It takes a village to raise a child..

So really, what's happening on this thread is exactly what happens in real life, right? We complain about the abusiveness and death of the child, but we're not willing to do anything to stop it ...because of some misguided ideal of rights and freedoms?

And so we'll talk about this until it's forgotten ...and still do nothing ...until the next little kid is killed. Then we'll start to talking again, the complaining again, but ...just like before, we'll do nothing to stop the abusiveness and deaths.

When this thread has died a forgotten death, let's try to remember it when, in a week or so, someone else posts an very similar thread about a different little kid that was killed. ....and we'll do nothing but talk and condemn, with no action at all ...just like in our society.

I understand and share this concern of yours.

However, it's not like there is nothing we could do.

In some way, the discussions here affect us in -

- how we treat other people (IRL and online),
- what opinions we state when asked (IRL and online),
- for whom and for what we vote.

Although this might seem an effect so small it is not worth talking about it, it is not nothing either.
 
I understand and share this concern of yours.

However, it's not like there is nothing we could do.

In some way, the discussions here affect us in -

- how we treat other people (IRL and online),
- what opinions we state when asked (IRL and online),
- for whom and for what we vote.

Although this might seem an effect so small it is not worth talking about it, it is not nothing either.

Yeah, and while we're having these silly discussion, thousands of kids are abused all over the world ...and we still keep talking ...and doing nothing.

Have you ever heard the term, "Talk is cheap!"?

Baron Max
 
At least the chances that we are going to abuse someone are slimmer,
if we make ourselves aware of the damaging consequences of abuse,
or spend the time here that we could have instead spend in a pub drinking ourselves into oblivion and then doing who knows what.
 
At least the chances that we are going to abuse someone are slimmer, if we make ourselves aware of the damaging consequences of abuse, or spend the time here that we could have instead spend in a pub drinking ourselves into oblivion and then doing who knows what.

How many people that read this site would be detered by the talk ...if they were, in fact, abusers? Do you really think that talk is going to stop them?

And millions, perhaps billions, of people do spend time in pubs drinking, yet don't abuse anyone ....and no one talked to them about it, they just knonw that it's wrong.

Talk is cheap, and this site is proof of that.

What we, as a society, need to do is to act, not to talk. We need to rid society of people who would harm little kids and defenseless people ....just get rid of them. We could pack them up and ship them to the Arctic ...it rids the society of them, plus it gives the Polar Bears something to eat!

Baron Max
 
Bells:
The reason I was cranky was not so much for my son's behaviour, but because my father piped up and told me off in front of my son because I had dared sent him to his room. He then took my son outside and gave him chocolate. Granted I was not beating or abusing my son. I had merely sent him to his room to calm down. But I resented their interference. Had I spanked my son, I suspect I would probably have been slapped by my father.

You let your father override your authority in regards to your children? What the hell? I always got the impression that you didn't take shit from anyone, especially men.
 
S.A.M:
Its a very common sight in India for neighbors to get involved in any incident. Any kind of untoward or extraordinary happening just needs a loud voice or a shout and the neighbors will be banging on the door to know whats going on. I remember many instances from my childhood.

I couldn't tolerate such god damn meddling. Privacy is very high on my list, and the thought of neighbours rushing over to my house every time I break wind causes my stomach to turn.
 
S.A.M:


I couldn't tolerate such god damn meddling. Privacy is very high on my list, and the thought of neighbours rushing over to my house every time I break wind causes my stomach to turn.

Societies tending towards excessive individualism breed themselves out of existence.
 
You've raised a very interesting point if only by the title of the thread ..."It Takes a Village to Raise a Child".

So, ...does that mean that the entire village should be held responsible for the death of the little girl? And if so, to what extent? I'd guess that almost everyone in the village knew about the abuse, even if they only knew about the drugs and the neglect. And remember, no punishment of anyone is going to bring the little girl back to life.

I don't know ... Are we to be our brother's keeper?

Baron Max

PS- just remember, that post was me trying to be a nice guy. The real Baron Max would just take all of them out behind the barn and shot 'em ....and be done with them. People like that have no place in society ...get rid of them, don't punish them, just get rid of them.

NOW, I've seen it all. :D

In response to the OP.
Yes, They should be responsible, but their guilt should have been punishment enough, In case it isn't, make em do community service or something.
 
Bells:


You let your father override your authority in regards to your children? What the hell? I always got the impression that you didn't take shit from anyone, especially men.

