SINGAPORE: After the Ministry of Education announced new measures to address bullying in schools in April, including caning for older boys for severe cases, a number of Parliamentarians raised questions last week regarding the updated measures.

Among them was Workers’ Party Member of Parliament (WP MP) Jamus Lim (Sengkang), who asked questions about the standardised caning measures, whether the distinctions made between students’ gender and age had been based on established research and if MOE could share the basis for these distinctions.

In a Facebook post, Assoc Prof Lim talked about having been mischievous as a child, and receiving caning “frequently” as a consequence both at home and at school.

Although he acknowledged that these experiences had been formative, he said that he and his wife have chosen not to use corporal punishment on their daughter.

The Sengkang MP cited studies that send “a pretty clear message: while physical punishment yields short-term compliance, it does not translate into long-term improvements in discipline. It may even normalise violence in their developing minds. 

Put another way, beating kids makes them stop, but they don’t learn why they went wrong, and are likely to repeat their bad behaviour. It may even be counterproductive and lead to more bullying, since violence was legitimised.”

He also wrote that some studies suggest that spankings are more effective with younger, rather than older, children, and that both boys and girls are affected by physical punishment, though they react differently to it.

“We shouldn’t think that boys can take it better than girls when they’re caned, or that any psychological harm to boys is somehow less damaging than to girls,” he wrote.

He also posted some follow-up questions he had been unable to ask in Parliament, concerning what recourse parents had in cases of corporal punishment, if they hold beliefs that are different on the matter.

The links to the studies cited by Assoc Prof Lim may be found in his social media post here.

Education Minister Desmond Lee had underlined that caning would only be administered for egregious violations.

“This is aligned with the Education (Schools) Regulations, which only permits caning for male students. This takes reference from the Criminal Procedure Code, which states that women shall not be punished with caning,” he said.

Mr Lee added that girls who bully are not less capable and may receive various consequences such as detention or suspension and an adjustment of their conduct grade.

“Our teachers and schools adopt a tiered approach to discipline that ensures that all students face consequences corresponding to the severity of their actions,” he said.

Netizens commenting on Assoc Prof Lim’s post pushed back on some of his points, and appeared to be in favour of caning, repeating what the minister said about caning being only the last resort in disciplining students. 

“Singapore school caning is a tightly regulated last-resort disciplinary tool shaped by social context and legal norms,” one pointed out.

Others shared their stories.

“When I was young, our disciplinary teacher treated every student equally. No such thing as a girl can’t be caned. Boys were caned on the buttocks, and girls were caned on their palms. One cane will let you remember why you got it,” a woman wrote. 

“From my anecdotal observation as a school administrator (I wish I could find research on this), the use of caning and especially public caning is NOT for the benefit of the child being punished but to achieve the 杀鸡儆猴 effect (making an example of someone) to the rest of the school,” a Facebook user shared.

“People are different, as an ex-teacher, I can only say that some individuals really need canning to reform,” another wrote.

Others, however, agreed with the MP, with one writing, “I can’t fathom how we can legally allow PHYSICAL VIOLENCE on a CHILD.” /TISG

Read also: MOE: New anti-bullying steps in schools with more staff and reporting channels

This article (WP MP Jamus Lim says caning bullies may be counterproductive, but Singaporeans push back) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.