religion. Research has
shown, though, that it is not effective in promoting
the desired change in behavior in any lasting way.
The behavioral and emotional consequences
of corporal punishment vary according to how
frequently and how severely the punishment is
applied, as well as to the age, developmental
state, vulnerability, and resilience of the child.
Corporal punishment humiliates children and can
lead to physical injury and serious impairment in
development.
Noting that parents’ use of corporal punishment
to discipline their children remains a strongly
debated issue, this policy brief discusses
why prohibition is needed (the human rights
imperative), what should be prohibited (all
corporal punishment and other cruel and
degrading punishment), how prohibition can be
achieved (law review and reform), and how to
use positive discipline as an alternative form of
disciplining children.
 2 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
Box 1. Discipline
Discipline vs. Emphasizes what a child should do
Punishment
Is an ongoing process
Sets an example to follow
Leads to self control
Helps children change
Is positive
Accepts child’s need to assert self
Fosters child’s ability to think
Bolsters self-esteem
Shapes behavior
Definition
The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the
Child defines “corporal” or “physical” punishment
as “any punishment in which physical force is used
and intended to cause some degree of pain or
discomfort, however light.” Most involves hitting
(“smacking,” “slapping,” “spanking”) children, with
the hand or with an implement—a whip, stick, belt,
shoe, wooden spoon, etc. But it can also involve,
for example, kicking, shaking or throwing children,
scratching, pinching, biting, pulling hair or boxing
ears, forcing children to stay in uncomfortable
positions, burning, scalding or forced ingestion
(for example, washing children’s mouths out with
soap or forcing them to swallow hot spices). In
the view of the Committee, corporal punishment is
invariably degrading. In addition, there are other
non-physical forms of punishment that are also
cruel and degrading and, thus, incompatible with
the Convention. These include punishment that
belittles, humiliates, denigrates, threatens, scares or
ridicules the child.1
Forms of Corporal Punishment
Save the Children (2004)2 defines corporal
punishment to include all forms of physical and
humiliating or degrading punishment. Corporal
punishment of children and the threat of it includes
hitting the child with the hand or with an object (such
as a cane, belt, whip, shoe, etc.); kicking, shaking, or
throwing the child; pinching or pulling their hair; forcing
a child to stay in uncomfortable or undignified positions
or take excessive physical exercise; and burning or
scarring the child.
Punishment
Emphasizes what a child should not do
Is a one-time occurrence
Insists on obedience
Undermines independence
Is an adult’s way of venting anger and frustration
Is negative
Makes children behave only on the short term
Thinks for the child
Defeats self-esteem
Condemns misbehavior
Corporal punishment also includes humiliating or
degrading punishment of children, which, takes
various forms, such as psychological punishment,
verbal abuse, ridicule, isolation, or ignoring the child.
Other forms of punishment such as making children
do heavy physical labor or stay in degrading or
uncomfortable positions also constitute corporal
punishment.
While physical forms of punishment are more visible,
emotional punishment in the form of humiliating or
degrading punishment is more difficult to identify
and confront as forms of child abuse.
Prevalence
Research into Filipino children’s experiences of child
abuse found that the most abusive acts were those
inflicted by parents in the name of discipline and
included spanking, beating or mauling (including
the use of a wooden stick, belt, bat or broom by a
parent, incessant beatings, slaps on the face, and
burning with a flat iron), scolding or punishing the
child even if he did nothing wrong, humiliating the
child in public, and shouting and cursing at the child.3
Save the Children Sweden’s Comparative Research
on the Physical and Emotional Punishment of
Children (2005), which included the perspectives
of 3,322 children from eight countries in Southeast
Asia and Pacific Region including the Philippines,
revealed that physical and emotional punishment
is widely used in these countries and, interestingly,
the methods were very similar – spanking, hitting
using specific objects like a stick or belt, punching,
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
kicking and verbal assault.4 An unpublished study
also conducted by Save the Children Sweden in
the Philippines (2005) revealed that 85 percent of
children interviewed said they are being punished in
the home, with spanking as the most common (65
percent), and 82 percent said that they were hit on
different parts of the body.5
Filipino children also experience threats of physical
punishment and humiliating treatment such as
being shouted at in front of others, and being
labeled and denigrated.6 In the areas covered by
the UNICEF Philippines country programme, 60
percent of women (3.6 million) reported that they
used at least one form of psychological or physical
punishment to punish or discipline their children. In
particular, 13 percent reported that they used some
severe physical punishment on their children.7
A survey conducted among Filipino students
generated evidence that Filipino children, especially
adolescents, also experience verbal abuse,
degradation and other forms of psychological
punishment, and that even these non-physical
forms of punishment have negative effects on
children, such as low self-worth, depression,
displaced anger and aggression.8
Consequences and Effects
There is a large body of international research
suggesting negative effects from corporal
punishment. These are some of them:
— Escalation: mild punishments in infancy are so
ineffective that they tend to escalate as the child
grows older. The little smack thus becomes a
spanking and then a beating. Parents convicted
of seriously assaulting their children often explain
that the ill treatment of their child began as
“ordinary” corporal punishment.
| POLICY BRIEF 3
— Encouraging violence: any corporal punishment
carries the message that violence is an
appropriate response to conflict or unwanted
behavior. Aggression breeds aggression. Children
subjected to corporal punishment have been
shown to be more likely than others to be
aggressive to siblings; to bully other children in
school; to take part in aggressively anti-social
behavior in adolescence; to be violent to their
spouses and their own children; and to commit
violent crimes.
— Psychological damage: corporal punishment
can be emotionally harmful to children.
Studies found that most children who are hit
by parents will experience few or no long-
term problems but the proportion that do
experience problems is at 1.8 to 3.9 times
greater risk than children who are not hit by
parents, depending on the type of problem.
Lansford and others (2005) found that
children who are disciplined with spanking
or other physical punishments are more
likely to be anxious and aggressive than
children disciplined through other methods9.
