Edges Magazine Issue 27 - What Does Punishment Mean For Children

EDGES MAGAZINE Issue 27

November 2001

What does punishment mean
for children

Dr.Alan Prout is the Director of the Economic and Social Research Council Children ’s Programme at the University of Stirling.
For the last few years we have published some of their findings .

>>	When describing what punishment is for,many children say that it is ‘to teach a lesson ’.Yet this simple expression is used in diverse ways,ranging from a painful deterrent shock to a regretful admonition.The researchers argue that this ‘open textured ’aspect of penal language is important in grasping how adults as well as children understand the problem of punishment.The image of ‘the lesson ’suggests that most children feel that,in order to be justified,punishment should serve some useful purpose.Yet they are often unsure about exactly how it might do this,or even whether in general it does so.
>>	Some groups find the idea of imposing punishment exciting,even thrilling.On these occasions the notion of punishing is associated with the heady prospect of exercising great power.
>>	Despite the thrill that penal power can hold,most groups rather rapidly come up against the problem that inflicting physical pain or injury can mean ‘being bad yourself ’.How can this issue be overcome?
>>	Children speak very differently about punishing when the topic is some way remote (impersonal, far away,in the distant past or far future)than when it is more concrete or familiar.In the latter case,they are much more reluctant to imagine imposing drastic penalties.Punishing people is not the answer.

Punishment from the Perspective of Childhood

Traditionally receiving discipline of some sort (whether mild or draconian,arbitrary or consistent,explained or merely imposed)has been part and parcel of being a child.We discussed some of these experiences,at home and at school,with the children.But we also used scenarios,stories and ‘hypotheticals ’in attempting to enable discussion of some of this topic ’s many dimensions.One scenario that many children particularly liked was to imagine that they woke up one morning to find that all the adults have disappeared.How then will they organise things in this adultless world?What role,if any,will rules and sanctions play there?And who will decide?

In their response to the ‘adultless world ’scenario it is sometimes the heady prospect of exercising power that comes to the fore. Children are accustomed to being on the receiving end of punishment and enjoy the idea of turning the tables.There is,initially at least, a palpable thrill in taking on the role of the one who punishes.At the same time there is the persistent sense of vulnerability.The adultless world often also conjures prospects of running,hiding,locking oneself in.in most of our conversations the exciting but alarming anarchic prospects of the adultless world soon give way to more deliberate discussion of what is proper,legal or feasible.Questions of capital punishment or the infliction of physical pain lead directly to a central and abiding dilemma (which is not just a child ’s dilemma) about how one punishes without being bad oneself.

‘Teenagers ’have a special role in the nine-year old perspective on this adultless world,often as a source of fear and ‘trouble ’.The children talked at length about the need for ‘fair distribution ’of scarce resources.It was in these first discussions that ‘rule breakers ’ were first identified.Most of the children acknowledged responsibility to those ‘weaker ’than them (babies,pets,etc.)but also were profoundly aware of their vulnerability to the might and whims of ‘the teenagers ’.Interestingly,many of the ‘troubles ’they identified resonated with adult concerns about ‘teenage ’problems –fighting,graffiti,smoking,stealing,drugs.

The Prison as the Key Site of Punishment

The prison is the focal image in children ’s talk about punishment,as it did in the adults talk.It is the institution that springs most readily to mind when punishment is discussed,and it is one that can be pictured and described in certain definite ways.If,as has been remarked, prisons are ways of ‘saying things with walls ’what kind of things are the children saying with these walls?

Prisons are oddly familiar institutions.The children spoke with a characteristic readiness about prisons – they described prisons with an immediacy and fine level of detail,mostly of ‘built-in ’discomfort.Children can envision the smells and sounds of prison,and they can envisage planning prisons.The regimes of prison,the preponderance of rules,the rations were frequent topics of conversation amongst the children.Discussion of ‘regimes ’that would make prison life bearable were interrupted by ‘ calls for austerity ’– ‘not too comfortable ’beds,‘not too big rooms ’,‘only porridge and lettuce ’.Such concerns and debates have profoundly shaped the historical development of penal institutions and the characteristic features of their regimes.The appearance of these themes in the children ’s talk is suggestive of their continuing resonance and ideological weight in contemporary culture.

