Document Actions
Mon.: "Rearin'" to go
posted at 2009-04-27 23:59 | Last modified 2009-04-28 08:58
House lawmakers voted tonight in favor of H442, a proposal to make corporal punishment in school more transparent and more subject to parental wishes.
The legislation makes three major changes to existing law:
- It requires schools to make a good-faith effort to contact a student’s parents before paddling the student.
- It requires parents to state in writing at the beginning of the school year whether their student can be spanked.
- It requires schools to report spanking incidents to the State Board of Education, which is charged with tracking the use of corporal punishment.
The third provision may be the most significant in the long run. Action for Children Senior Fellow Tom Vitaglione says schools aren’t currently required to report who they’re spanking, how often, or why.
Interestingly, the State Board of Education, which collects data on numerous things, including all sorts of school violence where students commit violent acts, does not require anything with regard to reporting on the administration of corporal punishment in the schools.
60 out of the state's 115 school districts already ban the use of corporal punishment. Those include all the big urban districts, which means about 80% of NC students already can’t be spanked.
As it turns out, the 20% who still face the paddle may not be on even terms, either. Child advocates say there’s anecdotal evidence that spankings are more common among special needs, minority, and low-income kids than among their counterparts. If that’s the case, the reporting requirement should show it.
"The rearin’"
To be fair, there was less floor debate than I expected. (Last session, when the House debated a ban on school spankings, it went on for what seemed like days.) But there were still some zingers.
Guilford Republican Laura Wiley, a teacher not long out of the classroom, spoke in favor of the bill.
We can all have differences how we feel about corporal punishment, but I don’t think we have any differences about letting parents have the option.
Robeson Democrat Ronnie Sutton supported the bill, but as a proponent of corporal punishment, he’s afraid it’s a step down the wrong path.
It’s just one more avenue working towards eliminating corporal punishment. But hopefully by the time we get corporal punishment eliminated, our economy will have turned around and we’ll go back to building prisons. Because that’s what we’ll need to be doing.
Guilford Republican John Blust waxed nostalgic about his paddlings in fifth grade, bemoaningthe lack of "rearin' " today's kids receive.
I was a beneficiary of some liberal application of corporal punishment when I was coming up…and I say beneficiary, and again it’s no silver bullet, but I think over time, I had it taught to me and reinforced, a certain respect for authority.
In the end, the measure passed easily, 91-24, with no objection to third reading. It now heads to the Senate, where it’s likely to pass by a similarly wide margin.
Blue Cross Audit
Wednesday’s the expected release date for the Auditor’s report on the State Health Plan’s contract with Blue Cross Blue Shield NC. It’s set for release at about the same time the UNC Tar Heels stop by Jones Street to be honored for their national title. Anyone want to guess which event will get more column inches in your local paper?
Coming up:
Was that a note of relief in Rep. Winkie Wilkins’ voice tonight as he announced the removal of the state employee furlough bill (H708) from tomorrow’s House State Government agenda? Either way, there’s still plenty of action on tomorrow’s calendar.
- The Open Gov’t Act (H1134) is in House J1.
- The Tenant Foreclosure Protection Act is due up in Senate J1.
- House J3 weighs a proposal to criminalize leaving a child unattended in a vehicle.
- House Education considers banning junk food from school vending machines.
- House Juv. Justice debates whether to regulate beauty pageants for children under 13.
Comments? Drop me a line.