Meanwhile, Esteban (2006) found that
children exposed to verbal abuse “displayed
a propensity for confusion, worrying, lack of
concentration, thoughts of rejection, low self-
worth, chronic fatigue, and displacement of
anger on siblings…[which] suggests a potential
risk for transgenerational verbal abuse.”10
Why Prohibit Corporal Punishment?
There are many reasons why corporal punishment
of children should be prohibited:
• it is a violation of children’s rights to respect for
physical integrity and to human dignity, and to
equal protection under the law;
4 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Box 2. • Direct assault in the form of blows to any part of a child’s body such as beating, hitting, slapping
Different or lashing, with or without the use of an instrument such as a cane, stick or belt;
Forms of • Other forms of direct assault on a child’s body such as pinching, pulling ears or hair, twisting joints,
cutting and shaving hair, cutting or piercing skin, carrying or dragging a child against his or her will;
Corporal
• Indirect assault on a child’s body, through the use of power, authority or threats, to force a child to
Punishment
perform physically painful or damaging acts, such as holding a weight or weights for an extended
period, kneeling on stones, standing or sitting in a contorted position;
• Deliberate neglect of a child’s physical needs, where this is intended as punishment;
• Use of external substances–such as burning or freezing materials, water, smoke (including from
smoldering peppers), excrement or urine–to inflict pain, fear, harm, disgust or loss of dignity;
• Use of hazardous tasks as punishment or for the purpose of discipline, including those that are beyond a
child’s strength or that bring him into contact with dangerous or unhygienic substances; such tasks include
sweeping or digging in the hot sun, using bleach or insecticides, unprotected cleaning of toilets;
• Confinement, including being shut in a confined space, tied up, or forced to remain in one place for
an extended period of time;
• Any other act perpetrated on a child’s body for the purpose of punishment or discipline, which
children themselves define as corporal punishment in the context of their own language and culture
identified through scientific participatory research with children;
• Witnessing any form of violent conflict resolution;
• Threats of physical punishment;
• Verbal assaults, threats, ridicule and/or denigration intended to reduce a child’s confidence, self-
esteem or dignity.
Source: International Save the Children Alliance SEAP Region, 2003, 42-43.

• it can cause serious physical and psychological
harm to children;
• it teaches children that violence is an acceptable
and appropriate strategy for resolving conflict or
getting people to do what they want;
• it is ineffective as a means of discipline–there
are positive ways to teach, correct or discipline
children, which are better for children’s
development and which contribute to building
relationships based on trust and mutual respect;
• it is difficult to protect children if corporal
punishment is legitimate–this implies that some
forms or levels of violence against children are
acceptable.11
Prohibition is necessary because all people,
including children, have human rights to respect
for dignity and physical integrity, protection from
all forms of violence, and equal protection under
the law. The United Nations Committee on the
Rights of the Child has made it absolutely clear that
prohibition of corporal punishment in all settings
is required to implement the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The UNCRC,
one of the most widely ratified United Nations
Conventions, entered into force on September 12,
1990, only a year after its adoption. Under the
Convention, a child is defined as “a human being
below the age of eighteen years, unless under the
law applicable to the child, majority is attained
earlier.”12 It sets the primary guideline in all actions
concerning children, which is in the best interest of
the child.
The Committee has also emphasized that, in
addition to being an obligation of States, prohibition
is ‘a key strategy for reducing and preventing all
forms of violence in societies’.13 UNCRC defines
substantive provisions on how children should
be treated in the different areas of their lives.
Some provisions relate to the family environment
or alternative care; others describe measures to
guarantee children a meaningful education and
access to health care. UNCRC encompasses the
economic, social and cultural, as well as the civil
and political rights of children, making it the most
comprehensive human rights instrument.
Other UN treaty monitoring bodies including
the Committee Against Torture, the Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination
Against Women, and the Human Rights
Committee have also recommended that states
explicitly prohibit corporal punishment of
children.14
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
Policy and Legal Environment
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines guarantees
the right of children to assistance and special
protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty,
exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their
development.­15 The Constitution recognizes as a
State policy the natural right and duty of parents in
the rearing of children, stating that:
“The natural and primary right and duty of
parents in the rearing of the youth for civic
efficiency and the development of moral
character shall receive the support of the
Government.” 16
The insertion of the adjective “primary” to describe
the rights of parents implies that the right of parents
is superior to that of the State.17 However, the State
has the “duty of protecting the rights of persons or
individuals who, because of age or incapacity, are in
an unfavorable position vis-à-vis other parties.”18
The Philippines was the thirty-first State to ratify
the UNCRC on July 26, 1990 by virtue of Senate
Resolution 109, thus, the UNCRC forms part of the
law of the land. In the World Summit for Children
of 1990, the Philippines adopted specific goals
for children, which resulted in the adoption in
December 1991 of the Philippine Plan of Action for
Children (PPAC) in the 1990s and Beyond through
Proclamation No. 855.
The Convention also requires governments to
provide regular reports to the UN Committee on
Save the Children Sweden 2005:
• 85% of children said they are punished in the home
• 82% reported that they were hit on different parts of their body
• 65% reported that spanking is the most common form of physical punishment
World Report on Violence and Health 2002:
• 75% of Filipino children said that they were spanked
National Health Institute 2003, Department of Health, Philippines; Nationwide (community survey of
2,704 adolescents):
• 83% said they had been physically maltreated
• 60% received psychological insults and debasement
Ramiro et al., 1998 (survey of 2,550 Filipino school children from urban and rural communities):
Top abuses experienced by children:
• verbal abuse (70 %)
• physical maltreatment (60.7%)
• emotional, non-verbal abuse (45.8%)
| POLICY BRIEF 5
the Rights of the Child, the international body
established to monitor governments’ progress in
implementing the UNCRC. In its scrutiny of these
reports, the Committee has stressed the need for
changes in government structures and mechanisms
to allow consistent consideration of children’s
rights–compatibility of legislation, national strategies
for children rooted in the UNCRC, analysis of the
impact of proposed policies on children, budgetary
analysis, and public awareness of children’s rights,
to name just a few.
