The new law, Ley de Protección de la Niñez, declares that “…children shall not be victims of corporal or psychological punishment, however, the parents’ right to direct, orient and correct them moderately and adequately is not restrained” (article 35). In tiny El Salvador, with a population of 5,6 million, 3 984 cases of child maltreatment were reported in 2007. And then there’s the number of unknown cases. Furthermore, millions of Salvadoran children suffer from less physically, still psychologically, harmful forms of corporal punishment. The kinds of punishment that the new law is permitting. The kinds of punishment that open up for more and more violence in society.
Many of the advocates of the new law use conservative arguments like “prohibiting corporal punishment would be discordant and against our culture” (Juán Pablo Durán, Partido Cambio Democrático) and “we cannot obviate what’s written in the Bible” (Jeremías Bolaños Anaya, la Conferencia Evengélica de las Asambleas de Dios). Some underline the importance of first explaining pedagogically to the child why it will be punished, before carrying out the act. So to speak; spontaneous, uncontrolled violence is not accepted, but calculated, systematic violence is.
Everyone in El Salvador is well aware of the serious problems of violence in the country. How can anyone, at anytime sustain that using violence against a child benefits development? That fear is better than reasoning? That, if other forms of child education was to be preferred, the result would be “lost generations” (Antonio Almendáriz, Partido de Conciliacion Nacional)? And who decides what is a “moderate and adequate” corporal punishment? Who protects the child, when not even the law does?
If there’s anything that could be called protective safe havens in El Salvador, I sustain that schools have the biggest potential. Of course, a lot of children suffer from violence at school, too. They are victims of maltreatment from other children and sometimes from teachers. However, I have met so many teachers at public schools struggling daily to teach the children how to solve conflicts through dialogue instead of violence. They claim that, when handling a student who misbehaves, one cannot get to the roots of the problem by yelling or hitting, since the child’s conduct in school originates from that kind of violent treatment she or he suffers at home. Violence feeds violence. The school, the teachers underline, has to be a place where vicious circles are broken, not reinforced.
But when the teacher explains to the bruised student that her mother’s treatment is wrong, that it is against the rights of the child, how is she going to explain the fact that according to national law, chastise is totally acceptable? As long as the punishment was “moderate and adequate”: “Mr National Law here says that maybe you deserved that slap. You see, kids who grow up without bruises become criminals. They never get to learn things like love and respect… Be grateful of the values that slap taught you!”

I am more convinced than ever that organizations like Schools for the Future and projects like ours have an important role to play in El Salvador. And that Salvadoran teachers are the hope of a less violent future where battered kids is the exception rather than the rule.
Please, visit http://www.schoolsforthefuture.org/ for more information about my work in El Salvador, and how you can help!
