Lawfulness of corporal punishment

Home

Corporal punishment is prohibited in the home by a 2007 amendment to the Civil Code. The Code had previously recognised that parents “shall have the power to punish their children”, although this should not endanger the child’s health or include abuse (articles 234, 235, 238 and 239). In December 2007, article 234 was amended to make clear that the right to correct children excludes all forms of physical punishment.

Schools

Corporal punishment is unlawful in schools. We have yet to obtain details of all applicable legislation.

Penal system

Corporal punishment is unlawful as a sentence for crime under the Juvenile Justice Act (2005, in force 2007). Judicial corporal punishment was prohibited in 1928.

Corporal punishment is prohibited as a disciplinary measure in penal institutions by article 45 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

Alternative care

Corporal punishment of children is prohibited in other institutions and forms of childcare.

Workplace

Corporal punishment of children is unlawful in situations of employment.

Prevalence research

A 2006 survey by the Association of Chileans for the United Nations, together with Save the Children Switzerland, found that many parents admitted to frequent use of corporal punishment, most commonly in families of lower socio-economic status, and more commonly mothers than fathers; most also expressed concern about physical violence. (Soledad Salazar Medina, 2006, Estilos de crianza y cuidado infantile en Santiago de Chile: Algus reflexiones para comprender la violencia educative en la familia, Associacion Chilena Pro Naciones Unidas – ACHNU – PRODENI. Reported in The Santiago Times, 15 November 2006)

Research reported in 2000 involving interviews with 160 young people in conflict with the law found that 81% characterised their treatment by police as bad, 7% as average and 12% as good, contrasting with the situation once actually in custody where 11.3% said the treatment was bad, 27% average and 61.7% good. The most common forms of police abuse were repeated kicking (120 cases), followed by drenching with hoses (33), suffocation (27), hanging naked from a tree (17), forcing the head into a bucket of water (14), and the use of electric prods (11). (Jimenez, M. A., 2000, Adolescent Detainees and Minor’s Justice, UDP, cited in World Organisation Against Torture et al., 2004, State violence in Chile: An alternative report to the UN Committee Against Torture, OMCT)

In 1994, a survey of 423 parents from two public schools and 104 parents from a private catholic school found that child battering was admitted by 80.4% in the public schools group and 57% in the private schools group. This was confirmed by surveys of 192 students which revealed that 85% of children at one of the public schools and 54% at the private school reported having been physically punished. Striking with the hand was the most frequent form of corporal punishment, but 23.8% of the private school children questioned reported being beaten with a belt. (Vargas, N., et al., 1995, “Parental attitude and practice regarding physical punishment of school children in Santiago de Chile”, Child Abuse & Neglect, vol.19, no.9, pp.1077-1082)

As part of the World Studies of Abuse in the Family Environment (WorldSAFE) cross-national project, researchers looked at incidence rates for corporal punishment using the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale, as self-reported by mothers covering the period of the previous 6 months. In Chile, “moderate physical punishment” was reported as follows: spanked buttocks with hand 51%, shook child 39%, twisted ear 27%, pulled hair 24%, hit with object on buttocks 18%, slapped face or head 13%, hit with knuckles 12%, pinched child 3%. (Reported in Krug, E. G. et al. (eds) (2002), World report on violence and health, Geneva: World Health Organization)

Recommendations by human rights treaty bodies

Committee on the Rights of the Child

“The Committee reiterates its previous concern (CRC/C/15/Add.173 paras. 31-32) and regrets that article 234 of the Civil Code appears to authorise corporal punishment in the home. Furthermore the Committee notes the lack of statistical data on the number of reported cases and is concerned that corporal punishment continues to occur in the home as well as schools and institutions.

“The Committee recommends that the State party, while taking due account of the General Comment no. 8 of the Committee on the Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading Forms of Punishment (2006), amends article 234 of the Civil Code and enforce legislation explicitly prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the home. The State party should also conduct awareness raising and public education campaigns against corporal punishment and promote non-violent, participatory methods of childrearing and education.

“The Committee recommends that the State party, while taking due account of the General Comment no. 8 of the Committee on the Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading Forms of Punishment (2006), amends article 234 of the Civil Code and enforce legislation explicitly prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment of children in all settings, including the home. The State party should also conduct awareness raising and public education campaigns against corporal punishment and promote non-violent, participatory methods of childrearing and education.

“With reference to the United Nations Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children, the Committee recommends the State party to; a.) take all necessary measures for the implementation of the overarching and setting specific recommendations contained in the Report of the Independent expert of the United Nations Study on Violence against Children (A/61/299) while taking into account the outcome and recommendations of the Regional Consultation for Latin America held in Argentina between 30 May and 1 June 2005.

b) use these recommendations as a tool for action in partnership with civil society and in particular with the involvement of children to ensure that every child is protected from all forms of physical, sexual and mental violence and to gain momentum for concrete and, where appropriate, time-bound actions to prevent and respond to such violence and abuse.

c) seek technical assistance from UNICEF, OHCHR and WHO for the above mentioned purposes.”
(2 February 2007, CRC/C/CHL/CO/3 Unedited Version, Concluding observations on third report, paras. 40, 41 and 50)

“The Committee is concerned that corporal punishment of children remains socially acceptable in Chile and it is still practised in families, schools and other institutions. It further notes that Chilean legislation does not expressly prohibit corporal punishment.

“In light of articles 3, 19, and 28 (2) of the Convention, the Committee encourages the State party to:

1. develop measures to raise awareness on the harmful effects of corporal punishment and engage in the promotion of alternative forms of discipline in families to be administered in a manner consistent with the child’s dignity and in conformity with the Convention; and
2. explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in the family, in schools and in other institutions.”

(1 February 2002, CRC/C/15/Add.173, Concluding observations on second report, paras. 31 and 32 (a and b))

“The Committee recommends that the Government of the State party consider pursuing the measures adopted to fight situations of child ill-treatment. It stresses the importance of ensuring training activities for the professional groups concerned, as well as of developing mediation measures.”
(25 April 1994, CRC/C/15/Add.22, Concluding observations on initial report, para. 16)