The UNCRC serves as the moving force for the
enactment of national laws to further protect
children from different forms of abuse and
exploitation. On June 17, 1992, the Philippine
Congress passed Republic Act 7610 (An Act
Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special
Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination, otherwise known as the Special
Protection of Children Act). It provides stronger
legislation and public policy for the care and
protection of children in need of special protection,
declaring it “the policy of the State to provide special
protection to children from all forms of abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation and discrimination, and
other conditions prejudicial to their development,
provide sanctions for their commission and carry
out a program for prevention and deterrence,
and crisis intervention in situations of child abuse,
exploitation, and discrimination”19
Other laws that provide Filipino children protection
from violence and abuse include: the Revised Penal
Box. 3.
Results of
Studies on
Prevalence
of Corporal
Punishment
in the
Philippines
6 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
Code (RA 3815); the Child and Youth Welfare Code
(PD 603), the Family Code (EO 209); the Anti-Rape
Law of 1997 (RA 8353), the Domestic Adoption Act
of 1998 (RA 8552), the Anti-Violence Against Women
and their Children Act of 2004 (RA 9262), the Anti-
trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 (RA 9208), the
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (RA 9344),
and the Act Providing for the Elimination of the
Worst Forms of Child Labor and Affording Stronger
Protection for the Working Child (RA 9231).
Gaps and Weaknesses of Policies on
Corporal Punishment
At first glance, the child protection laws in the
country seem to be progressive. However, once the
definitions of terminology are examined, the laws are
revealed not to be so protective. Indeed, parents and
legal guardians can use discipline as an argument to
defend the use of corporal punishment.
The Special Protection for Children Act (RA 7610),
which is a response to the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child, prohibits ”the infliction
of physical or psychological injury, cruelty to, or
neglect, sexual abuse or exploitation of a child.”
Cruelty is defined as ”any act by word or deed,
which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic
worth and dignity of a child as a human being.”
However, the Implementing Rules and Regulations
to RA 7610 defines some terms within the context
of the Philippine law. Physical abuse is included
in the definition of cruelty and physical injury. It
states that “discipline administered by a parent or
legal guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty,
provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate
in degree and does not constitute physical or
psychological injury.” Based on the definition, what
is “reasonable” and “moderate” cruelty is based on
an assessment influenced by one’s values, beliefs,
and own experiences.
As the Committee on the Rights of the Child
observed, while RA 7610 broadly defines child
abuse to include corporal punishment, there is yet
no explicit law prohibiting corporal punishment
in the home, in schools, and in other institutional
settings, except for children in conflict with the law
and children in detention who are now adequately
given protection and more humane treatment
under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act enacted
in 2006. This fact has been reinforced by a 2006
Save the Children UK study, which reviewed and
analyzed various existing Philippine laws related
to discipline and punishment of children within
the family. The study found that current legislative
provisions are too general and vague to guide
parents in the exercise of their right to discipline
children and, more importantly, to protect the
physical integrity and human dignity of children.20
Home and Family
• Existing laws are unclear and can have different
interpretations
The right to discipline and punish children accorded
to parents are not without limitations. Philippine
laws refer to terms such as “may be required under
the circumstances,” “moderately” and “just and
reasonable rules, suggestions and admonitions”
in the exercise of discipline and punishment. In
applying these qualifications, it is not clear whose
point of view is considered–whether that of the
parents or of the child. Another major concern is
that the qualifications provided by law are open to
subjective interpretation. What is “moderate” and
“just and reasonable” for the parents may already
be considered “excessive” or “unreasonable” by
another set of parents. These restrictions, which
are applied subjectively, are too general and vague
to guide parents in the exercise of their right to
discipline children and, more importantly, to protect
the physical integrity and human dignity of children.
• Existing laws do not cover the more common
and lighter forms of punishment
General penal laws do not cover the second
category of discipline: humiliating or degrading
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
punishment–which takes various forms such
as psychological punishment, verbal abuse,
ridicule, isolation or ignoring the child–because
the law requires that a deed or physical act be
committed before any person may be deemed
to have committed an offense.21
All forms of corporal punishment of children,
however light, constitute violence against the
child. Corporal punishment is one form of
violence against children or child abuse. It is not
a separate method of discipline used by parents,
teachers or other caregivers as they see fit. In
today’s society, violence against women and
elderly people are not accepted in any form. Why
should it be different for children?
• Existing laws do not cover injuries resulting from
discipline administered by parents to their children
Even if regulations exist against the parents in
disciplining the child, the crimes covered by penal
laws are specifically defined. There is a possibility
that the act of the parents in disciplining the child
may not fall under penal laws.
School Setting
The DepEd guidelines for both public and private
schools prohibit the use of cruel or physically
harmful punishment against students. However,
while the public schools’ Service Manual elaborates
on the rule, specifically prohibiting corporal
punishment including humiliating and degrading
punishment, the private schools’ Service Manual
does not include “humiliating and degrading
punishment.” Thus, a similar provision should be
added to the manual for private schools.
Penal System
The judiciary issued guidelines specific to children
in conflict with the law, which define and prohibit
corporal punishment. However, aside from
prohibiting corporal punishment, the judgment
should be guided by the principle that it should not
be degrading or humiliating for the child.
Alternative Care Settings
The “Standards in the Implementation of Residential
Care Services” adopted by the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) applies
| POLICY BRIEF 7
to agencies or centers that provide residential care
service. However, it only provides that “corporal
punishment detrimental to the residents’ emotional,
psychological and physical development shall
never be used.”22 The Standards should be further
amended to include all forms of punishment,
physical or emotional, which violate the physical
integrity and human dignity of the child.
Workplace
Unlike laws on family relations, schools and
alternative care settings, there are no provisions,
which are directly applicable to discipline and
punishment of children in the context of work.
