CHILD RIGHTS VS. CULTURAL DISCIPLINE: A STUDY OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT PRACTICES IN KANO STATE

CHILD RIGHTS VS. CULTURAL DISCIPLINE: A STUDY OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT PRACTICES IN KANO STATE

1.1 Background of the Study

In Kano State, corporal punishment remains a culturally sanctioned method of disciplining children in homes and schools, often justified as necessary for instilling respect and obedience (Christian & Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, 2015). Yet international child-rights frameworks—including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child—categorically oppose all forms of physical punishment, citing risks of injury and long-term psychological harm (Berkowitz, 2017). This tension between child-rights norms and deeply rooted cultural beliefs poses significant challenges for policy implementation and community acceptance of non-violent discipline methods.

Empirical research indicates that corporal punishment, even when intended as corrective, is associated with increased aggression, anxiety, and diminished parent–child trust (Glick, Lorand, & Bilka, 2016; Lansford et al., 2021). In contexts like Kano State—where religious and traditional leaders wield considerable influence—shifting disciplinary norms requires both respect for cultural values and robust community education on children’s rights and developmental needs. Understanding how Kano parents and educators reconcile or resist these competing frameworks is critical for designing child-protection interventions that are both effective and culturally sensitive.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Despite national laws prohibiting excessive physical punishment, corporal discipline remains prevalent in Kano State, with little empirical data on its frequency, context, or community attitudes. The lack of region-specific evidence hampers efforts by child-rights advocates and education authorities to promote alternative discipline strategies, leaving children vulnerable to abuse under the guise of cultural tradition.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

To document the prevalence and forms of corporal punishment used by parents and teachers in Kano State.

To compare community perceptions of corporal discipline with international child-rights standards.

To develop culturally appropriate recommendations for reducing reliance on physical punishment and promoting positive discipline.

1.4 Research Questions

What types and frequencies of corporal punishment do children in Kano State experience at home and in school?

How do parents and educators justify corporal discipline in relation to cultural and religious beliefs?

What community-driven strategies can effectively shift attitudes toward non-violent forms of child discipline?

1.5 Significance of the Study

Child-Rights Organizations & NGOs: Will gain region-specific data to tailor advocacy and training programs.

Education Authorities & School Administrators: Insights to inform teacher-training curricula on positive discipline.

Parents & Community Leaders: Evidence to facilitate dialogue on balancing cultural values with children’s rights and well-being.

1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study

Scope: Cross-sectional survey of parents, teachers, and children (aged 6–17) across selected urban and rural communities in Kano State.

Limitations:

Social Desirability Bias: Respondents may underreport punitive practices.

Cultural Sensitivity: Definitions of “harsh” vs. “acceptable” punishment may vary, affecting data consistency.

1.7 Definition of Terms

Corporal Punishment: The intentional application of physical force to a child for the purpose of correction or control (Christian & Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, 2015).

Child Rights: Legal entitlements ensuring protection from violence and respect for physical and psychological integrity.

Positive Discipline: Non-violent strategies—such as time-outs, reasoning, and reward systems—designed to teach appropriate behavior.

Cultural Discipline: Disciplinary methods rooted in local customs, traditions, or religious teachings.

Social Desirability Bias: The tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others.

 

List of References

Berkowitz, C. D. (2017). Physical abuse of children. New England Journal of Medicine, 376(17), 1659–1666.

Christian, C. W., & Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect. (2015). The evaluation of suspected child physical abuse. Pediatrics, 135(5), e20150356.

Glick, J. C., Lorand, M. A., & Bilka, K. R. (2016). Physical abuse of children. Pediatrics in Review, 37(4), 146–158.

Lansford, J. E., Godwin, J., McMahon, R. J., Crowley, M., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., … Dodge, K. A. (2021). Early physical abuse and adult outcomes. Pediatrics, 147(1).