I was angry but knew enough to realise it best to not say anything in front of my son. I did not want my son to know he was the subject of an argument between my father and myself. So I said nothing until he had toddled off out of earshot and politely advised my father to butt out next time. I reminded him how much it used to make him cranky when his parents used to step in and interfere with his parental role when I was a child. He is my father and I adore him to bits, I also respect him... There are only 2 people on this planet I do "take shit from" and they are my parents.

greenberg said:
I think people tend to be very risk-averse nowadays. There is no easy solution to this.
There is also the selfish ideology of simply not wanting to become involved. And then of course you have the family dynamics of not wanting to bring in outsiders, thereby admitting to others and the community at large, the problems in your own family. Pride, and an excessive amount of it, is partly to blame.

I think Baron is right. We do need to act. But we do not. The fear of interfering in the private family lives of people and forcing them to tow the line would receive screams of outrage from the general public. Action is needed to educate the community at large that some things will never be acceptable and a failure to report abuse (such as in this case) should and will result in severe punishment. There is a system already already in place in regards to certain professional fields, such as medicine and education (where if a doctor or teacher becomes aware of abuse of a child, they are bound to report it), and I think it is high time the same rules were applied to family members and the general community. If you know someone is abusing a child in your family, it should be your duty to report it immediately to ensure that child is removed from danger. Failure to do so should result in a fairly hefty jail sentence.
 
If you know someone is abusing a child in your family, it should be your duty to report it immediately to ensure that child is removed from danger. Failure to do so should result in a fairly hefty jail sentence.

Ideally so, yes. But the problem is that it is impossible to prove or disprove that one knew what was going on. The issue of eyewitnesses is too moot, so the Law rather focuses on that which can be proved directly, ie. whether the parents abuse the child; the reports of eyewitnesses being only circumstantial evidence in all this.
 
In olearnder's defense

Sure, probably. But then ...how many other people knew what was going on in that house? How many others suspected something like that? Should we charge them all? And if not, why charge some people, but not the others?

See? It's not so simple ....unless we do it my way; Take those who lived in the house and knew what was going on and shoot 'em.

The grey area exists for those whom you shoot too. And that's obvious.

You / loved one want to be shot in this manner? Nope. nothing, especially messing with life is so simple.

You become chairman and promote your ideologies, and there will be a spike of worse human treatment that is sure. But whatever, I can understand where you are coming from.

Mmmm, viva la revolucion
 
Thoughts on the village

The concept of "It takes a village" is not intended to be applied so literally as some have suggested. It involves various aspects of conduct that, these days, are held in broad disdain as people prefer to worry about their own selves.

Simple things: My friends still stop and apologize to me when they cuss in front of my daughter. On the one hand, I appreciate their awareness; to the other, I'm not concerned about their lapses. She will eventually learn to cuss—in fact, it appears she's already trying out "damn" as an expression of disappointment, like when her Star Wars video game character misses the jump, or the spaceship blows up—and, in truth, I'd rather she learn how to do it right. As none of my friends speak generally in the various dialects that consist of stringing certain words together, or placing variations of fuck at every few words—"You know, fuck', he was, like, fuckin', sayin' all this fuckin' shit and fuckin' telling her she's a fuckin' bitch, and he fuckin' just needs to fuck off!"—I'm not concerned about the occasional lapse.

But the old expectation that we do not cuss in front of children has fallen out of favor among many whose first concern in the world is themselves.

People are torn, too, about whether to say anything when a parent spanks a child in public. Sure, what we saw might seem a stupid reason to get that angry at a child, but we don't know the full history, so we only intervene in more extreme cases. Or, as is the manner of people concerned about themselves, they intervene in a moralistic manner: they are offended, and the child's welfare is only a utility to advance that sense of offense.

Some would hide their morals behind a pretense of concern for society. Recently an episode was recounted in which some elderly people deigned to lecture a parent on the dangers of letting toddlers run around naked. That someone, somewhere, might get off on seeing a naked three year-old isn't a good argument unless one presumes the parent so naive as to be unaware that pedophiles exist. No concern was shown by the elderly—and perhaps this is something they don't understand, but maybe they just don't care—about the damage of early childhood demonization of the body.

