体罰肯定派の科学と反論――体罰は本当に「百害あって一利なし」なのか？ (4/4)

「理想的な体罰」と「フグの調理免許」の関係――できる人だけやる、という危険

これまで数多くの研究論文をもとに、体罰容認と体罰反対の主張をみてきました。

そして体罰容認派と体罰反対派がかみ合わない根源的な部分には、実証しているもののすれ違いや反対派の実験結果を飛び越えた政策提言などの思想が大きく影を落としていることも見えてきました。

では学術的な問題はさておき、もっと現実的で生々しい場面ではどうでしょうか？

この観点からは、別のものも見えてきます。

それは体罰容認派の基準に合う体罰とは、同時にきわめて強い自制心を前提にした体罰でもあるという事実です。

年齢、回数、強さ、場面を厳しく絞り、怒りに流されず、見せしめにもならず、その場かぎりの短い介入として止める。

そうした「理想条件つきの体罰」は、言葉にすれば整って見えますが、実際にはどれほどの親が安定して実行できるのか、という問題が残ります。

多くの場合それは、親がいら立ち、子どもが反発し、家庭の空気が張りつめた感情的場面で選ばれる行為です。

そして政策は、最も自制的な親を基準に組むべきではありません。

現実には、冷静な一打だけで終わるはずだったものが、連打になり、見せしめになり、しつけの名を借りた感情の放出に変えてしまう親たちも存在するからです。

フグが免許を持つ人にしか調理を許されていないのは、「できる人はやればいい」としてしまうと、できない人まで手を出し、危険が広がるからです。

同じように、「きわめて強い自制心を前提にした体罰」もまた、「できる人はすればいい」で済ませるには危うい性質を持っています。

体罰はそれを受ける子供だけでなく、親の問題でもあると言えるでしょう。

参考文献一覧

• Atkinson, L., Khoury, J., Kenny, M., & Gonzalez, A. (2026). Is there experimental evidence for the effectiveness of disciplinary spanking? A review and meta-analysis of four controlled trials. Child Abuse & Neglect, 174, 107945. DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2026.107945.
• Gunnoe, M. L., Larzelere, R. E., Ferguson, C. J., & Cox, R. B., Jr. (2025). An update on the scientific evidence for and against the legal banning of disciplinary spanking. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(1), 1–9. PubMed/PMC: PMID 40969656.
• Afifi, T. O., Stewart-Tufescu, A., Gonzalez, A., & MacMillan, H. L. (2025). Legal banning of disciplinary spanking in Canada: Evidence and human rights – a response to Gunnoe and colleagues. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(2), 3–4. PubMed/PMC: PMID 40959826.
• Kraus de Camargo, O. (2025). The need to consider more than evidence when justifying physical punishment. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(2), 5–6. PubMed/PMC: PMID 40959828.
• Gunnoe, M. L., Larzelere, R. E., Ferguson, C. J., & Cox, R. B., Jr. (2025). More arguments for the weakness of the empirical evidence used to support spanking bans: Rejoinder to Afifi et al. (2025) and Kraus de Camargo (2025). Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(2), 7–11. PubMed/PMC: PMID 40969678.
• Gershoff, E. T., Goodman, G. S., Miller-Perrin, C. L., Holden, G. W., Jackson, Y., & Kazdin, A. E. (2018). The strength of the causal evidence against physical punishment of children and its implications for parents, psychologists, and policymakers. American Psychologist, 73(5), 626–638. DOI: 10.1037/amp0000327.
• Larzelere, R. E., Gunnoe, M. L., Ferguson, C. J., & Roberts, M. W. (2019). The insufficiency of the evidence used to categorically oppose spanking and its implications for families and psychological science: Comment on Gershoff et al. (2018). American Psychologist, 74(4), 497–499. DOI: 10.1037/amp0000461.
• Gershoff, E. T., Goodman, G. S., Miller-Perrin, C., Holden, G. W., Jackson, Y., & Kazdin, A. E. (2019). There is still no evidence that physical punishment is effective or beneficial: Reply to Larzelere, Gunnoe, Ferguson, and Roberts (2019) and Rohner and Melendez-Rhodes (2019). American Psychologist, 74(4), 503–505. DOI: 10.1037/amp0000474.
• Gershoff, E. T., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: Old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(4), 453–469. DOI: 10.1037/fam0000191.
• Heilmann, A., Mehay, A., Watt, R. G., Kelly, Y., Durrant, J. E., van Turnhout, J., & Gershoff, E. T. (2021). Physical punishment and child outcomes: A narrative review of prospective studies. The Lancet, 398(10297), 355–364. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00582-1.
• Pritsker, J. (2021). Spanking and externalizing problems: Examining within-subject associations. Child Development, 92(6), 2595–2602. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.13701.
• Kang, J., & Rodriguez, C. M. (2025). Spanking and children’s approaches to learning: Estimates from a longitudinal matched-sample design. Behavioral Sciences, 15(5), 658. DOI: 10.3390/bs15050658.
• Cuartas, J., Weissman, D. G., Sheridan, M. A., Lengua, L., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2021). Corporal punishment and elevated neural response to threat in children. Child Development, 92(3), 821–832. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.13565.
• Cuartas, J. (2021). Corporal punishment and early childhood development in 49 low- and middle-income countries. Child Abuse & Neglect, 120, 105205. DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105205.
• Larzelere, R. E., Gunnoe, M. L., Pritsker, J., & Ferguson, C. J. (2024). Resolving the contradictory conclusions from three reviews of controlled longitudinal studies of physical punishment: A meta-analysis. Marriage & Family Review, 60(7), 395–433. DOI: 10.1080/01494929.2024.2392672
• Alampay LP, Godwin J, Lansford JE, Bombi AS, Bornstein MH, Chang L, et al. Severity and Justness Do Not Moderate the Relation Between Corporal Punishment and Negative Child Outcomes: A Multicultural and Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Behavioral Development. 2017;41(4):491-502. doi:10.1177/0165025417697852.
• Rodriguez CM, Silvia PJ, Lee SJ, Grogan-Kaylor A. Assessing Mothers’ Automatic Affective and Discipline Reactions to Child Behavior in Relation to Child Abuse Risk: A Dual-Processing Investigation. Assessment. 2022;29(7):1532-1547. doi:10.1177/10731911211020114.
• Gershoff ET, Goodman GS, Miller-Perrin CL, Holden GW, Jackson Y, Kazdin AE. The Strength of the Causal Evidence Against Physical Punishment of Children and Its Implications for Parents, Psychologists, and Policymakers. American Psychologist. 2018;73(5):626-638. doi:10.1037/amp0000327.
• de Camargo OK. The Need to Consider More Than Evidence When Justifying Physical Punishment. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2025;34(2):5-6. PMID:40959828.
• World Health Organization. Corporal punishment of children and health. Fact sheet. 2025 Aug 20.