Earlier this month, the Kerala High Court, hearing the case of a teacher accused of caning a class 6 student, rationalised teachers carrying canes to educational institutions.
“Let teachers, if they wish, carry a cane… It need not always be used, but its mere presence will deter students from misbehaving,” Justice P V Kunhikrishnan observed.
Granting bail to the accused, the court further stated that teachers should be shielded from criminal prosecution for minor disciplinary actions in schools if carried out in good faith.
This marks the fourth time in as many years that the court has deliberated on this issue and arrived at the same stance. In two previous cases, it urged that teachers be allowed to use “reasonable/moderate” force to discipline students with a much-needed caveat — that there is no malicious intent.
Why this stance?
Why is the Kerala High Court favouring such a stance? One may naturally ask. But before we get to that, it is best to examine one more case.
Last year, the court quashed a criminal case against a female teacher who had disciplined a Class 7 student for verbally abusing her. Justice A Badharudeen noted that teachers today educate students under the constant fear of what they can and cannot do, which could have “dangerous consequences” for the functioning of educational institutions.
A similar observation was made in the latest case as well. The court’s conclusions assume significance amid a marked increase in the number of criminal and sexual cases against teachers. Court data reveals that there were nearly as many cases filed against teachers in the past four years as those filed in the previous two decades.
The High Court alone heard 18 cases in the 2020-24 period. The figure stood at 19 from 2000 to 2020.
While some cases are genuine, concerns have been raised about a rise in allegations that may not always be well-founded. They are often filed by anxious parents who may not fully grasp how their child’s character is developing.
A deeper concern
The court’s remark in the latest case is certainly one that’s echoed throughout society.
“The behaviour of the younger generation is deeply concerning,” Justice Kunhikrishnan said. “Many are involved in serious criminal activities, and some have fallen into drug and alcohol addiction — something rarely seen in the past.”
The real, long-term solution may ultimately lie within schools. That’s not to say that teachers should be like ‘Chacko Mash’ (of Spadikam), of course.
Research shows corporal punishment has a detrimental effect on children’s well-being. This is why it was banned in the late 2000s.
Parents’ concerns also stem from this. Especially given how modern parenting often involves shielding children from hardships, pampering them, or ignoring their misdeeds.
But this approach, too, could have an adverse effect, points out sociologist Johnson M M. “Family is a primary socialisation agency where children learn values and morals. Instead of shielding children from realities, they should be encouraged to understand them,” he says.
In contrast to old-school parenting, children get more affected today. Psychiatrist Dr Arun B Nair, explains why. “It’s because they [older generation] had other emotional outlets — like an evening spent with friends on the playground,” he says.
“However, today, nuclear family kids lack such outlets, leading to brooding and feeling unloved. Moreover, the digital revolution left children disconnected.”
The parents? “They are also distracted by digital devices and neglect children’s emotional needs, making them feel even more lonely and distant,” Dr Arun says.
A need for balance
Psychologist and student counsellor Usha K Pillai says,“There should be a balance because when children are forced to seek external love and validation, they become vulnerable and fall prey to social ills.”
Psychiatrist Dr C J John concurs. “Effective discipline should be calm, clear, and constructive, fostering self-control and emotional maturity, not fear or resentment,” he says.
“A common, healthy discipline policy at home prevents confusion when experienced elsewhere, especially in schools.”
Canes “symbolise bad disciplining”, according to Dr John. “Effective discipline will not instil shame, negative guilt, a sense of abandonment or a loss of trust,” he notes.
“Negative consequences are, of course, needed to enforce discipline. But these should not be actions that may hurt the child emotionally or physically. Depriving pleasant privileges that the child enjoys – like playing outdoors or screen time quota – can be chosen as a negative consequence.”
The role of a teacher
There was a time when the mere presence of teachers was enough to instil discipline in the classroom. Now, reports emerge of students threatening and even physically attacking teachers.
Some argue that stricter discipline, even in the form of ‘moderate’ physical punishment, is necessary to restore order. “However, once a culture of violence is legitimised, the line between ‘mild’ and ‘excessive’ punishment often blurs,” warns policy expert Amal Chandra.
Instead of permitting corporal punishment, he says, efforts should be taken to address the root causes — “improving the working conditions for teachers, providing adequate psychological support, and ensuring smaller class sizes so discipline can be managed effectively”.
“Policies should focus on promoting constructive discipline rather than granting teachers the authority to use corporal punishment, which is fundamentally at odds with modern educational principles,” he concludes.
Meanwhile, many of the school teachers that TNIE spoke to are in favour of corporal punishment. Biju (name changed), a PT teacher, says, “The use of a cane is very much needed to ensure discipline. When used responsibly, punishment can reinforce discipline, set clear boundaries, and deter repeated misconduct, helping maintain order in classrooms.”
Another teacher, Manju (name changed), says, corporal punishment “is justified as long as it’s done to make them responsible, shape them to be better citizens”.
“But teachers must exercise caution and consider the student’s well-being as well. There must be a clear distinction between correction and harm,” she adds.
Principals, however, are more diplomatic. Most say “corporal punishment is not the solution to disciplinary issues”. Some urge the parents to be more proactive in ensuring their wards behave well.
What parents say
Parents, on the other hand, are split down the middle. Among the many that TNIE spoke to, it is those past their 50s who seem okay with children getting a few whacks in school.
“I prefer the old-school strictness from teachers,” says Nicholas (who prefers to use only his first name). “Many parents are hesitant to beat their children. They are pampered. Teachers should discipline children like in the old days. Emotional outbursts by one or two parents should not have schools compromising on discipline.”
Younger parents, however, are strictly against corporal punishment. “Instead of bringing back the cane and inflicting more trauma, equip children with awareness and social-emotional skills like boundary setting, standing up against peer pressure, anger transformation, etc,” says Karthika Jyothish.
Another mother, Neena Emil, says, “A cane is certainly not an answer. If children are unruly, first find the root cause, combat it and then help him with time and presence. Similarly, if a weapon, alcohol, or substance is found in possession of a student, probe for the source. That’s where the problem lies.”
Reshma S, mother of a nine-year-old boy, echoes similar views. “Forget corporal punishment, the government needs to combat the nefarious elements in society and severely punish those who are ruining our next generation,” she says.