Oklahoma House reconsiders decision not to ban corporal punishment of special needs students

Monday, the Oklahoma House of Representatives reconsidered a bill which would ban the use of corporal punishment against some students with limited cognitive abilities.

The original language would have had prohibited corporal punishment on “any student identified with a disability in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).”

An amendment offered Monday by Rep. Chad Caldwell changed that to students with “the most significant cognitive abilities according to criteria established by the State Department of Education.”

Rep. John Tally (R-Stillwater) wrote House Bill 1028.

His bill, as originally written, actually got more “yes” than “no” votes last week, but under Oklahoma law it’s a majority of the House membership, not the majority of the number of members voting, that actually counts.

The opposition to the bill centered on the argument that current law already allows parents to opt out of any corporal punishment, even in districts which still allow it (many do not).

There was, however, also a theological element injected into the debate when Rep. Jim Olsen (R-Roland) rose to invoke Proverbs 29:15 - “The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings his mother to shame.”

Rep. Anthony Moore (R-Clinton) apologized to Tally, saying he agreed to co-author the bill and had told Tally “this would be an easy bill to carry, because there’s nobody who’s going to be for corporal punishment on students with disabilities. I apologize to the author, because apparently I was wrong.”

Rep. Cindy Munson (D-Oklahoma City) related abuse she received at the hands of her mother as a child, and said school for her was the safe place.

“A child needs to go someplace safe, and you would hope that would start at home. And God bless the children who go home, who have parents who hit them and use the Bible as justification. God bless those children,” Munson said.

Tally did reserve the right to ask for reconsideration of the vote, which had to occur by close of business Monday.

And after a motion to reconsider easily passed, so did the amended version of HB1028, by a vote of 84-8 with nine representatives not voting.