Many of us are familiar with the saying, “Spare the Rod, Spoil the Child.” It comes from a passage in the Old Testament of the Bible. Proverbs 13:24 reads as follows: “Whoever spares the rod, hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.”
This verse has long been used as a way of equating corporal punishment, with discipline and love.
It represents a social norm, strongly evident in the Pacific that there is a level of violence which is acceptable for our children, if it is to discipline them, correct behaviour or punish misbehaviour.
Simply put, many feel that it is done out of love to ensure that our children grow up respectful and aware of the consequences of their actions.
In a number of homes, the wooden spoon, sasa broom, belt or open hand ready for a slap is a symbol of punishment.
Many of us have been raised in this way and have come to accept it as the norm, the standard form of discipline.
Yet what we are doing is perpetuating the acceptance of violence against children.
What is violence against children?
The UN defines violence against children in line with article 19 of the Convention of the Rights of the Child: against “all forms of physical or mental violence, injury and abuse, neglect or children negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse.”
In a 2006 report titled Violence Against the Girl Child in the Pacific, Shamima Ali writes the following on the social acceptance of violent punishment of children: “Most countries of the Pacific, if not all, accept violent punishment, mockery, ridicule, public humiliation and severe verbal abuse of boys and girls as valid forms of discipline.
“Even in countries where corporal punishment is illegal, such as Marshall Islands and Fiji, violent punishment of children is accepted both at home and at schools.
“A study of parental practices in Fiji found that in punishing their children, hitting, smacking and hitting with a stick or other object was almost as frequently employed as verbal scolding.
“Violence is not only directed at children, but in many countries of the Pacific, violence is seen an acceptable means of conflict resolution within the family, particularly when used against women and girls.
“For example, reports from Samoa and Fiji showed that violence between spouses, by parents against children and between other family members, was widely tolerated and condoned.
“In most countries of the Pacific, violent punishment of children is defended as being part of local culture.”
Too often, the cycle of violence continues with children who have witnessed or experienced these various forms of violence either allowing themselves to become victims to it or becoming perpetrators. This is a legacy we do not need to leave for our children.
On Monday, Fijian President, Ratu Epeli Nailatikau challenged those of us attending the UNICEF Pacific Islands End-Violence-Against-Children Conference in Nadi.
“The children of the Pacific cannot wait to be free of violence, wherever they are. We owe it to them.”
In a powerful speech to representatives of 15 Pacific Island nations, as well as the special representative to the United Nations Secretary General on ending violence against children, the President challenged those in the room.
He said, “we may have limited resources and competing concerns — but if we are to protect our beautiful children, then this must be a priority, anything else is just an excuse.”
So how do we transform these social norms — some of which are ingrained in our subconscious level — through exposure or experience?
One way is to transform our worldview or the justification we use for inflicting violence on our children.
For the majority of Pacific Islanders, this worldview has a decidedly Christian lens, coloured by our cultural and social context.
This means a transformation needs to take place in the Christian perspective on violence against children.
In contrast with the passage from Proverbs quoted at the beginning of this article, there is a passage from the New Testament, from the Gospel according to Mark, Chapter 10 verses 13-16, often titled, Jesus blesses the children”. This passage offers a possibility for a paradigm shift in the understanding of loving our children.
In this passage, people are bringing their children to Jesus for Him to lay His hands on them.
This represents an appropriate and safe form of touching.
Jesus’ touch could mean different things to each parent and child — healing, the breaking of social stigma (Jesus touched the ritually unclean and made them clean in the eyes of society), comfort, protection — ultimately the touch was a blessing.
Jesus’ disciples rebuke (shoo away, use sharp words) the parents and children.
This is a demonstration of verbal violence and quite possibly emotional violence by the humiliation of being rejected publically.
Jesus is indignant with the disciples — he is angry at their behaviour. He tells the disciples that the Kingdom of God can only be received by one as a little child.
He affirms with this group of parents and children that the Kingdom is child-centred, that just as there is a preferential option for the poor, outcast and marginalised, including women — there is a preferential option for the children.
Finally Jesus lays his hands on the children and blesses them.
This transforming of worldviews has already had a positive impact in the work to reduce stigma and discrimination for people living with HIV and AIDS, and has led faith groups to engage in issues which require not only a change of mindset but a change of heart, such as gender-based violence.
In Fiji, part of the changing of worldview has led to the establishment of the House of Sarah by the Anglican Diocese of Polynesia and the Ecumenical Women’s Network which deal with the issues of gender based violence and child protection.
The Salvation Army has a “Safe to Serve” policy for those planning on serving in Children and Youth Ministries which require training and police clearance among other checks.
In the Methodist Church in Fiji, the draft Code of Conduct for ministry and lay leaders has sections on domestic violence, violence against women and a child protection policy as well as one to ensure that church communities are safe spaces for all.
There is still much to be done in changing social norms — such as the strengthening of the integrity of cultural traditions such as the i bulubulu so that they are not abused or lose their relevance by perpetuating violence and abuse.
Pastoral counselling training for ministers, pastors, teachers, school counsellors and community leaders must be enhanced to ensure that the root causes of violence are dealt with in cases, rather than simply the solution.
Violence in the family and the community is an issue for all.
It will require a committed partnership between the government, civil society and must include faith-based groups.
“Simplicity, Serenity, Spontaneity”.
* Rev. Bhagwan is an ordained minister of the Methodist Church in Fiji and a citizen journalist. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Fiji Times or the Methodist Church in Fiji.
