The Murder of Innocence

October 2013 has found us with a barrage of media highlighting the loss of innocence in South Africa. There has been the conviction of a couple for the rape and murder of their baby “Samantha”, children raped and murdered by a community member and left in a public toilet, a mother who allegedly poisoned her children and herself and her children and multiple abandonments with the intention that children die and many did die. These are the cases the media know about. We also met with students from Forensic pathology who highlighted that there are between 300 and 500 unnatural baby deaths in the Johannesburg mortuary per year and only 10% of those are investigable!

We live in a society where we acknowledge that we are a “throw away culture” and we are literally “throwing away babies”. If we are unable to afford children their first right ie the right to life, what of their other rights? We bring children into a world where on arrival their arrival they are not wanted and often hated, used, hurt or murdered.

If I we say this is a loss of innocence, there is the loss of the actual innocent child but there is also the loss of the innocence of our society at large. We, like a baby, look at the world with hope and wonder and see a future. We bring children into a world where we want to share the joy of what life can be. We see the media and shudder, what we have done?

For those who hurt and kill babies, and as a result

 the innocence of our society, we as a society must have killed their humanity when they were children. To be human is to be cared for so we can care. If we murder, we must be dead inside. We, as a society raised these murderers we are so enraged by. We see communities respond decisively with rage at the death of innocence and these acts of commission are deserving of rageful condemnation. What we seem to be missing is that it appears that the acts of omission, or the neglect of childhood, results in a adults who are capable of the destruction of innocence in rage or in total absence of any emotion, the latter being the more terrifying.

How do you teach the uncared for to care?

Compassion in Child Protection

When looking back at the year thus far it has become clear that all that is worth doing takes time and requires stamina, strategy and courage. We are still fighting the paralysis of a system that designed its laws to ensure children’s rights were met in South Africa, but unwittingly created a series of barriers to services based on the flawed human interpretations and applications of this law. It appears that the age old Hegelian Dialectic has come into play and in our zeal to ensure rights are not abused we have lost sight of how best to protect them.

The thesis was that we need to sign the convention on the rights of the child, ascent to the African Charter for Children, draft a Constitution and then laws to enact these. If this was done successfully children would be safe and have their rights upheld. We did this but,

The antithesis was that we tied humanity up in litigation and lost This child for The children and what has become abundantly clear is that legislative reform is not enough. Transformation of people is what is needed. Ultimately all those who implement law are people first and people play roles that define their identity. The role of professional seems to have become paralysed, or poor performance excused, by law. We have law, all this shows us is that we cannot behave humanely unless threatened.

So what is the synthesis, humanity! There are three premises to successfully protecting children:

1.      The recognition that there is suffering in the world

2.      The negative duty to not add to that suffering and

3.      The positive duty to alleviate the suffering where you can.

On reflection this seems a simple request, it calls for us to be kind. Why is it then so hard to achieve.

        i.            We know there is a recognition of suffering as this is bemoaned every day in the media, at dinner parties and in our work in the non-profit sector.

      ii.            If we did nothing to harm children as a collective, they would be safe!

    iii.            But we need to actively protect because there are many who actively hurt or through acts of omission allow for children to be hurt.

How do we explain why some hurt children? We refer to psychology, sociology, anthropology, biology, evolution etc. Theories abound as to why we raise adults who either do not protect or actively hurt children. In my mind, however, none of them suffice as the sum of the parts never appears to make up the whole. Bad childhoods, poverty, trauma, poor attachment, genes etc., have all been used as a way to explain asocial behaviour. What appears to be missing is that there are many, and even potentially a majority, who have had the same experiences and overcome those experiences to live by the mantra “it ends with me”. The cycle can only end if we are aware there is suffering and NOT wanting to inflict that on the other. Others, often wounded healers, have chosen to actively take the hurt and use it to heal. How is this done?

I want to leave you with a thought; it is relationships that are “good enough” and the ability to choose another path because someone opened it up for you. So we want to make a difference in the life of a child. When I am asked what makes a difference in the life of a child?

It is everything! As a result we need many strategies and often ones that do not rely on law or a solution but on an alternative experience of a caring and consistent adult who is authentic and congruent. This is only achieved if we remember our humanity and filter all of our professional work through one question “would I expose my child/family to this?”. Sadly, many professionals in the child protection system would answer no. The implication is that we have created a distance between our work and our humanity and that is why we are failing so dramatically in protecting our children by not being able to protect their right to nit be harmed that would be realised if we did nothing!