The sounds of bloodshed? Well, there was an occasion fifteen years or so ago when a trucker was driving along when he came to what looked like an accident. There were a lot of people standing around in the highway, and what looked like a car at the middle of the knot. He got out of his truck, pushed through the crowd to see what he could do to help, and was horrified to find that the people were standing around, watching a child being raped on the roadside. What the hell was wrong with these people? And the local police, commenting to the media afterward, were unsure what the witnesses' obligations were in that situation. Such incidents (albeit generally less severe) led to the passage of certain "good samaritan laws"; not those that protect someone against liability for failing to revive a heart attack victim with CPR, but laws that actually obliged people to intervene in muggings and other dangerous situations. The closing episodes of Seinfeld mocked these laws.

I had an occasion a couple years ago in which I had to choose between calling children's services or not. The eldest boy, eleven, knocked on my door at one-thirty in the morning, visibly shaken, and said, "I need help. My mom's bleeding."

The incident was one of domestic violence, but alleged by both parties to be accidental. In the middle of an intoxicated argument, the man had "kicked off his shoes", something we all do. Only one of the shoes arced off his foot and smacked the woman in the face, bloodying her nose. The timing of the incident, of course, was unfortunate. I spent about three hours with them, trying to get a grasp on the situation, and while I never did, the one thing that both insisted with believable sincerity was that this was a genuine accident. After a while, everyone was calm, and they laughingly recounted some of their prior DV episodes. It was clear to me that this one was over, and that their occasions of violence were less about malice itself than a lack of restraint. This is an important criterion to me. A lack of restraint they can work on. And they did, and still do. Life goes on. Everything seems to have worked out, but every now and then, I still wonder if I did the right thing.

It's a hard call. But the one thing I couldn't do was look at the boy as he stood at my door and say, "Sorry, kid. None of my business."

Of course it's my business. His little sisters played with my daughter every day. The effects of any trauma they suffer could come out in play. That's dangerous. In the longer view, too, it is, statistically speaking, children of dysfunctional homes who become the greater part of society's troubled individuals. Dysfunction often begets dysfunction.

There is no easy solution, no obvious balance of community intervention; there is a Caribbean culture I've heard of, although it was a few years ago and I forget which, exactly, where pretty much any elder was allowed—and even expected—to scold a child for misbehavior witnessed. I don't recall if that extended to corporal punishment, and I would certainly hope not. But in the United States, or, at least, my corner of it, parents are more likely to take offense at the notion that someone down the street took it upon themselves to lecture and scold the child. I have, to the other, been told by a parent that I'm allowed to smack their kids if it's necessary, but the thought of it horrifies me. And while maybe patient lectures and explanations of why certain behavior is wrong didn't work at the time, maybe—just maybe—sometime down the road, those kids will remember that at least one adult in their circle (actually, there were a few) took the time to talk to them, and to listen to them, and remember how that felt. And, hopefully, something good will come from that.

Objections to breast-feeding in public? These are purely selfish concerns that do nothing to help the community.

And so on, and so on.

The list is long. Few of the considerations are easy and clear-cut. But whether we appreciate the notion or not, it does, indeed, take a village to raise a child. Parents, educators, role models, peers—not all of these are easily contained under one roof. And, in truth, the closer we get to that sort of self-contained unit, the less I recognize the customs and perspectives that grow out of such situations.
 
bells i dont know legally what should be done, thats your area not mine.

Ethically however i agree with you, there was a discussion a while ago about wether to widen the amount of people who are manditory reporters for child abuse and there was a fair argument on both sides.

The agument for increasing the number to include just about anyone is quite ovious so i will just repeat the negitive, the argument went that its hard enough for those of us who already are manditory reporters and who arnt police and lawyers to know where an action lapses into abuse and where it is symply a violation of personal ethics but legal (for instance smacking)

Now its easy to sit on the extreems and say "look its quite easy to tell, this is oviously child abuse" but is it really when your in that situation. Paticually when your talking about the 18 year old girl. Was she subject to the same sorts of abuse when she was a child? did she grow up thinking this was normal? If so and she hasnt be educated differently (i highly doubt she has studied university level crisis care for instance) then she may not see anything wrong with it. Then there is the issue that she is still almost a child herself, would you even at your own age be able to stand against your parents? would you have at 18?

the grandparents are a compleatly different issue but it has its own problems, could you really send your own child to jail?

its very easy to sit down after the fact and ask why nothing was done, its very easy to judge DOCS but we arnt in there shoes at that time. In the case of DOCS we dont have there workload and are trying to judge whos urgent knowing no one will thank them when they are right but will crusify us when they are wrong.
 
Back
Top