Although there are several penal laws that are
applicable to certain acts committed against
children, a more direct provision prohibiting
corporal and humiliating and degrading punishment
of children should be enacted to cover persons who
employ them.
Barriers to Prohibiting Corporal Punishment
Proponents of corporal punishment primarily base
their support for this disciplinary practice on their
interpretation of biblical statements and other
religious teachings, or on their firm conviction that
physical punishment is a parental obligation or
duty. Many also recount their personal experience
of physical discipline within their childhood home
or school and note that, because ‘it never did them
any harm,’ it is likely to work for the next generation
as effectively. Advocates of corporal punishment,
therefore, support existing legal provisions, which
provide parents a defense against charges of
assault, provided the force used was “just and
reasonable” and for the purpose of correcting the
child’s behavior.
Government and public will are also considered
to be a barrier in prohibiting corporal punishment
in the Philippines. Without government support
for child protection and the necessary resources,
policies, systems and services, then neither
individual professionals nor NGOs can achieve
a systematic impact to support all children (in all
geographic areas, at all economic levels). Public
awareness and cooperation are also critical in
enabling professionals to help prevent corporal
punishment and child abuse.
 8 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

Box 4. Family Code of the Philippines:

Philippine “The parents and those exercising parental authority shall have… the following rights and duties…
Laws Related (sec. 7) to impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances.“ (Art. 220)
to the “… parental authority [may be suspended] if the parent or the person exercising the same… (sec.
Discipline 1) treats the child with excessive harshness or cruelty.” (Art. 231)
and
Punishment Child and Youth Welfare Code:
of Children “Parents have the right to discipline their child as may be necessary for the formation of his good
character, and may therefore require from him obedience to just and reasonable rules, suggestions
at Home
and admonitions.” (Art. 45)
“Criminal liability shall attach to any parent who… (sec. 8) inflicts cruel and unusual punishment
upon the child or deliberately subjects him to indignities and other excessive chastisement that
embarrass or humiliate him.” (Art. 59)
Republic Act 7610, Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act
(Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases, Sec. 2):
“Cruelty” refers to any act by word or deed, which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic
worth and dignity of a child as a human being. Discipline administered by a parent or legal
guardian to a child does not constitute cruelty provided it is reasonable in manner and moderate
in degree…
RA 7610 (Rules and Regulations, Sec. 2):
Discipline…does not constitute cruelty provided it…does not constitute physical or psychological
injury as defined herein;
“Physical injury” includes, but is not limited to, lacerations, fractured bones, burns, internal injuries,
severe injury or serious bodily harm suffered by a child;
“Psychological injury” means harm to a child’s psychological or intellectual functioning, which may
be exhibited by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal or outward aggressive behavior, or a
combination of said behaviors, which may be demonstrated by a change in behavior, emotional
response or cognition;
Revised Penal Code (Art. 263: Serious physical injuries):
“Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious
physical injuries…[This] shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical injuries upon
his child by excessive chastisement.”
There are several factors that prevent government Philippines, there is an almost absolute respect
and the public from taking an active pro-child stand, for family privacy and parental rights. Corporal
including prohibiting corporal punishment, such as: punishment is widely practiced, accepted
and encouraged. Parents, teachers and other
— Financial concerns. Government believes that caregivers are not aware of positive parenting
child protection is expensive. What it does not and other non-violent forms of discipline as an
understand is that prevention is less expensive alternative to corporal punishment of children.
in the long-term. International donors that
provide funding directly to the government In summary:
rather than through civil society often do not
establish monitoring requirements or control to 1) There is still a general acceptance of corporal
ensure that funding is used for strengthening punishment, which stems from a very low
the effectiveness of child protection. awareness and understanding of children’s
rights by the public.
— Lack of public awareness and will. Social and
traditional norms can constrain the government 2) Structures and mechanisms for promoting,
from taking action to protect children or implementing and monitoring children’s
establish children’s rights. In a country like the rights, and addressing and monitoring child
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
rights violations (including cases of corporal
punishment) at the national and local levels are
generally weak.
3) Lack of effective monitoring and reporting
mechanisms to address the issue of corporal
punishment. Local councils for the protection
of children, which are supposed to serve
as mechanisms for reporting, monitoring
and addressing child abuse cases are not
established in many areas, and non-functional
in areas where these exist.
4) The lack of said information is exacerbated by
the lack of evidence-based good practices and
models for prevention of corporal punishment
and intervention programs.
5) Without commitment to such programs, there
are no commitments of financial allocations for
these critical child protection components.
We therefore need data and evidence to establish
the importance of the issue and an ensuing
commitment of financial resources to establish
capacity to protect children (policy, systems,
services, training, and related professionals).
Legislative Measures to Prohibit Corporal
Punishment
Law reform to prohibit all corporal punishment
and other forms of humiliating punishment of
children is essential for the realization of children’s
rights. When accompanied by comprehensive and
sustained awareness-raising, public education,
and promotion of positive, participatory and non-
violent ways to approach parenting and discipline,
law reform sends a strong educational signal: that
hitting or humiliating a child is just as illegal and
unacceptable as hitting or humiliating anyone else.
Thus, on November 5, 2007, recognizing the
prevalence of corporal punishment in the country,
Senator Manny Villar filed Senate Bill No.1812 titled,
“An Act Prohibiting the Act of Imposing Corporal
Punishment on Children, Amending for the Purpose
Republic Act No. 7610, as Amended, Otherwise
Known as Special Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.”
| POLICY BRIEF 9
In the House of Representatives, a similar bill,
House Bill 682, “An Act Prohibiting and Penalizing
the Use of Corporal Punishment on Children,”
was introduced by Representative Monica Prieto-
Teodoro of the First District of Tarlac City. Both bills,
filed during the 14th Congress, seek to prohibit and
penalize the use of corporal punishment on children
and to amend Republic Act 7610.
