Update: MI Appeals Court Confirms Ruling on Spanking Children
In April, the Michigan Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court’s ruling in Brown v. Brown (No. 350576 decided April 9, 2020). The courts affirmed that the father's use of corporal punishment and infliction of mental harm toward his minor children is sufficient to meet the definition of domestic violence as defined by the Michigan Legislature (MCL 400.1501). The case cites two main instances where the father committed domestic violence against his minor children:
Spanking children with a paddle
Physically harming family pets in front of children.
Regarding the father's use of spanking the children with a “paddle,” the court records stated:
Even if plaintiff was acting on the basis of his religious beliefs and without malicious intent, the fact remains that his corporal punishment involved the infliction of injury on members of his household. We further observe that "domestic violence" unambiguously includes the infliction of mental harm, and it is obvious that a combination of cruelty and serious physical harm with expressions of love would further inflict mental harm upon any reasonable person.
Concerning the family pets, the courts ruled that:
Harmful or abusive conduct toward an animal is not per se domestic violence, for the reasons already noted. However, intentionally harming an animal with whom a child (a "person" under the Act) has a significant emotional bond could constitute "engaging in activity toward a family or household member," i.e., toward the child, "that would cause a reasonable person" (again, the child) "to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested," MCL 400.1501(d)(iv), or, in other words, would constitute domestic abuse directed at the child.
Click here to read the full ruling in Brown v. Brown