Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 980 ..

Substance abuse is a common factor that leads people to act perhaps uncharacteristically but extremely unpleasantly and leads to a vast range of abuse of young children. Sometimes there are temporary situations relating to trauma, to stress, to poverty or to circumstances with which the family cannot deal, and suddenly we find that the young ones of the family are the subject of abuse or that carers are abusing people in their trust. Sometimes the situation is permanent, as in the case of extreme poverty and deprivation. One of the adjustment processes, unfortunately, ends up being the abuse of young ones. Maladapted, malfunctioning adults who may have been the victims of abuse themselves are often caught up in a tragic cycle of continuance of abuse. All of these circumstances can produce child abuse. Then there are the sadists, the pederasts and all the other ugly people in our community who can never be excused as the perpetrators of child abuse. Some families have profoundly held beliefs that firm discipline is good for a child, and their notion of “firm” may be extremely harsh.

In any of the situations that I have outlined - they are just a few of the possible circumstances in which child abuse occurs, and I accept that it is a complex and difficult issue, in any of the situations where child abuse occurs, the question is: What is going to happen if the state chooses to intervene? In other words, if we legislate to make reporting mandatory, what is the state's responsibility? What are the intended results and outcomes of such intervention? What we want to achieve has to be absolutely clear. That is why it is so important to have some sense of a plan, some sense of purpose, some sense of deciding where, in these situations, we as the people responsible for the wellbeing of the ACT, for the safety of our own children, are going to take a stand and where we are going to lead in the possible eradication of this process. What is it that we really need to achieve? Primarily, everyone begins from the base of stopping and preventing any further abuse of a child, in any circumstance. But how can we do this? Of course, for some people the answer is simple - make the abuser a criminal, lock them up so that you never see them again, end of story. Anyone who has spent two minutes thinking about it knows that life is not quite so simple.

Clearly, the parent, the carer or the abuser of any kind has to be dealt with. But - and here we come to the difficulties - is removing the child absolutely necessary? If so, where to? For how long? When? Does the guilt of the abuser have to be determined before a child is removed? If so, how are those individuals’ legal rights protected? When and at what point does the state intervene? Who takes care of the child? Can they go to any carer, or do they go to a well-trained carer? Who trains the carer? Who monitors that all is well with the child? When can a child go back to their family or to the potentially abusive situation? Can the child stay with the family or close to the perpetrator of abuse? Who protects the child? Who makes those decisions? At the same time as the concern for the child is dealt with, so must some attention be paid to the circumstances of abuse. If a family is really stressed by poverty, who can take responsibility and assist them through the crisis? Does the child have to be separated and punished for the fact that their family lives in poverty? If a carer is beset by illness, does the state have the right to remove the child or does it have an obligation to ensure that the illness of the carer is dealt with appropriately? How is the child dealt with during that crisis?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .