Violence against children

A decade after ratifying the “UN Convention on the Rights of The Child” most Caribbean countries are still grappling with the institutionalisation of its strictures. They had accepted an obligation to take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect our children from all forms of violence, as set out in Article 19 of the Convention. One of the criticisms of the Caribbean’s response was the lack of a co-ordinated approach to their responsibilities.
Last Friday, the Council for Human and Social Development (C OHSOD) of CARICOM met in Georgetown, Guyana for two-day meeting, convened under the theme; Charting Our Future: An Integrated Development Agenda For Children And Youth. In response to international pressures, CariCom was evidently moving to rectify its usual ad hocism. While they tackled issues including early childhood care and development, children and migration, and youth employment and development, the most critical issue was violence against children and youth, covering institutionalised, physical, sexual and psychological violence.
The still comparatively new Secretary-General of Caricom, LaRoucque summarised the overall tasks that unfortunately still lay ahead for the CariCom grouping: “If we can work together to ensure that laws have the necessary teeth to punish those who exploit our children and youth; if we can work together to build greater community awareness of the risks which children face; if we can work together to ensure that civil society addresses certain ‘taboos’; if we can work together to ensure that data gathering and monitoring mechanisms are in place to identify children who are at risk; if we continue to work together to ensure that the educational opportunities provided for our youth from the earliest stages remain relevant and prepare them to function in an increasingly knowledge-based environment, then, ladies and gentlemen, we would be on the right path in charting a bright future for our children and their children.”
Back in May, a sub-regional consultation on violence against children had been held in Kingston, Jamaica. That meeting was hosted by the Government of Jamaica and co-organized with the SRSG and the Latin American and Caribbean Chapter of the Global Movement for Children. It was part of the process of follow up to the UN SECRETARY GENERAL’S STUDY ON VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN IN THE CARIBBEAN REGION done in 2005, which clearly detailed what was necessary to rectify abuses against children.
The report had identified and defined the various abuses as follows: Physical abuse: any act which results in non-accidental physical injury; Sexual abuse: sexual exploitation of a child through violent and non-violent molestation; Emotional abuse: the overt or covert direction of hostility to a child by repeatedly threatening, withholding affection, and belittling the child’s capabilities, qualities and desires and Neglect: gross or repeated failure to provide  for the child’s physical or emotional needs resulting in harm or threatened harm to the child’s health or welfare.
With respect to corporal punishment, for instance, the report “found that the legacy of slavery may help to explain the social and cultural traditions that have hindered acceptance of the child rights revolution.  The widespread use and subsequent acceptance of physical punishment as a suitable form of disciplining and punishing children, and even to some extent adults, is undoubtedly a legacy of slavery. It is also true that an acceptance of corporal punishment in families and institutions, such as schools can be traced to the British cultural influences.  Such remnants and retentions act as a significant obstacle to the development of comprehensive approaches to the legal and social reforms needed to ensure greater respect for the rights of children.”
The distance to be travelled is suggested by two outreach missions conducted by the Minister of Education of Guyana to two of its three counties to gauge reactions to the proposal to abolish corporal punishment in schools. In both instances, educationists and parents overwhelmingly approved the continuation of the policy to sanction punishment under specified conditions.