I could not believe my eyes when I recently read an article that mock criminal whipping demonstrations took place in our schools and I am really relieved that the government had the good sense to suspend this exercise.

But as a psychologist working almost exclusively with children, I am appalled and enraged that the move was even considered in the first place..

I found myself asking if any of these obviously well-intentioned methods had been discussed with any sensible psychologist/psychiatrist/childcare professional prior to implementation.

It certainly seems that these public whipping displays were a frightening throwback to the 'see and learn' mentality of previous generations, and not an approach that acknowledges the inherent intelligence in each and every one of our future Malaysian leaders, our children.

Indeed, the long-term effects of such demonstrations may have adverse effects on children in a number of ways. As pointed out by many, human rights violations is one such issue.

Another is that the children will learn to be desensitised to such violence, or that in some, the perpetration of crime and escape will be glamourised, particularly as his/her peers will have an idea of the punishments involved.

This is not to mention the effect that such displays would have on the substantially larger percentage of non conduct-disordered children. There is currently no known research suggesting that such methods are efficacious, and certainly none documenting potential hazards to spectators.

Should Malaysian parents therefore have a cause for concern if their child is to be exposed to such displays? Certainly. One must ask what use our fantastic censorship board serves, if it censors needless violence on the television for the benefit of children, only for the scale to be tipped the other way with these displays in school.

I do understand that the move was made in the wake of rising numbers of juvenile crimes - but one has to ask if this method is really a suitable one. In other countries, some juvenile-related crimes are dealt with using a combination of group therapy type approaches (focusing on anger management, conflict resolution and relaxation techniques) alongside other types of penalties.

In some schools, a great amount of resources are diverted to anti-bullying programmes. Teachers are trained to deal with and detect conduct-disordered children and channel them towards appropriate help at an earlier stage. Surely our young offenders deserve the benefits of such programmes?

There is another issue that I wish to raise pertaining to those public flogging exhibitions. From my humble understanding, the rationale behind these displays is that immediately prior to committing a crime, a child/young offender will remember the display and think 'Oh no ... I do not want that to happen to me', and thereby cease their negative behaviour.

Is this a realistic assumption to make? I think not. For one, it does not provide a buffer for crimes in which the child may be acting impulsively (and therefore not thinking of the consequences).

Detection of children at risk for such behaviour is therefore of great importance. A much worthier road to travel would be for more resources to be directed in organising programmes and training for adults to enable them to deal with young offenders in a way that has actually been proven in the research arena.

Sure, it is much less sensational than public whipping exhibitions but it is certainly the correct way to go. A way that acknowledges that our children are higher beings than those that would warrant such Skinnerian methods of conditioning.