Hot off the presses - The Supreme Court upholds reasonable use of force in discipling children in Canada. Yet to read the ruling - read Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004 SCC 4 along with me and discuss later today.

Later: This is the concluding paragraph from the 6 to 3 majority at paragraph 68:

I am satisfied that a reasonable person acting on behalf of a child, apprised of the harms of criminalization that s. 43 avoids, the presence of other governmental initiatives to reduce the use of corporal punishment, and the fact that abusive and harmful conduct is still prohibited by the criminal law, would not conclude that the child's dignity has been offended in the manner contemplated by s. 15(1). Children often feel a sense of disempowerment and vulnerability; this reality must be considered when assessing the impact of s. 43 on a child's sense of dignity. Yet, as emphasized, the force permitted is limited and must be set against the reality of a child's mother or father being charged and pulled into the criminal justice system, with its attendant rupture of the family setting, or a teacher being detained pending bail, with the inevitable harm to the child's crucial educative setting. Section 43 is not arbitrarily demeaning. It does not discriminate. Rather, it is firmly grounded in the actual needs and circumstances of children. I conclude that s. 43 does not offend s. 15(1) of the Charter.

Interestingly, at paragraphs 45 and 46, the use of corporal punishment upon children under two and above 12 is usually unreasonable and, therefore, prohibited. The statements in this section of the case is not very detailed but likely constitute a ban under the Charter on corporal punishment outside of that ten year range from two to twelve.