Also known as “The Anti-Corporal Punishment
Law of 2008,” the above bill redefines corporal
punishment as an infliction of physical and mental
violence upon children as forms of punishment. The
revised definition also includes any form of public
humiliation, verbal abuse, and other humiliating and
degrading means.
The proposed bill states that any parent, ascendant,
teacher or guardian who uses any form of corporal
punishment, whether verbal, physical, mental
or psychological, can suffer lawful penalties. The
proposed bill will also protect students from abusive
punishments from teachers and other academic
authorities, regardless of when or where corporal
punishment was executed.
If passed into a law, violators shall be liable in
accordance with existing penal laws, provided that
the penalty shall be imposed in the maximum
period, except where a higher penalty is provided
under Republic Act No. 3815, as amended,
otherwise known as the “Revised Penal Code,”
Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the
“Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act,” or Republic Act
No. 9262, otherwise known as the “Anti-Violence
Against Women and Their Children Act”. If the act is
not penalized under the above mentioned laws, the
penalty shall be arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day
to 6 months) in its maximum period.
If the penalty imposable for the act is only arresto
menor (1 day to 30 days) or arresto mayor, the bill
states that the prosecutor may refer the accused
to the local social welfare and development office
for assessment and intervention; provided, that the
offender has not been previously charged under
this Act. The interventions shall include seminars
on children’s rights and positive and non-violent
discipline of children, counseling, anger management,
and referrals to other rehabilitative services. If the
10 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
offender is the parent or a person exercising parental
authority, the court may suspend parental authority in
accordance with the Family Code.
Another bill, Senate Bill No. 1947 titled, “An Act
Amending Article 218, Article 220 and Article 223 of
the Family Code to Prohibit All Forms of Corporal
Punishment,” was filed in the Senate by Senator
Miriam Defensor-Santiago on December 11, 2007.
Promoting Positive Discipline as an Alternative
Discipline is an essential part of child care. Discipline
helps children feel secure, meets their needs, and
builds self-control and self-esteem. The objective of
discipline is to promote behaviors that are beneficial
to the child’s development and welfare and to
change and/or eliminate behaviors that are harmful
or distressing to a child or to others. This is different
from punishment.
Corporal punishment may change children’s
behaviors, but often through fear. It stresses what
children should not do, but rarely teaches them
what to do. Children controlled by punishment
such as spanking or severe consequences may
“behave” to avoid a penalty chosen by the adult.
It often teaches children to hide their mistakes,
and does not build long lasting inner controls
or cooperation. Punishment may also cause
the children to focus on revenge rather than on
changing behaviors.
In a 1997 research, American children whose
parents used corporal punishment to reduce anti-
social behavior actually experienced the opposite
result from their children and an increased
probability of aggression and other antisocial
behavior in the long run.23
Disciplining children by spanking does not facilitate
learning. Instead, it may halt the unwanted
behavior only while the child is in the adult’s
presence or it may scare a child into submission.
While it may teach a child what not to do, it fails to
teach a child what is expected of him or her and
what is an alternate behavior. Additionally, corporal
punishment is most often used when the parent
is frustrated or does not have another resource.
Spanking in these circumstances may lead to
an unintentional injury or more serious abuse.
The following illustrate more of what corporal
punishment does:
• ­increases anxiety and fear
• hinders the development of empathy and
compassion for others
• makes children angry in response
• heightens aggression toward others
• decreases compliance and increases resistance
• harms relationship with parent or caregiver
• potentially causes unintended and severe
physical injury
• decreases self-esteem
• increases the probability for an array of
undesirable social and psychological behaviors
• teaches that violence is an acceptable way to
handle conflict
Positive discipline, on the other hand, refers to an
approach to parenting that teaches children and
guides their behavior while respecting their rights
to healthy development, protection from violence,
and participation in their learning.24 It is based on the
philosophies of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs who
believed that all human beings have equal rights to
dignity and respect. All positive discipline methods are
non-punitive and non-permissive. They are kind and
firm at the same time. Kind because that shows respect
for the child and for the adult, and firm because that
shows respect for what needs to be done.
Positive discipline is not permissive parenting.
Neither is it about punishment. It is about long-
term solutions that develop children’s own self-
discipline and their life-long skills. Positive discipline
is about teaching non-violence, empathy, self-
respect, human rights and respect for others. The
use of positive techniques in rearing and educating
children will help them grow to be responsible and
caring citizens as children are given the venue to
learn, think for themselves, think of others, and
take responsibility for their actions.
The four principles of positive discipline are:
1) identifying long-term childrearing goals;
2) providing warmth and structure;
3) understanding how children think and feel; and
4) problem-solving.25
The following are the major characteristics of
positive discipline:
• it is non-violent and respectful of the child as a
learner;
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
• it is about finding long-term solutions that
develop children’s own self-discipline;
• it involves clear communication of parents’
expectations, rules, and limits;
• it builds a mutually respectful relationship
between parent and child;
• it teaches children life-long skills;
• it increases children’s competence and
confidence to handle challenging situations; and
• it teaches courtesy, non-violence, empathy, self-
respect, human rights, and respect for others.26
Many parents acquainted with the term have
the misconception that positive discipline is a
bag of techniques including time outs, natural
consequences, and logical consequences.
The concept has actually evolved significantly
as research and experience have shown that
consequences are often just punishment in
disguise. Positive discipline actually strongly focuses
on the benefits of regular family meetings, focusing
on solutions for misbehavior rather than blame
and on teaching children successful social skills and
personal accountability.
Strategies for parents and other caregivers that help
children learn positive behaviors include:
• providing regular positive attention,
sometimes called special time (opportunities
to communicate positively are important for
children of all ages);
• listening carefully to children and helping them
learn to use words to express their feelings;
• providing children with opportunities to make
choices whenever appropriate options exist
and then helping them learn to evaluate the
potential consequences of their choice;
• reinforcing emerging desirable behaviors with
frequent praise and ignoring trivial misdeeds; and
• modeling orderly, predictable behavior,
respectful communication, and collaborative
conflict resolution strategies.27
Policy Options and Strategies
To have all Filipinos embrace the goal of eliminating
all forms of corporal punishment of children, a
multilayered strategy of interventions is necessary.
Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population
and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD)
| POLICY BRIEF 11
recommends such a set of policy options and
strategies here. Education should be the key goal of
any such initiative, a principle that is emphasized in
each of the strategies discussed.
Universal Prohibition – Education Campaign on
Effective Discipline
A universal, or primary, approach to prohibiting
parents’ use of corporal punishment would be
to educate the general public about its risks
and about the benefits of using other discipline
techniques. Such an approach has the benefit
of providing a consistent message to all current
and potential parents in the country and of not
merely targeting particular populations who will
feel labeled as potential abusers. The main goals
of such a universal approach would be to change
norms about the acceptability and utility of corporal
punishment and to increase knowledge of effective
nonviolent forms of discipline.
Targeted Interventions for New Parents and Would-
Be Parents
While a universal campaign is crucial for changing
the national debate about discipline and may be
sufficient for some parents to reduce or stop their use
of corporal punishment, changing actual discipline
behavior for other parents may require more
intensive interventions. Because altering established
behavior patterns is difficult, many such interventions
should be preventive, targeting individuals before
they become parents. One preventive approach
would be to include a curriculum on effective non-
12 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
violent approaches to disciplining children in schools.
Another targeted approach would be what is known
as tertiary prevention, in other words, one that is
targeted at parents who have already been identified
to have physically abused their children.
Reforming Laws Regarding Corporal Punishment
Effective prohibition of corporal punishment requires
that it be explicitly prohibited in law. This means a
clear, unambiguous statement in legislation that all
corporal punishment is prohibited. Children, like
all people, have a right to equal protection under
the law, including equal protection from assault.
This should apply in all contexts–in the family
home, schools, juvenile justice systems, alternative
care (institutions, foster care, day care, etc), in the
community, and in situations of employment.
Recommendations
The Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population
and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) is
committed to work towards eliminating–through
policy advocacy, legal reform, education and other
measures–all forms of control and punishment of
children, in the family, schools and other settings,
which breach children’s fundamental rights to
respect for their physical integrity and human
dignity.
Protecting children from all forms of corporal punishment
is not only about prohibition in law. It also requires:
• public education and re-education, raising
awareness of the negative effects of corporal
punishment and of children’s rights to protection
from all violence and to respect for their human
dignity among parents, teachers and all those
working with and for children;
• promoting positive, non-violent disciplinary
approaches to childrearing and education;
• changing the attitudes and values that underpin
the ways adults regard and relate to children;
• establishing accessible and effective support
for the family and all those with an input into
children’s lives; and
• monitoring progress towards eliminating
corporal punishment.28
Specifically, PLCPD recommends the following
strategies to end corporal punishment:
1. Work for the enactment of a law banning
corporal punishment of children
• explicit prohibition of all forms of corporal
punishment and any other humiliating
treatment in all settings, including in the home;
• removal of legal defences for the corporal
punishment of children;
• establishment of a range of appropriate
responses and sanctions to address the
continued use of corporal punishment by
parents and others;
• clear direction and guidance to all providers
of services for children and families to
support and enforce prohibition;
• comprehensive education and training
program of parents, caregivers, and service
providers on positive and non-violent forms
of discipline and child rearing;
• establishment and strengthening of national and
community-based child protection systems; and
• have the best interest of the child as the
primary consideration.
2. Establish and strengthen the national child
protection system
Child protection systems are structures,
mechanisms, processes and tools (including budget
allocations, guidelines, standards, and procedures)
that, ideally, should operate in an integrated and
coordinated way to prevent, report, and monitor
cases of violence against children and respond
to such cases through programs and services for
children experiencing corporal punishment.
In the Philippines, the institutional and
community structures in the effort to protect
children include:
• ­child protection units at hospitals;
• ­women and children’s desk at police stations;
• local councils for the protection of children
(LCPC) and juvenile justice welfare units at
the barangay level;
• Parent-Teacher Community Associations in
schools;
• local social welfare and development offices;
• Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC);
and
• quick reaction teams, hotlines, children’s
groups, adult support groups or
neighborhood monitoring groups set up by
NGOs and the community.
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
The means of protecting
children in the country
also include processes and
protocols, as well as national
laws and policies, and local
codes and ordinances that
ensure children’s protection
is already in place at the
national and local levels.
However, these still need to
be strengthened to effectively
address the issue of corporal punishment. To
strengthen existing child protection systems, there
is a need to:
• set up processes for raising awareness
among local officials on corporal
punishment;
• organize support groups of adults;
• build strong networks of response and
referral to ensure access to programs and
services for children;
• develop common standards of response
and support; and
• strengthen inter-agency and multi-sectoral
coordination and collaboration.
3. Promote positive discipline and non-violent
child rearing
• raise public awareness about children’s
rights and corporal punishment to adults
and children alike;
• encourage media to promote non-violent
values, and follow guidelines that protect
the rights of the child in all media coverage;
• conduct training on positive discipline in
communities; and
• build the capacity of all those who work
with and for children.
4. Involve children in the development of policies
and programs
• consider children’s experiences and
perspectives in the development of policies
and programs that would respond to
corporal punishment; and
• support children’s own initiatives to raise
awareness among other children on the
issue of corporal punishment and to help
address the issue.
5. Monitor children’s situation and the
implementation of actions and responses
| POLICY BRIEF 13
Regularly assess and monitor:
• children’s situation and experiences of
punishment in all settings, ensuring that
children’s perspectives are heard;
• changes in children and adults’ views on
corporal punishment;
• changes in adults’ behaviour and practice;
• type and quality of programs and services;
and
• enforcement of laws and policies banning
corporal punishment.
