The stick wars

1. The central issue raised by this article is whether students should be caned. The article discusses the psychological effects of caning on both the caned student himself, and those watching. It also discusses whether these caning is effective in preventing these students from repeating their offences. The article takes a stand that these children should not be caned as caning is not efficient in ending out the correct message. The article argues that it is a “Display of Barbarity” and that caning should not be supported.

2. To cane or not to cane? If you were a parent, would you agree for your child to be caned in public for a serious offence like stealing? Some people believe that caning is an act or barbarity, while some believe that it is the most efficient way to send the message out to both the student being caned and those observing, that what the student is being punished for should not be done.

Firstly, caning is should always be used a last resort, when the student is a repeat offender that cannot understand why what he is doing is wrong. The student should not be used as a tool to send out a message to the rest of the student population. The act of caning should always be the best course of action for the student. Some may argue that caning is never the best option for the student, and that counseling is always a better solution. However, so what do you do if even after multiple rounds of counseling, the student continues to make the offence? Threaten him with a reduced grade point if he does not stop? Obviously caning is the only option left. Caning is not about the pain, but about the shame. When the student is punished in front of the entire school, the student feels a lot of shame. This shame is what will prevent the child from doing it again. If what we do is to counsel the child after he steals, he’ll only think that he is allowed to do it and that it’s okay to steal. When he is caned, he will finally understand how severe his offence is.

However, some people may argue that caning is not an option for the rational human being. Caning uses violence to solve problems, and it brings out the barbarity in the people. It brings gives people the idea that people always have to be punished using force. What kind of impression would the act of caning young children give to members of other countries? If caning is continued, Singapore may even be seen as a barbaric society, where violence is used to solve problems.

The act of caning could affect the other students watching. They might think that force is the only way to solve problems and engage in fighting with each others to solve problems in the future. The act of caning is a public display of violence which may disgust many who are watching. In the article the author’s child is clearly disgusted when she thinks “No one should be caned, especially not in public.” The young innocent minds of the children could be suffering from serious effects as they might not be able to take trauma of seeing others being caned. However, this is exactly the effect that the disciplinary board wants to attain.

Caning is not only about punishing the student, but also about sending out a message to the rest of the student populace. If they see their fellow schoolmate being caned, they will also feel disgusted, and would not want to be put in their shoes. This would be a strong motivation for them to not commit any crimes in the future. Some may say that this is not the correct way to send the message out, but is there a better way? Caning is extremely effective as it allows all the students to identify as they all can feel what it feels like for them to be standing up there waiting to be caned. The sense of dread before the caning applies for both the person being caned, and the audience.

As they say, spare the rod and spoil the child. If these children are not caned, how would they be able to understand the true consequences of their actions?