Rights Under Parental Authority

This article is written by Paramjeet Kaur of Himachal Pradesh National Law University, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

Preface 

Whenever there’s a violation of any legal right or duty and legal damages have been incurred the inpatient may bring action against the other under the law of torts. For this, the rudiments must be present. still, there are colorful exceptions to this that include maternal and quasi-maternal authority. Maternal Authority Maternal Authority under the law of torts is an authority given to parents to control and correct their children by either kind of force and similar people are defended under the law of torts only if they act in a reasonable manner and for a good cause. It’s upon the Judge to decide whether the action was reasonable or not. In India, there’s a Guardians and Wards Act, of 1890, and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, of 1956 which empowers the guardian to dispose of or transfer movable or minor’s real estate for the benefit of a minor. Just as parents give birth to a child, they’ve certain rights over the child and certain liabilities towards the child, similar to the right to education, the right to determine religion, the right to guardianship, the right to supervision, protection and health care, etc.

According to Hindu law, the father and mother are the natural guardians of the children. A guardian is a person who takes care of a minor and his property. From the birth of the child, the parents acquire the rights and duties of the guardian through a natural relationship. It is the duty of the natural parent to take care of the child. There is equality of rights of both parents with respect to the custody, education, control, correction, chastisement, and upbringing of children.

The future of a child is in the hands of the parents. Various restrictions are required to be followed according to the needs of society and for this the parents are given the right to control and correct them by any kind of force and such people are protected under the law of tort only if they work in a proper way and in good faith. However, what is deemed appropriate by the judges or jury changes over time i.e., no precise method is defined.

The father and mother or other person i.e., the guardian of the child may inflict moderate and reasonable corporal punishment to the child with the aim of improving the behaviour of his child. This right is protected by the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933.

As per the Hindu law, father and mother are the natural guardians of children. A guardian is a person who takes care of minor and his property. From the birth of a child, parents acquire the rights and duties of a guardian by a natural relationship. It’s the duty of the natural guardians to maintain the child. There is equality of rights for both the parents in respect of children’s custody, education, control, correction and chastisement and upbringing.     

A child’s future is in the hands of the parents. There are various restraints that need to be followed as per the necessities of society and for this, parents are given authority to control and correct them by either kind of force and such people are protected under the law of torts only if they act in a reasonable manner and for a good cause. However, what is deemed to be reasonable by the judges or jury changes as per time i.e., there is not an exact manner defined. 

Rights under Parental Authority

There are various rights and duties under parental authority:

1) Right to custody: Custody is of two types. First is legal in which there is a right to make decisions for the child and another is physical which means the right and duty to provide housing and care to the child.

2) Right to determine the religion: Parents have the right to determine which religion the child will profess.

3) Right to education: It is the duty and right of the natural guardians to provide the necessary education to their child and help him in making his future bright.

4) Right to control: The parents can also restrict the movement of their minor child if they find it unfit for him and can also take actions against him in a moderate manner.

5) Right of supervision: The parents have the right to supervise and advise their children in life so they can do the right thing.

6) Right to protection and health care: The parents have the right and duty to protect their child from anything harmful and to provide basic healthcare. 

7) Right to reasonable chastisement: Chastisement literally means a severe criticism or punishment. The parents have the right to punish the child in a reasonable and moderate manner.

Quasi Parental Authority

  The Latin term “ loco parentis ” means ‘ in the place of parents ’. The people in loco parentis are called quasi-parents. still quasi maternal authority comes with 

lower rights and duties than maternal authority. Parents when not in charge tend to delegate their authority to someone differently who can take care of their child. For case in seminaries, the parents delegate their authority to preceptors and star and they can take opinions for the child. The authority of a schoolmaster or a school teacher is analogous to that of the parent. It resembles the authority of the parent, and thus, it is quasi-parental authority. People with similar authority include the schoolmaster, supervisor or warden of the orphanage, hotel or children observation home, etc. When a parent places his child with a schoolmaster, he she delegates to him all his/ her own authority, as far as it’s necessary for the weal of the child. The school master can, thus, induce a moderate comeuppance on his pupil. This authority isn’t limited to acts done on the demesne of the academy but may extend to acts done by them while on the way to and from the academy. still, the law is that the parents and quasi parents both can administer discipline on a child for his good or to help him from hurting himself or any other person. They’ve legal control over the children and can correct him at every point. Parents may also delegate their authority to a sitter who for a particular time period takes care of the child, she acts as a quasi-parent. also, when the child is in the academy the parents are supposed to delegate their responsibility to preceptors. In this the main important point of the right of both parents and semi-parents is that both have the legal right of their children. In maternal authority there’s no delegation of rights and duties, but in quasi authority there’s some delegation of duties and rights to other persons or authority. Let’s take an illustration- parents give some authority to academy preceptors, principle or education master, for the weal of the children. So, they can study duly and achieve their pretensions in future. This is for the betterment of the child. Nanni or sitter also act as a quasi-maternal authority. Quasi parent is also important for the pupil to leans the social morals and how to live in the society. At the end, human has to do 