Conclusion
Children are bearers of human rights from the
moment of their birth, and they are entitled to
physical integrity and human dignity in the same
way as adults. Children are human beings that are
simply younger and more vulnerable than adults.29
The UNCRC sees the child as a subject. He or she
has the right not only to schooling, health care, and
an adequate standard of living, but also to be heard
and have his or her views respected.
The UNCRC is clear about how parents and other
guardians cannot do whatever they like to children.
They are not allowed to beat up or use other
methods of physical or psychological violence
against children as a means of punishment or
to “teach” them a certain behavior. Adults are
protected against such ill-treatment. Of course,
children should be as well. Only zero-tolerance is
acceptable.
Prohibition of corporal punishment and other
cruel and degrading punishment of children is an
obligation under international and regional human
rights instruments. Children have a right to equal
protection from assault under the law. Failure
to enact legislation to achieve equal protection
and that explicitly prohibits all forms of corporal
14 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law

punishment represents a violation of this right, and
allows the near universal social acceptance and use
of corporal punishment in childrearing to continue
unchecked.
The proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment law will
prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel
or degrading forms of punishment to protect the
physical integrity and human dignity of Filipino
children against abusive forms of discipline at home,
in schools and other institutional settings. Existing
Philippine laws in restricting corporal punishment do
not cover humiliating or degrading punishment.
The primary purpose of law reform is not to keep
the courts busy prosecuting parents and causing
disharmony within families, but to send a concrete
message about the unacceptability of violence
against children. Prohibiting all forms of corporal
punishment in law will set the standard. The best
interest of the child is the guiding principle in its
implementation.
Thus, PLCPD supports the move towards law
reform made in the form of draft legislation that
has been filed in the Senate and the House of
Representatives. PLCPD hopes that the deliberation
on the proposed bill will highlight the importance
of the government responding to treaty body
recommendations and strongly recommend that
the authors of the bill introduce it as a matter of
urgency to:
• prohibit corporal punishment of children in
all settings, including in the home;
• include the prohibition of all corporal and
degrading forms of punishment of children;
• promote positive and non-violent discipline
of children; and
• provide budget allocation for the
implementation of laws related to children’s
rights.
Ending all forms of corporal punishment requires a
combination of legal reform and public education.
Legal reform is essential to send clear messages
that hitting or humiliating children is just as
unacceptable as hitting or humiliating anyone else.
But legal reform will achieve little unless it is well
publicized among children and adults and linked to
the promotion of positive, non-violent discipline.
Programs and materials need to be developed to
give positive advice on effective ways of discipline
to parents, teachers and others.

Appendices
Appendix 1. States with Full Prohibition of Corporal Punishment

In the following 23 states, children are protected by law from all forms of corporal punishment30

Costa Rica (2008) Spain (2007) Portugal (2007)

Venezuela (2007) Uruguay (2007) Greece (2006)
New Zealand (2007) Netherlands (2007) Ukraine (2004)
Hungary (2005) Romania (2004) Israel (2000)
Iceland (2003) Germany (2000) Latvia (1998)
Bulgaria (2000) Croatia (1999) Austria (1989)
Denmark (1997) Cyprus (1994) Sweden (1979)
Norway (1987) Finland (1983)

In addition, in Italy, the Supreme Court in Rome declared in 1996 all corporal punishment to be unlawful;
this is not yet confirmed in legislation. In Nepal in 2005, the Supreme Court declared null and void the legal
defense in the Child Act allowing parents, guardians, and teachers to administer a “minor beating”; the Child
Act is yet to be amended to confirm this.
 Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law | POLICY BRIEF 15

Appendix 2. East Asia and Pacific: Progress towards prohibiting all corporal punishment

Note: The following information has been compiled from many sources, including reports to and by the United Nations human rights
treaty bodies. Information in square brackets is unconfirmed.

Prohibited in penal system Prohibited in

Prohibited in the Prohibited in
State As sentence for As disciplinary alternative care
home schools
crime measure settings
Australia NO SOME YES SOME SOME
Brunei Darussalam NO NO NO NO NO
Cambodia NO YES YES YES NO
China NO YES YES YES [NO]
Cook Islands NO NO YES NO NO
DPR Korea NO NO YES [YES] NO
Fiji NO YES YES YES NO
Indonesia NO NO SOME NO NO
Japan NO YES YES YES NO
Kiribati NO YES NO NO NO
Lao PDR NO YES YES YES NO
Malaysia NO NO NO NO NO
Marshall Islands NO YES YES YES NO
Micronesia, Fed. NO [YES] YES NO NO
States
Mongolia NO YES YES NO NO
Myanmar NO NO YES NO NO
Nauru NO [NO] [YES] NO NO
New Zealand YES YES YES YES YES
Niue NO NO YES ??? [NO]
Palau NO NO YES NO NO
Papua New Guinea NO NO YES YES SOME
Philippines NO YES YES YES SOME
Republic of Korea NO NO YES YES [SOME]
Samoa NO NO YES [NO] NO
Singapore NO NO NO NO SOME
Solomon Islands NO NO YES YES NO
Taiwan NO YES YES YES NO
Thailand NO YES YES YES NO
Timor-Leste, DR NO NO YES YES NO
Tonga NO YES NO NO NO
Tuvalu NO NO SOME NO NO
Vanuatu NO YES SOME YES NO
Viet Nam NO NO YES YES NO
TOTALS
Prohibited 1 15 25 17 1
Not prohibited 32 18 8 15 32
Legality unknown - - - 1 1

Source: Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children (www.endcorporalpunishment.org), March 2009
16 POLICY BRIEF | Parenting without Punishing: A Policy Brief on the Proposed Anti-Corporal Punishment Law
Endnotes
1
Committee on the Rights of the Child, CRC General Comment
No. 8 (2006): The Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal
Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading Forms of Punishment (Arts.
19; 28, Para. 2; and 37, inter alia), 2 March 2007. CRC/C/GC/8.
