Serbian Ombudsman Tamara Luksic Orlandic Deputy Ombudsperson for the Rights of the Child ENOC Annual Conference Brussels, 25-27 September, 2013 Positive.

Serbian Ombudsman Tamara Luksic Orlandic

Deputy Ombudsperson for the Rights of the Child

ENOC Annual ConferenceBrussels, 25-27 September,

2013

Positive Parenting and Ban Corporal Punishment Campaign

Why this campaign was launched?

• In the first Draft of Child Act (launched in December 2011), banning CP in all settings was proposed

• This proposal provoked huge polarization in the public and raised numerous controversies

• Media gave their contribution in pro et contra discussions for legal banning with an accent that legal banning is entering into family private life.

• It was clear that a new approach was needed

• UNICEF as natural partner – Campaign started in early 2012

New approach – disadvantages • traditional attitudes that parents are those who

have the power over their children• legal banning is interference into the family life • Serbian family is still patriarchal with dominant

role of man and subordinate role of woman and children

• Still dominant role of the Orthodox Church followed by right wing NGOs as an echo of 90-ties)

• Some figures: 57% of parents in UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster

Survey (MICS) 2005 pool reported that they use CP in disciplining their children;

37% of parents in MICS 2010 reported the same.

Advantages

• Corporal punishment was legally prohibited in schools in Serbia from 1929 Law on public schools, and in all following laws on education up to the current one

• In correctional institutions and juvenile prisons it is strictly prohibited.

• In social care institution it is not explicitly prohibited such as in educational institutions, but it is indirectly banned, as the professional has to take care of children respecting their dignity

• The same wording is in The Family Act, but explicit ban doesn't exist.

Aims of the project on positive parenting

• Awareness raising about harmfulness of corporal punishment

• Explicit legal ban of CP and promotion of alternatives to CP in raising and disciplining children

Project Activities

• Peer research on views of children and young about CP and positive parenting

• Seminar for children about advocacy, debating and awareness raising activities

• Focus groups with medical staff of maternity wards and teachers

• Preparing and publishing of publication in 5.000 copies

• Public Statement of the Ombudsman on CP• Public debates held by children and

Ombudsman’s experts

Peer research

Seminar for children

preparing them for advocacy, debating and awareness raising activities

Focus groups • Focus groups with medical staff of maternity wards and

teachers, whose task is to further strengthen young parents

Publication

• Preparing and publishing of publication ”To beAT or not to beAT: that is the question now – Parenthood without smacking”

5.000 copies

Public Statement of the Ombudsman

• Public Statement of the Ombudsman on CP

Public Statement of the Ombudsman

• Serbian Ombudsman is the only state authority in Serbia (though independent) that publicly announced its statement on CP (presented at the Press conference, put on the web site, and sent to the Peter Newell and his site End Corporal Punishment as well

• The main point of the Statement is that legal prohibition of corporal punishment is necessary to finally protect children from beating in all settings, including family

• Prohibition of CP is based on the principle that no physical punishment is reasonable and in the interest of a child

• Apart from enhancing parents to use other forms of disciplining children, a constant education of professionals working with children is necessary

Public debates held by children

• Public debates held by children and Ombudsman’s experts

The Role of Children in the Project

• Public pool was organized among children and was conducted by the children – Young Advisory Panel (YAP) of the Ombudsman

• Total number of 812 students (children age 13 to 17) were interviewed

• Ten public debates were held in 10 elementary and high schools in 6 municipalities throughout Serbia (split in two groups with pro et contra arguments, they provoked discussion among visitor – peers, teachers and parents)

YAP Research - How children perceive CP• Children have absolutely negative attitude towards CP. They

recognize non efficiency of CP, harmful and dangerous consequences of applying CP

• 84% consider that wrong behavior should and can be corrected without beating

• 82% consider that beating can injure body and child’s personality• 63% are of the opinion that CP provokes fear but not understanding• 61% recognize that children who are exposed to CP at home, easier

get involved in peer abuse, either as the perpetrator or a victim• 51% realize that children who are frequently beaten have law self

confidence (only 16% oppose this)

What is opposite to the CP – children's views• 77% consider that children have to be equally protected from physical

and all other degrading punishment• 61% consider that children should have the same protection at home

as they have at school

• 90% think that parents should explain to children what is acceptable behavior and what is not

• 88% think that parents should praise a child and encourage him/her to behave properly

• 84% think that personal example of behavior of parent is more effective in raring children than the CP

What to suggest parents instead of using CP• Brochure ”To beAT or not to beAT: that

is the question now – Parenthood without smacking” offers several ways of escaping CP and using other models of raring, such as:

What to suggest parents instead of using CPtime-out (2 -10): send a child in other room for few minutes to

calm down ( as many minutes as the child’s age)• change environment, not a child (1-6): move dangerous and

expensive objects from a child, instead punishing the child for its curiosity

• praise (applicable for all ages): the most efficient, but the least applicable in everyday life

• compensation of damage (applicable for all ages): a child, not a parent, has to apologize to whom a child made damage, insult, etc..

• restrict privileges: to watch TV, use PC, pocket money, playing with friends, etc.

• awarding a child (applicable for all ages) for those situation which are not pleasant for a child (to correct bad mark in a school)

• contracting (with a teenager): both sides (parents and a child) should have obligations in the contract

RESULTS so far

* Project on Positive parenting was finalized in April 2013

• Five thousands brochures was disseminated among young parents in maternity wards and in schools

• NGO Network is supporting our activities, especially NGO “ The Parents”, whose activists are in touch with parents on daily basis and share with them models of positive parenting

• It is expected that our initiative for legal banning CP in all settings will be finally adopted when Draft Child Act enters into Parliament procedure

Thank you for your attention

Tamara Luksic – Orlandic

Email: [email protected]