People vs Politics in Child Protection

My reflections on the previous quarter were positioned around the fact that there are real challengers in the child protection field at present. In stark contrast the end of June saw the Forum engaged in a three day Child Protection Conference under the banner of The South African Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (SAPSAC). The theme of the conference was “Back to Basics” and to essential role of the Multi-disciplinary team in child protection. I was called on to assist in developing the programme and briefing the speakers. We had over 300 delegates from all over the country from most disciplines ie. Social work, psychology, medicine, SAPS, prosecutors etc. What struck me was the unwavering commitment by those present to do the correct thing in each of their disciplines to ensure children are protected both from abuse as well as from the potential secondary trauma of exposure to the system itself. The presenters were all given case studies to apply their mind, theory, law and practice to and what became evident is that we have many of the structures, laws, resources etc. in place to manage cases effectively if we work together. The calibre of the presenters was exceptional and it served as a reminder of what is possible if we all meet the child protection week mandate to work together to protect children.

So why then is there such a gap between what is possible and what is!

It appears it is humanity and the fact that we have lost the rage of injustice to the meritocracy of political correctness and replaced the position of people in the forefront of our minds with the print we see on paper. A mouthful indeed, but that too seems to be part of the problem, there is a whole lot of talking, corresponding, meeting etc., and too little work on the issues faced by children directly. We are all too often caught up talking about “the children” and we forget “this child”, we are paralysed by the “best interest” principle and no longer use our common sense to do what is best for children. We have become so professional that we no longer love children, we work with them.

Until we connect with the child we once were, we will forever loose the children that are.

Children remember not what you do for them but what you make them feel.

We want to make a difference and we do, what kind of difference is it?

How are we shaping up in our quest to protect child rights

I am often called on to speak to a variety of sectors on issues of children’s rights in South Africa and do this with great pride. The reason for my proud pronouncements is that I have been a part of the human rights based culture in South Africa that has become such a beacon of hope across the world as we attempt to redress the abuses of the past. We have signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as the African Charter on the Rights of the Child and have our own Constitution that enshrines these in Article 28. In enacting these rights for children we have recognised that some of these rights are to be granted now and others must be realised progressively. It is at this point that it seems we stray and forget it is us who are raising children and we remain responsible for their well-being. How have we strayed? It seems in two major areas:

1)      We constantly talk of the need for children to be responsible as if we merely give them rights, they will become uncontrollable by us, and yet it is us who are raising them. A case in point is the right children have to be protected and not to be abused and we place this responsibility in the hands of children. They must say NO to us, rather than telling adults they must not harm children. While doing this, we in no other way encourage children to say no to either adults or those in positions of power. There are clearly certain rights afforded to our children that are solely the responsibility of adults and should be given now and not progressively. For me the fundamental right under review here is the right to protection. We, as adult and children, all have a negative duty to realise this right for children, ie we do not harm children. However, as adults, and particularly child protection service providers, we have a positive duty ie. To actively protect our children. Protection can take many forms, but its enforcement is in the law. This brings me to my second point. Those mandated by the law to act within this sphere.

2)      It appears that as the laws have developed and the statutory social workers and police officials, who have legal authority, have engaged with the law, they have become gatekeepers to the courts and make decisions that are on behalf of the courts. Cases in point are our attempts to present evidence to the Children’s Court to decide whether children are in need of care but the social workers have decided they are not and then when they decide the children are in need of care suddenly the children are not in their mandate. Politics trump professionalism. We then move to children who have managed to access care but are the “released” contrary to, and in contravention, of our laws. All of this in a misguided homage to the less than perfect ideal of “Family Preservation” now acknowledged on our law. We then move to the SAPS who refuse to open sexual abuse cases where the accused is under 18. This is a convenient ploy to decrease their crime statistics, as per their mandate, and use a good piece of legislation that should open services for children at risk ie. The Child Justice Act. Finally, there is just an apparent lack of interest and will as is evident in the child kidnapping case where the Investigating Officer did not present any of the medical evidence on the docket to the prosecutor. This is the evidence for the caregiver who the accused attempted to murder as she tried to protect the child. What is the result of this going to be, even when before court without evidence we cannot have either convictions or appropriate sentences?

The question then becomes, have we legislated ourselves into immobility and in pursuing rights are only paying lip service to children’s rights? Adults still exert a careless and even abusive role in children’s lives. What is even sadder is that those mentioned above are those charged with the active protection of children and their access to justice. Systemic abuse comes from “evil flourishing when good men do nothing” and when they do act do they consider the most fundamental of caregiver codes “first do no harm!”

