Because for a long time in many societies women and children were seen as property of men and corporal punishment was seen as appropriate well after it was decided that the state could not do the same to men who were convicted of crimes. Eventually most societies have started to treat physical violence against wives as a crime, but lag far behind on children.
A huge chunk of the US still doesn’t prohibit corporal punishment for children, and everyone can probably guess most of the states that still allow it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_of_children_in_the_United_States
Where did you grow up?
It was definitely illegal for teachers to assault students in California when I was a kid in the 80s.
Rockford, Chicago, Tallahassee, Miami, Atlanta, Seattle, Mississippi, Texas and finally Arkansas. Now that I am reading that sentence I am reminded of that animaniacs song.
Corporal punishment was also opt-out at my elementary school in Virginia in the early 2000s, maybe late 90s? I don’t really remember which school year it was, just that one teacher in particular had multiple paddles engraved with her name and speed holes, and I did witness them used on classmates
Probably because they thought physical discipline was an effective method of training at an impressionable age but was obviously only a method of punishment once you reached adulthood. Or maybe because enough of the people who made the laws could imagine themselves on the side of the prisoner, but none of them would ever be in the position of being a child again so there wasn’t enough self interest for that law to be different.
Basically probably no good reason, but just a misguided vague ‘nip it in the bud’ attitude carried over the generations.
When we moved to the South everyone had to sign waivers with their kids schools indicating whether the teachers could hit them. This was in the 2010s. IDK if they still do it. This is rural Arkansas.
Because schools hadn’t implemented better rules yet. A while ago, physical discipline for kids was normalized; we know now that it’s not a great method of discipline, so we have better rules in schools.
prisoners are a labor asset- damage their ability to output and you’ve damaged the profits. kids don’t make anybody money by being healthy.
I’m going to propose a different speculation from the other answers -which have some truth - but I don’t think it’s that deliberate.
My guess is that it’s because prisoners are adults that can sue, claiming “cruel and unusual punishment”, and win. Kids generally won’t. We’ll maybe now they would, but less so back then.
Another issue is that despite the basic principle that they both involve “corporal punishment”, there’s a world of difference in methods and purpose between them. Guards weren’t using a paddle to sternly swat prisoners’ bottoms, and teachers in school (generally) weren’t using billy clubs and fists to beat the shit out of kids. Guards use it for instant compliance and control, teachers use it as (harsh) corrective instruction. Obviously there were exceptions but overall that was the case.
If I were to guess, the teachers would have had many good reasons to not to too far, whereas the prison guards would have had less incentive to hold back.
Also, a prisoner’s crimes are probably more serious. Probably.
I got my ass paddled 3 times before my State cut that crap out. Mr Summerville got me twice, but that was nothing compared to the drilled-out paddle that Mrs Routin kept.
Those were the worst
