Abstract:
There has been considerable debate over whether corporal punishment against children
should be prohibited in Canada. Various organizations, most notably the Canadian
Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law, have argued that the Canadian Government
should ban the use of corporal punishment by repealing the specific section of the
Canadian Criminal Code that provides parents with a legal defence to use corporal
punishment against their children; this provision is outlined in Section 43 of the Criminal
Code. Recently, the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law challenged
the constitutionality of Section 43 before the Supreme Court of Canada. The organization
claimed Section 43 is unconstitutional. It violates children's Charter rights, such as the
right to security of a person (Section 7), the right to be protected from cruel and unusual
treatment (Section 12), and denies children the same protection adults receive under the
law. Both the Canadian government and the Supreme Court of Canada reject the
Foundation's arguments. Examining the federal government and the judicial system's
rationale for refusing to remove Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code discloses how
the parent-child relationship is perceived. This thesis examines how the parent-child
relationship is perceived by the Canadian government and the issues that arise from such
a view. This examination is essential for the comprehension of why Canada's corporal
punishment law was enacted and remains in effect today.