349 days of inaction and the currency of protecting children

From the beginning of recorded history it has been recognised that money has enormous power. From the biblical

1 Timothy 6:10 - For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
 

To more modern reflections when Mark Twain rethought the Biblical and said

The lack of money is the root of all evil.

Culminating in interesting philosophically satirical comments from authors such as Ayn Rand, who reworked the biblical again to read

So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money?

From these, and the passage of daily life what we do know is that there is a sad truth in the phrase “money makes the world go round”…or not.

The Non-Profit Sector has always attempted to mitigate against the multitude of vulnerabilities that face humanity on a global level. Poverty has always been central to this. What is it about poverty that contributes so significantly to vulnerability? It is access to resources. Those resources relate directly to the realisation of the indelible rights that are enshrined in our constitution. So has our Constitution now become class based and our human rights culture, so hard fought for, now become a luxury that comes with a price tag?

There has been a great deal of media coverage of the global financial crisis, interspersed with overarching controversy, such as the now infamously vandalised “spear painting”. So what is the connection? The connection is that the painting controversy happened during a time where the country prides itself on a focus on children during Child Protection Week, in the face of the ever nearing collapse of the Child Protection System as a whole. Why is this related to the global financial crisis and recession?

The current recession could be over by the year's end, but its impact on children will continue through next year and may virtually erase decades of improvements in American children's well-being, according to a new report by the Foundation for Child Development.[i]   

If this is the case in developed countries what is the situation for our developing country? Quite frankly it is dire. The experience of some children is that their rights, which should be granted immediately and unconditionally, are not even being progressively recognised but in fact are regressing in certain areas. What has led to this is a complex interplay of factors from the global financial crisis to an improved view of South Africa within the BRICS nations, to erratic and unintelligible National Lotteries Distribution policies, to a change in direction in Socio-Economic Development funding from corporates and a totally inadequate budget form the Department of Social Development and other relevant Departments to meet their positive child rights mandate.

So where does the non-profit sector find itself? It finds itself taking on the pathologies of the clients it is trying to uplift. We are left with a feeling that we are slightly better dressed and more eloquent, but are still standing on the street corner with a sign “no money, no food, 1 100 000 children to feed, please help”. The question to ask at this point is how did we get here? In order to answer this question we need to look at where we came from. Traditionally the non-profit sector filled gaps where government did not meet its mandate, and the result is that much of the work has been “out-sourced” to NPO’s, but not at the same value as the same government service. This glaring imbalance and lack of respect for equal partnerships between Government and its’ people plays itself out in a sadly infuriating relationship that feels abusive. We are praised at the NPO summit by the President for the development and growth of the NPO field, but told by the officials that there is not enough money. We are lambasted by the SAPC as being funded by Imperialists and always taking the Government to court. To add further insult to this injury, there appears to be an ever increasing mistrust in our motivations and ability to govern and be held accountable, so the corporate sector funds in strange ways. A sad irony that contributes to the overall picture is that our improved perceived international status is resulting in less international aid coming in and ever increasing amounts going out.

Now we feel like schizophrenics standing on the street corner with an unintelligible sign and wild staring eyes. Are we paranoid or is there a sense that the NPO’s are  facing a slow death and taking the hopes of the full realisation of the rights of children with them? There are some who believe that this is the case and this was raised at a summit to launch an NPO code of governance. It was suggested that the government began destroying the traditionally strong and fiercely ethical NPO sector when it launched the YDA and the NDA. The thought has stuck with us, although unprocessed at the moment. Our history was one of challenging government, if we maintain this are we seen now as critics, rather than the voice of the voiceless for the current experience of rights realisation for children in South Africa? 

We know this whole mess sounds like the idle and uncontained ramblings of a messy mind. Well that may well be true but it highlights the feeling we are left with, bewilderment! So what do we do? We march on the National Lotteries Board, they laugh at us. We meet with DSD on many occasions and all we seem to get is transformation talk and some very concerning innuendo that we are unethical, multiplying too quickly and unable to govern appropriately with insufficient funding. We need to reflect on this point as the psychological training we had kicks in on a deep level and screams “this sounds like transference to me.” What you say about us firmly reflects you. So we, in true advocacy style mobilise and get angry, we ask for disaster zones to be declared, and we receive letters in return. We challenge the budget and again we are told there is no money and that we need to find it elsewhere as the funding dispensation will shift to developing organisations based on a myth that established NPO’s are rich and hiding money. So we are left with a situation where the GWSSDF co-ordinator stated it as it actually is, there is a policy of “redistribution of poverty!”