Stock Phrases and ‘Short,Sharp Words ’

One of the more striking features of the children ’s penal discourse was the recurrence of certain ‘stock ’expressions;formulae that came readily to hand as ‘easy ’or ‘obvious ’responses.(We take all this to be a feature of adult punishment talk too,especially in the form of newspaper headlines and political sound bites –but in fact adult conversations on these topics have rarely been studied).Some of these expressions,especially those that we characterise as ‘short,sharp words’,relate primarily to imprisonment:‘lock them up’,‘throw away the key’. Others had mainly historical resonances:‘behead them’, ‘banish them’, ‘let them rot’.

However,some ‘stock ’phrases were much more open and ambiguous in application.One of these,which we have found particularly provocative,is ‘teach them a lesson ’.Teaching lessons is what children primarily take punishment to do,but precisely what this entails (and,for example,whether it is a deterrent,corrective or rehabilitative lesson that one learns)is a topic that repays close examination, and whose relevance is not confined to work on or with children.On some occasions the lesson consisted in hard treatment – a bitter experience that one would not wish to repeat.Sometimes it means ‘more of the same ’:if a person repeats their offence put them in prison for a longer time.Alternatively,the lesson can be something much more like a school lesson,involving book learning and tests:we prove we have ‘learned our lesson ’by passing an exam.But sometimes the lesson refers to something more personal and challenging:a change of heart.Alternatively,the lesson can be something much more like a school lesson,involving book learning and tests:we prove we have ‘learned our lesson ’by passing an exam.But sometimes the lesson refers to something more personal and challenging a change of heart or outlook associated with coming to understand another ’s hurt.

In part what is an issue in the use of these common phrases is the tendency of penal discourse to reduce to slogans (‘Prison Works!’).At the same time some expressions record the traffic between punishment and other areas of experience including such mundane and familiar ones as education (‘teach a lesson’) and sport (‘Three strikes and you ’re out’). One effect of such homely and everyday associations may be to make courses of action that would otherwise look morally troubling seem more natural and acceptable.

IMPLICATIONS

In many contexts -at home and at school,for example – adults ’ability to communicate effectively with children tends to be taken for granted.Many of our interventions in children ’s lives are defended on the grounds of guiding or correcting their behaviour,and of teaching them ‘their lessons ’.We suggest that there are both theoretical and practical value in reflecting on the character of such lessons,and the various relationships,practices and justifications that they signify for children.

Meanwhile,many policy innovations in criminal justice and elsewhere (consider the Scottish Children ’s Hearings or,more recently,some of the formats involved in ‘restorative justice ’,‘family conferencing ’and so on)rely upon the child ’s participation and ‘voice ’.We hope to have contributed to practice by indicating some of the ways in which children give voice to their moral sensibilities about punishing.We see a clear need for further research and reflection on these arrangements (and such traditional ones as courtrooms, social work interviews and so on)as social settings and interactions.What kinds of conversations are these?How is the child ’s voice solicited and interpreted?

The heady thrill that sometimes goes with the notion of having the power to punish tells us at least as much about our dominant ideas and images of punishment,and about power relations between adults and children,as it does about children ’s minds or their ‘moral development ’.At the same time,when children can picture themselves as responsible for the fate of a real other person the language shifts onto different ground,and ideas of apology, reconciliation and reciprocity take centre stage.

FURTHER DIRECTIONS IN RESEARCH?

The children who participated in our study were all of much the same age, came from from much the same part of the country and were rather homogenous in the terms of their ethnic and cultural backgrounds (they were overwhelmingly white;few had direct personal experience of the criminal justice or care systems).We wish to encourage further work,perhaps using similar methods of inquiry,with more diverse populations and with adults as well as with children.

MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT

Several papers arising from the project are in preparation.These address such topics as the association between punishment,power and violence;images of prisons;and bullying,as well as the theoretical and methodological aspects of the work.We expect to continue developing work,especially on the latter issues,for some time to come.