BACKGROUND:
Safety and protection are key components of the Nurturing Care Framework1,2, emphasizing the prevention of environments that increase child vulnerability3. This study examines violent discipline against Brazilian children, adopting an intersectional approach based on sex and self-reported skin color.

METHODS:
The PIPAS study is a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2022 in 12 state capitals and the Federal District, with 13,425 children aged 0-59 months4,5. Using this database, intersectional groups were created by combining caregiver-reported child sex (female/male) and skin color (White, Black, Brown, Indigenous, and Yellow), resulting in ten subgroups. Associations between intersectional categories and violent disciplinary practices (shouting and spanking) were examined. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted and adjusted for socioeconomic position (quintiles), food insecurity (yes/no), and household headship (father, mother, mother’s partner, or grandparents).

RESULTS:
The sample was predominantly composed of Brown boys (23.4%) and Brown girls (23.2%), followed by White boys (21.5%) and White girls (22.2%). Although Black children represented a smaller proportion of the sample (boys: 4.1%; girls: 4.6%), they showed a higher prevalence of violent disciplinary practices. Compared with White boys, higher odds of shouting were observed among Black girls (OR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.19–2.00), Brown girls (1.20; 1.09–1.38), and Indigenous girls (9.97; 2.31–43.01), despite wide confidence intervals. Spanking was more likely among Black boys (1.51; 1.17–1.95), Brown boys (1.43; 1.22–1.70), and Brown girls (1.25; 1.06–1.47). Food insecurity was independently associated with increased odds of shouting (1.30; 1.16–1.46) and spanking (1.36; 1.20–1.60).

CONCLUSIONS:
From an intersectional perspective, violent disciplinary practices vary by sex and self-reported skin color, disproportionately affecting Black and Brown children. These findings highlight the importance of contextualizing disciplinary violence within social and structural determinants, rather than attributing responsibility to families while overlooking the political and social conditions that shape caregiving practices.