United Nation Convention on the Rights of the Child

(UNCRC)
 The Philippines ratified the CRC in August 1990 and has engaged the UNCRC
 All countries in the world have signed the convention
 The Philippine delegation is headed by USec. Angelo Tapales, executive director of
the Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC). Co-heading the delegation are
Ambassador Evan Garcia, permanent representative of the Philippine Permanent
Mission to the UN in Geneva, and USec. Severo Catura, executive director of the
Presidential Human Rights Committee Secretariat.
 “We have always accorded high importance to our human rights commitments as
you can glean from our engagement with stakeholders both at the international and
national level,” Usec. Tapales said.
 “The UN engagement is an opportunity to put forward the real and positive picture
of the human rights environment in the Philippines, given that we have so much to
be proud of and share with the world, among which is on child rights protection,”
USec. Catura explained. “And equally important is, we are able to convey the
essential message that the promotion, protection, and fulfillment of the human
rights of Filipino citizens, especially the most vulnerable, are always high on the
priority list of the Philippines’ governance agenda,” Usec. Tapales said.

 The obligation to prohibit all corporal punishment of children falls directly under
articles 19, 28(2) and 37 of the Convention.
Article 19: “(1) States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative,
social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or
mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or
exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal
guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child….”
Article 28: “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school
discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity
and in conformity with the present Convention.”
Article 37: “States Parties shall ensure that: (a) No child shall be subjected to
torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither
capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be
imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age….”
 House Bill No. 8306 and House bill 1269 - Angelica Natasha Co approved this bill in the
Philippines promoting positive and non-violent discipline of children at home, in school, in
institutions, in alternative care systems, in workplaces, and in all other settings. Both bills
have been approved at the committee level in the House of Representatives and are
progressing through the legislative process.
 According to American Academy of Pediatrics Parents are more likely to use aversive
techniques of discipline when they are angry or irritable, depressed, fatigued, and stressed . In
44% of those surveyed, corporal punishment was used 50% of the time because the parent
had lost it. Approximately 85% expressed moderate to high anger, remorse, and agitation
while punishing their children.
 Although 93% of parents justify spanking, 85% say that they would rather not if they had an
alternative in which they believed. Based on the study of American Academy of Pediatrics
found that 54% of mothers said that spanking was the wrong thing to have done in at least
half of the times they used it.
 “We know that children whose families use corporal punishment are more likely to develop
anxiety, depression, behavior problems, and other mental health problems, but many people
don’t think about spanking as a form of violence,” said Katie A. McLaughlin, John L. Loeb
Associate Professor of the Social Sciences, director of the Stress & Development Lab in the
Department of Psychology.
 Based on the study published from Harvard gazette they found that corporal punishment can
impair brain development and exacerbate fear and stress responses. The American
Psychological Association highlights that spanking and similar punishments are linked to
higher aggression and long-term mental health issues, challenging the notion that these
methods effectively discipline children
 According to Holinger who’s a psychiatrist and a psychoanalyst in Unites States, there are
many ways we can discipline children without any forms of physical harm including corporal
punishment. One of the most useful ways is to talk and use words instead of actions—talk
rather than hit. Talk with the child about what behaviors are acceptable or not, what is safe or
dangerous, and why. Second, listening to the child—find out why they did or did not do
something. Lastly, explaining your reasons—this will enhance the child's decision-making
capacities.
 Parental rights must always align with children’s fundamental rights to safety and dignity.
International law, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC),
recognizes the child's right to protection from all forms of violence, including physical
punishment. Allowing harmful disciplinary practices in the name of autonomy risks
legitimizing abuse under the guise of discipline. Moreover, banning corporal punishment
doesn't remove parents' rights but guides them toward more effective and non-violent
methods that build healthier parent-child relationships.
 While traditions should be respected, cultural practices that harm children’s development
must evolve. Historically, many harmful practices (e.g., child labor or forced marriages) were
justified by tradition but were abolished when society recognized their adverse effects. A ban
would encourage society to adopt more constructive ways of teaching discipline that respect
children's dignity without compromising cultural values. Positive parenting can be integrated
into Filipino traditions by emphasizing respect and empathy.
 Current laws like Republic Act 7610 address abuse but don’t explicitly prohibit corporal
punishment. This leaves room for physical discipline to be misused or normalized as
"acceptable punishment." Clear and specific legislation banning all forms of corporal
punishment would close this loophole, making child protection laws comprehensive and
unequivocal. Evidence from countries like Sweden shows that explicit bans lead to societal
shifts in attitudes and reductions in violence against children
 Against Positive Parenting Exclusivity - Non-violent methods are universally adaptable
and have been shown to work across diverse cultural contexts. Studies show that corporal
punishment increases aggression and antisocial behavior, while positive parenting promotes
long-term compliance, emotional regulation, and trust. No evidence supports corporal
punishment as more effective in shaping behavior
 Cultural Diversity in Discipline - Cultural differences are acknowledged, but harm
transcends cultural contexts. The Philippine society values family and children, and this law
aims to protect them, aligning with cultural priorities while reducing harm.
 A meta-analysis published in The Lancet reviewed 69 studies and found that corporal
punishment did not lead to better behavior. Instead, it predicted an increase in behavioral
problems and worsened long-term developmental outcomes, regardless of culture, parenting
 style, or frequency of use. Children subjected to physical punishment were more likely to
exhibit violence themselves, creating a cycle of harm rather than resolution.
 According to the National Baseline Study on Violence Against Children (NBS-VAC),
approximately 60% of Filipino children have experienced physical violence, with corporal
punishment being a common form in households. The study further found that such violence
significantly impacts children's mental health, increasing the risk of anxiety, depression, and
developmental harm. Despite cultural norms framing corporal punishment as a discipline
tool, experts warn of its long-term negative consequences, including impaired social and
emotional development.

Breaking the Cycle: Beauty Gonzales on Generational Trauma