 |
BCIFV home
> Newsletter > 1995
Archives > Fall 1995 articles
Parental Violence Against Children in India
Uma A. Segal, Ph.D Associate Professor
Department of Social Work,
University of Missouri -- St. Louis, USA
The susceptibility of children to abuse and neglect has
been in the Indian political consciousness since at least
the early part of this century with the passage of the first
Children Act of 1924, which called for the protection of children
against cruelty and indignity. Furthermore, the present Indian
Constitution has several laws to guard the rights of children.
However, because many of the problems children face in India
are in the areas of health, nutrition and education, most
governmental and private social service agencies have, of
necessity, focused on their basic survival needs. On the whole,
consequently, there has been very little attention focused
on the abuse of children in the home, and there is very little
awareness, both in the general public and among human service
providers, regarding the extent and severity of abuse among
children in India. Furthermore, traditional themes of the
sanctity of the family, prerogatives of parents, and children
viewed as parental property have protected abusive families
from inspection and intervention by society.
Cross-cultural differences in child-rearing practices make
it clear that there are no absolutes regarding optimal care
or what constitutes child abuse, therefore child abuse may
best be understood when viewed in light of three interrelated
conditions - the behavior of the perpetrator, the effects
on the child, and the perception of the observer, each of
which has been empirically studied in India by the writer.
Beginning with the belief that if abusive behavior is not
perceived to be so by society, the phenomenon becomes a non-issue,
the first study compared the perceptions about the seriousness
of different forms of child abuse of human service providers
with a group of persons not involved in the provision of such
services. Findings revealed that the responses of the two
groups were similar, suggesting that a majority of human service
providers were not any more sensitized to the issue of child
abuse in India than was the general population.
Using Murray Straus' definition, a subsequent study of the
self-reports of 313 college/graduate school educated, middle-class
professionals indicated that, in the previous year, 56.9%
had engaged in 'normal' corporal punishment, 41.9% in 'abusive'
forms of discipline, and a surprising 2.9% in 'extreme' forms
of violence with their children.
In a third study, 515 children between the ages of 3 and
19 who were admitted to a detention center in Bombay were
interviewed at intake over an 8-week period. Of these, 258
indicated they had experienced physical violence at the hands
of their parents. Given what is known of the tendency of children
to protect their parents, the setting in which the interviews
were conducted and the time of the interview (upon intake),
it is highly unlikely that parental abuse was underreported.
One hundred and fifty six of these children indicated that
they had run away because they could no longer tolerate the
abuse.
The first two studies begin to reveal that although Indians
may not have given much thought to parental child abuse, it
may be more prevalent than the society has been willing to
recognize. Since corporal punishment has so long been intrinsic
to child rearing in India, professionals who might be in a
position to intervene, but who are themselves a product of
the society, may not perceive such practices as destructive.
Clearly, however, although corporal punishment may be considered
appropriate in the discipline of children in India, it is
not necessarily acceptable to the children who experience
it, and one effect is that they run away from home.
This is a significant finding that has implications for
Indian society, but to which the country has paid little attention.
While the Indian public and Indian social services are increasing
outreach and intervention programs to the growing numbers
of street children who live in poverty and become enmeshed
in criminal activities, less effort appears to be placed on
understanding what causes, other than poverty, contribute
to the presence of these street children. That so many of
the children brought to the detention center within a 2-month
period reported abuse as the primary reason for their presence
on the streets suggests that child abuse should no longer
be called a family matter that can continue to persist behind
closed doors.
Some professionals in the human services in India are beginning
to recognize the need to direct attention to the effects of
the intrafamilial maltreatment of children, which in the West
has been found to be correlated with intergenerational abuse,
juvenile delinquency, crime, mental illness, teenage pregnancy
and a variety of psychosocial difficulties in adulthood.
Most prominent in research and education in this area are
the Unit for Child and Youth Research at the Tata Institute
of Social Sciences in Bombay* and the National
Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development in New
Delhi.** Both may be contacted for further information
as may the writer.***
*Unit for Child and Youth Research
Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Post Box No. 8313, Sion-Trombay Road
Deonar, Bombay 400 088, INDIA
Contact: Dr. Asha J. Rane
** National Institute of Public Cooperation and
Child Development
5, Khel Gaon Marg, Siri Fort Road
New Delhi 110016, INDIA
Contact: Mrs. Rita Punhani
*** Uma A. Segal, Ph.D.
Department of Social Work
UM - St. Louis
St. Louis, MO 63121
(314) 516-6379
|
|
