Summary Of Nick Freeman's Cane

Nothing that Nick Freeman has written is true. Will bringing back the cane restore discipline in school? He wants the cane to retrieve in schools because teachers are losing respect from their students. He is bestowing an opinion as if it is a fact because not all students disrespect their teachers.

Firstly, Freeman states that he desires to ‘re-establish order in the classroom’ and he is annoyed by the students of disrespecting their teachers. The reason he writes the article is because he wanted to ‘end truancy and restore respect for those in authority’. Even though he strongly agreed that ‘the only way’ for these problems’ is to bring back corporal punishment, the cane can induce the students to have lowered self-esteem, which could result in poor academic performance and inadequate social skills. Moreover, they wouldn't want to communicate or share new ideas with their families and friends.
Secondly, Freeman asserts that corporal punishment would reduce the numbers of bad behaviours.
He is presenting an opinion as a fact because he does not provide any facts or information to support this statement. By using the word ‘reduction’, he was implying that the cane could make ‘bad habits’ in school become less. However, the cane can affect children who are being caned feel anger, fear and hostility; they will have suicidal thoughts and depression in their later life. They will also become emotionally alienated. The effect of emotional alienation is the students will feel isolated from their family, friends and relatives. Additionally, it has a very pessimistic effect on other children: they may be emotionally traumatised after viewing such physical abuse which will stop disrupts the learning of
them.

Adopting a sarcastic, sardonic and acrimonious tone, Freeman believes corporal punishment is the only option: “Fear and pain is the only language that some children understand.” Well, in contrast, corporal punishment educate students to be violent to other students as students may deem that violence is an adequate resolution to problems which this will be carry on into adulthood too. Violence begets violence if you nurture a child in a violent environment where physical punishment is necessitated it make the child brutal and ferocious. If they are punished with violence they may not understand what they have done wrong and continue to make the same mistake. Furthermore, Freeman argues that students will ‘fear’ the cane ‘as hundreds of eyes bore’ to them. However, the cane will shame them in front of their classmate. This will likely cause them to feel that there is inherently something wrong with them. They will not understand that it is their behaviour that is wrong and they don’t want to focus on the mistakes that they have done because they are in shame. They will take the shame to adulthood which will make them feel depressed and anger.

Additionally, Freeman states that ‘stabbing’ and ‘rape’ is ‘soaring in the classroom’ which this is factually inaccurate as not everyone in the classroom has committed that crime before. Yet, the cane would not decipher this problem as it will only aggravate the trouble. Also, there is a better alternative to discipline children than using violence. Extra school work, parent conferences and other strategies would assuredly have a much better outcome than ‘whacking’ them.

Overall, the cane shouldn’t be managed in schools as the children will become less spontaneous and are afraid to attempt new things out of fear that will result in more critical punishments. Freeman’s arguments are flawed and fallacious because cane will affect students’ mentality. The cane is a barbaric, primitive and crude act and it should never be utilized in schools.