Objectives:
To present the role of parents in the process of responsible child-rearing in the context of the chastisement of minors as an educational method of upbringing that isn’t legally indeifferent and state policy towards chastisement of upbringing

Material and methods:
The study points out the danger of simplifying reality by equating the disciplining of a child with the use of corporal punishment and the risk of too hasty an encroachment on family autonomy by state authorities interfering with parental authority. Methods typical of the legal sciences – dogmatic-legal, theoretical-legal and axiological methods – were used

Results:
The educational impact includes both rewarding and chastising a child in situations where the child's behaviour needs to be corrected for the child's welfare and social interest. Exceeding the limits of a child's chastisement, bearing the hallmarks of the use of violence or abuse, triggers a response from the state authorities, who have a duty to protect the child from violence, cruelty, exploitation and demoralisation

Conclusions:
Prohibiting corporal punishment of minors does not mean prohibiting the disciplining of minors. It is impossible to raise a child properly without setting tasks and enforcing the fulfilment of those tasks. Any interference by the state in the relationship that exists between parents and children constitutes an interference with parental authority and should therefore be done with great care, in such a way that it does not lead to disorganisation of the family and does not turn against the child