Child Protection. Freda Briggs

Чтение книги онлайн.

      2

       POLITICS INVOLVED IN CHILD PROTECTION

      There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children. —Nelson Mandela

      Nigel Parton, NSPCC Professor in Child Care at the University of Huddersfield was one of the first to examine child protection as a political issue. In his book, The politics of child abuse 1, he linked child maltreatment and poverty, challenging the dominant medical model that traditionally used narrowly-defined forensic investigation methods that were isolated from the family unit. Poverty is, of course, linked to government policies and budgets, especially those that result in unemployment, inflation, high interest rates, inadequate welfare payments and housing shortages that prevent victims from escaping from child abuse and domestic violence. It is significant however that although the book was published in 1985, child sexual abuse merited only one mention.

      Child protection is a political issue because governments create laws and regulations and allocate funds for the provision of child protection-related services. If governments fail to recognise their importance when annual budgets are decided, there may be cuts to family support agencies, care and education centres for preschool children, child protection curriculum in state schools and universities and in-service training for teachers. Without adequate government funding, there will be a shortage of child protection officers for responding to reports of child maltreatment. This can have fatal consequences for children. Politicians determine the budget for police to prosecute child abuse cases and the courts that hear them. Governments also determine whether prisons provide treatment for convicted child sex offenders.

      Historically, child protection has had a low priority in politics. Few politicians have a professional knowledge of child abuse and its consequences and given that they may only be in power for a few years there is little incentive to consider the long-term consequences of ignoring these issues. Children are disadvantaged by the fact that they have no voice, no vote and no strong lobby acting on their behalf. Parents are seldom interested in child protection until their own children are affected. Most child protection professionals are employed by governments or government funded agencies and workers are banned from talking to media. Charities dependent on government funding may require staff to remain silent for fear that their contracts will not be renewed. Governments like to invest in projects that have highly visible outcomes, such as sports stadiums. By contrast, child protection is unpleasant, there is no quick-fix and taxpayers can see little for their money.

      In The Politics of Child Abuse in America2, the authors argue that for child abuse to be taken seriously it must be seen as a public safety problem. This definition would make it congruent with other family-based social trends, including the crackdown on domestic violence. The authors said that children must have at least the same legal protection as women experiencing domestic violence. They recommended the creation of a Children’s Authority to make provision for investigation, enforcement, placement services, prevention and education, family support, and research and development.

      Richard Krugman, an eminent American pediatrician, reviewed American political history and concluded that laws passed over a thirty-year period were in response to “the perceived crises of the moment”. Major political parties failed to recognise child abuse as a significant health or social issue reflecting (a) centuries of denial of the existence of family abuse; (b) antagonism towards media that exposes it; and (c) a lack of agreement and cohesion between the professions working with children. Krugman also noted that there were few political advocates for children. To change this, child abuse needed to be conceptualised as a “national health problem”³.