HAZEL MARY THOMPSON-AHYE
ON NEW Year’s morning I attended the 8 am Mass at my parish church. In the course of his sermon, the priest mentioned the words “child rights.” It was music to my ears. I thought I was in for a treat. Glory Hallelujah! My joy was short-lived, however, for, as the sermon continued, I became increasingly concerned about the message being conveyed.
The priest said that the reason there was so much crime in the society was that children were not being corrected, as we adults had been when we were children. He blamed the child rights advocates (among whom I count myself) for that state of affairs. He told of a child in the US who had called the protective services to complain of his grandmother beating him and the grandmother had been arrested. He advocated a return to the good old days when children were flogged and became law-abiding members of society. I vowed to speak to him after Mass.
The sermon was reminiscent of a Mother’s Day sermon at the cathedral in Nassau many years ago.The parish priest had said then that mothers were responsible for boys being in Fox Hill Prison. A number of mothers, including the then president of the Bar Association, walked out the church. Archbishop Burke had taught us that older parishioners had a responsibility to correct young priests when they fell into error, so I had a word with the priest and discovered that he was oblivious to the exodus that had occurred.
After the New Year's Mass I approached the priest, whom I had, in the past, complimented on his inspiring sermons and his manner of engaging the congregation in the liturgy, and asked him if a Trinidadian mother was told, as Mary was, by Jesus, "Did you not know I must be about my father’s business?" should she cuff him in his mouth? He laughed. I promised to respond publicly to his sermon. I do so now.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which TT ratified since 1991, has made it clear that “legal and social acceptance of physical punishment of children in the home and institutions is not compatible with the convention.”
In its general comment No 8 on the “The right to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment,” the committee defined corporal punishment as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light.
"Most involve hitting (smacking, slapping, spanking) children, with the hand or with an implement – whip, stick, belt, shoe, wooden spoon, etc. But it can also involve, for example, kicking, shaking or throwing children, scratching, pinching, burning, scalding or forced ingestion (for example, washing children’s mouth out with soap)…”
The committee views corporal punishment as “invariably degrading and recognises that some justify the use of corporal punishment through religious faith teachings and texts” but that “practice of a religion or belief must be consistent with respect for others’