effects for the society. still, the law is that the parents and quasi parents both can administer discipline on a child for his good or to help him from hurting himself or any other person. They’ve legal control over the children and can correct him at every point. Parents may also delegate their authority to a sitter who for a particular time period takes care of the child, she acts as a quasi-parent. also, when the child is in the academy the parents are supposed to delegate their responsibility to preceptors. Similar kind of authority only allows the use of reasonable and moderate discipline but if it exceeds a limit the indicted may, thus, be liable for civil or felonious disdain. 

Position under England and India 

In England, a parent or quasi parent who has the lawful control or charge of a minor can correct the child and has the right to administer the punishment on the child as per the Child and Young Person’s Act,1933. 

In Cleary v Booth ((1893) 1 Q.B. 465) the defendant was a school headmaster. Two boys fought on the way to school and the defendant administered punishment to them. The headmaster was held liable for assault and battery. However, it was held that he was not liable as the authority of teachers is not only limited to school premises but also outside the school. As per the jury, “There is not much opportunity for a boy to exhibit his moral conduct while in school under the eye of the master, the opportunity is while he is at play or outside the school”.

It is obvious that at home the parents have the control of children and at the school, the teachers and principal but the main question are who is in charge between the school and house. It can be rightly said that here the authority is delegated to the teachers. They can not only correct them for their wrongs but can also administer punishment to them. Hence in the above case, the boys fought out of the school and the headmaster had the authority to punish them.

In another case Eisel v Board of Education (1991), a student threatened school counselors to commit suicide but they failed to inform the parents. This negligence by not providing knowledge to the parents was a loophole and since the school was in authority to control the child it should have informed the parents about the threat as said by Maryland High Court. 

Hence as per the law in England, the authority of the schoolmaster is the same as that of parents and he represents the parents in the matter of correction as held in Regina v. Hopley (1860) 2 F & 7 202) and Fitzgerald v. Northcote ((1865) 4 F & F 665).

In India, it has been held several times that a teacher plays a very important role in a student’s life. It has been well recognized over the years that quasi parental authority of a teacher comes with the inherent right to take disciplinary actions against the pupil and has been ingrained in the country’s philosophy as said in R.C. Thampan and Ors. v The Principal Medical College (AIR 1979 Ker 171).

In Laxmikant Shri-pat Bhandara v. C. R. Gerrard (AIR 1947 Bom 193), it was held that the schoolmaster has the power of chastisement over a pupil committed to his charge, arising from delegation by the parent or guardian.

The position and rights of a teacher have been deeply explained in the case of Sankunni v. SwaminathaPattar. Venkatsubba Rao, J. said that the teacher cannot get away with the punishment with the excuse that the punishment has left no marks on the body, in one or another way if the punishment could have caused harm to life and limb of the child the teacher will be accused under the law of torts. However, in the above case, the 2 smacks given by the defendant were not held to be violent and were considered reasonable.

CONCLUSION

This parental and quasi-parental authority provides immunity to the persons against any liability for doing something for the welfare of the child. Parenting comes with certain rights and duties for a good upbringing of the child. Hence, it comes with the right to correct him either by words or chastisement in a moderate manner. The court says that the nature of punishment should be such that a prudent man would have considered it right. With these rights comes the responsibility to show the child the right path and to correct him either by words or chastisement in a moderate manner. But this can’t be the excuse to skip criminal or civil liability like assault, battery, etc. The test of reasonability depends upon the courts. The punishment administered should be of such nature that a prudent man would have considered right.

Hence it is clear that parental and quasi-parental authorities come with certain rights and duties that need to be performed for the welfare of the child and to ensure there is a good upbringing for the child. With these rights comes the responsibility to show the child the right path and to correct him either by words or chastisement in a moderate manner. But this can’t be the excuse to skip criminal or civil liability like assault, battery, etc. The test of reasonability depends upon the courts. The punishment administered should be of such nature that a prudent man would have considered right.

---