Online. UNHCR Refworld, p. 4, (http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/
docid/460bc7772.html)
2
Ennew, J. & Plateau, D.P. (2004), How to research the physical and
emotional punishment of children, Bangkok, International Save the
Children Alliance. (http://www.scslat.org/search/publieng.php?_
cod_92_lang_e)
3
De la Cruz, T. et al. (2001), Trust and power: Child abuse in the
eyes of the child and the parent, UP-CIDS Psychosocial Trauma and
Human Rights Program, Manila.
4
Beazley, Harriot et al. (2005), Comparative research on physical and
emotional punishment of children in Southeast Asia and the Pacific
2005. Regional Protocol, Save the Children Sweden Regional Office
for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, p. 3. (http://www.
violencestudy.org/IMG/pdf/220905-02.pdf )
5
Save the Children-Sweden (Unpublished; 2005), Research on
corporal punishment in Bagong Silang, Caloocan City and Cebu
City, United Nations High Committee on the Rights of the Child
(2007), Consideration of reports submitted by states parties under
article 44 of the convention, Third and fourth periodic reports of
States parties due in 2007, Philippines, para. 114, p. 37. ( http://
www.humanrights.gov.ph/docs/CRC_3rd-4th-2007%20periodic%20
reports.pdf )
6
Beazley, H., S. Bessell (2006), et al., pp. 12-19.
7
United Nations Children’s Fund (207), Philippines Sub-Regional
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2007
8
Esteban, E. (2006), “Parental Verbal Abuse: Culture-Specific Coping
Behavior of College Students in the Philippines.” Child Psychiatry and
Human Development, Vol. 36, No. 3. (March 2006), pp. 243-259.
9
Lansford et al. cited in “Spanking Leads to Child Aggression and Anxi-
ety, Regardless of Cultural Norm” Science Daily, 14 November 2005.
10
Esteban, op cit.
11
Adapted from Council of Europe, Abolishing corporal punishment.
The key points. (http://www.coe.int/t/transversalprojects/children/pdf/
triptyqueCP_en.pdf )
12
Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 1.
13
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children
(2008), Prohibiting corporal punishment of children: A guide to legal
reform and other measures, General Comment No. 8, para. 3.
14
Global Initiative to End All corporal Punishment of Children and Save
the Children Sweden, 2008, Ending legalized violence against children,
Global report 2008, p.1. (http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/
pages/pdfs/reports/GlobalReport2008.pdf )
15
The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, art. XV,
sec. 2.
PEOPLE COUNT
PLCPD POLICY BRIEF 2009
A publication developed by the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD)
for the Child Rights Network (CRN) with support from Save the Children.
2/F AVECSS Building, #90 Kamias Road. cor. K-J Street, East Kamias, Quezon City 1102, Philippines
Tel. nos.: (+632)925-1800 • (+632)436-2373
E-mail: plcpdfound@plcpd.org.ph
Website: http://www.plcpd.org.ph
Executive Director: Ramon San Pascual, MPH
Editors: Ernesto Almocera, Jr. and Ma. Cecilia de los Reyes
Layout: Dodie Lucas
16
Ibid., art. II, sec. 1.
17
Bernas, S.J., Joaquin G. (2003), The 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, Manila: Rex Bookstore,
p. 79.
18
Nery, et al., vs. Lorenzo, et al., G.R. No. L-23096.27, 27 April 1972,
cited in Save the Children UK (2006), Philippine Laws Related to
the Discipline and Punishment of Children, Quezon City: Save the
Children UK Philippines Programme, p. 20.
19
Republic Act No. 7610, An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence
and Special protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination, and for other Purposes, art. 1, sec. 2.
20
United Nations High Committee on the Rights of the Child
(2007), Consideration of reports submitted by states parties under
article 44 of the convention, Third and fourth periodic reports of States
parties due in 2007, Philippines, para. 116, p. 37. ( http://www.
humanrights.gov.ph/docs/CRC_3rd-4th-2007%20periodic%20
reports.pdf )
21
Save the Children UK Philippines Programme (2006), Philippine
Laws Related to the Discipline and Punishment of Children, Quezon
City: Save the Children UK, p. 118.
22
Department of Social Welfare and Development Administrative
Order No. 141, Standards in the Implementation of Residential Care
Services, part III, sec. 1.4.
23
Straus, M.A., Sugarman, D.B., & Giles-Sims, J. (1997). Spanking by
parents and subsequent anti-social behavior of children. Archives of
Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 151, pp. 761-767.
24
Durrant, J. E. (2007), Positive Discipline: What it is and how to do it
(Primer), Bangkok, Save the Children Sweden Southeast Asia and
the Pacific, p. 1. (http://seap.savethechildren.se/upload/scs/SEAP/
publication/publication%20pdf/violence/Positive%20Discipline%20
Summary%20Brochure.pdf )
25
Ibid.
26
Interview with Joan E. Durrant, Ph.D. (http://seap.savethechildren.
se/upload/scs/SEAP/publication/publication%20pdf/violence/
Positive%20Discipline%20interview%20brochure24Aug07.pdf )
27
Kohlberg L. (1964), Development of moral character and moral
ideology. In: Hoffman ML, Hoffman LW, eds. Review of Child
Development Research, New York, NY: Russell-Sage Foundation;
pp. 383–431
28
Rustemier, S. (2006), Corporal punishment of children vs. alternative
disciplinary approaches, Global Initiative to End All Corporal
Punishment of Children. (www.ispcan.org/documents/VID/
Corporal-punishment-position-paper.pdf )
29
Ennew, J. & Plateau, D.P. (2004), How to research the physical and
emotional punishment of children, Bangkok, International Save the
Children Alliance. (http://www.scslat.org/search/publieng.php?_
cod_92_lang_e)
30
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, States
with full abolition (http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/
frame.html)
Since 1989
PLCPD
Philippine Legislators’ Committee
on Population and Development
Foundation, Inc.