The following case is interesting
Example case - R (Williamson and others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others [2005]
A group of parents and teachers tried unsuccessfully to use Article 9 to overturn the ban on corporal punishment of children in schools. They believed that part of the duty of education in the Christian context was for teachers to assume the parental role and administer physical punishment to misbehaving children. The House of Lords rejected the case because the parents’ rights under Article 9 were restricted by the need to protect children from the harmful effects that corporal punishment might cause – a punishment that involves deliberately inflicting physical violence.
So if 'a punishment that involves deliberately inflicting physical violence' can be outlawed why not a punishment that deliberately inflicts emotional damage? This is no small area as it can be easily proven that religious shunning causes severe emotional problems and even suicide. Again I'm talking about the POLICY, not an individual's right to not invite a family member to tea.