Why is this happening, well very simply based on empirical research, there are not enough skilled people to do the work and the money allocated is totally insufficient to meet the mandates. We have in the vicinity of 160 000 social workers in the country. We need that full amount to meet the Children’s Act mandates and then have not even begun to address the other levels of vulnerability in our population. We costed this Act and came to a set of figures where we looked at full implementation (Clem Sunter’s Premire League scenario), we look at a basic minimum funding dispensation (possibly Sunter’s Second Division). Research shows that in terms of the second division scenario the State is funding at less than 50% and in Premiere League terms less than 10%. So where does that leave us? Well it could be argued that the pie is only so big and as a result can only be cut in so many pieces. However we hear of widespread corruption, mismanagement and incompetence and would like to see this budget. However, more pertinent is the proposed Toll Road Amendment Bill that seeks to get relief funding for the financial losses incurred due to civil society court action. How much are they asking for, billions, how much to we need to avert of crisis of children that needs to move to a crisis of conscience? Some of those billions. So here we are where we started, money as the priority and the neglect of the financial potential of human capital.

Where does this leave us, with Sunter’s final scenario, a failed state. We constantly quote Whitney Houston and loudly proclaim “I believe that children are our future”. How then is it that we do not invest in them now? Let’s leave this here with an image in your mind of children going to school in good faith to realise the potential of their promise of education and the future it opens or closes doors to. Rural children walking for miles and parents sacrificing to access education. On those dusty roads there is no pot of gold or light, there are not even books. As the rivers of Limpopo carry the hopes and dreams of the children down with the books dumped in them, we are reminded that children’s rights are going up in smoke, as they are burned with the books that are destroyed when they were never replaced. How will we replace the hope and trust of our children in us!

Money and the skilled, conscious, ethical will to use it for the good of all as opposed the financial enrichment of self. In order for this to be realised there needs to be an acknowledgement of the crisis facing children. We look back at the cost of denialism and the warnings put forward at the time. The scenario planners again looked at possible outcomes and we are now faced with headlines like “three orphans bound and stoned to death”, “Cries of gang raped girl” and “Mutilated girl, 8, drags herself home.” In the most telling of all stories highlighted in the media we are told that parents have refused to let their children attend school as a way to get roads tarred. If parents are breaking the law and using children to do it and the country cannot get control over its institutions charged with the care of children, where are we in recongising the rights of the child.

We talk of child participation so what are the actions by and against children telling us? There is a deafening scream “help” -  will it be heard?

---

[i] http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-504103_162-5059820.html

The sad truth of the disabled in South Africa on International Day of the Disabled

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Johanna <johanna@sophiatowncounselling.co.za> wrote:

Today is the International Day of the Disabled. It seems that this important day has forgotten this man, as have the many agencies tasked with the duty to uphold his rights and his dignity. A few months ago this man, aged 59, had a stroke which has left him paralyzed and totally unable to care for himself. He is unable to speak or walk, and unless somebody gets himself to the toilet on time he soils and wets his pants.  When they could do no more for him hospital staff dumped him with his only relative, his sister. She shares a bed with eleven children in a quarter of a sitting room in a flat in one of the biggest slum buildings in Berea. The sitting room is shared with two other families, while a couple lives in the one bedroom. Altogether 20 people share a bathroom, a toilet, and a tiny kitchen, which is home also to a huge deep freeze, containing nothing but one frozen orange and the encrusted stains of beetroot juice. Between the bed his sister shares with her children and the curtain which demarcates the living space of the next family, is less than one meter, just enough to squeeze in a wheelchair and a small TV. There is no space to move except onto the bed.  The flat reeks of urine and faeces. The wheelchair is broken. Social workers at the hospital told the sister that they could do nothing to find proper care for him (because he is a refugee), and at the humanitarian aid organization tasked with assisting disabled refugees has as yet not been able to come up with a workable suggestion.  No food, no linen, no space to move, no toiletries, no adult disposables, no care, no concern, no compassion. On this International Day of the Disabled we seem to count only those who achieve seemingly superhuman feats. A traumatized, smelly, starving, dirty disabled refugee does not fit our image of disability heroism.

Shame on us all!

Johanna Kistner

Executive Director/Clinical Psychologist

Sophiatown Community Psychological Services

4 Lancaster Street, Westdene, 2092

Johannesburg

The cost of diminished resources for child protection