PANEL SESSIONS
PANEL A
HE YEAR OF THE CHILD
Panel members: Mr Owitigalage S. Perera, MP, Sri Lanka (Chairman)
Mrs Jill Knight, MBE, MP, United Kingdom
Sen. the Hon. Carl Rattray, Minister of Justice and Constitutional
Reform, Jamaica
At the beginning of the discussion a panellist noted that the lack of concern for children was indicated by the fact that the United Nations had found it necessary to declare a Year of the Child. During 1979, hundreds of thousands of children had starved in Cambodia, and coloured children throughout Africa were being butchered, subjected to oppressive discrimination because of apartheid, or kidnapped to be trained as terrorists. In addition, 800,000,000 children lived in countries where the per capita income was $100 a year or less, and, of those children, 80,000,000 suffered from some form of malnutrition.
In the developed countries, millions of unborn children were being exterminated through abortion; children in America were being used in the pornography trade; the battered baby syndrome was a widespread phenomenon; and children were still being exploited for labour in Iran and parts of Europe.
The effects of the energy crisis and the refugee problem were felt most acutely by children. Millions of children in Africa and Asia had suffered because of military occupation, and thousands of orphans had been afflicted with psychological problems as a result of shock and deprivation. In view of this, the first duty to children was to secure lasting peace.
The plight of Aboriginal children in Australia was particularly acute; their health was poor and their diet unsatisfactory. Their condition made a mockery of the Declaration of Human Rights; and the Australian press was to be indicted for not reporting the severe criticism.
However, Australia was not the only country that had to deal with the problems associated with small minority groups. Other countries had to ensure that not only their own children, but immigrant children as well, were not discriminated against. The problem was apparent in the United Kingdom, where, because of the lack of careful assessment, many West Indian children, with their different cultural background, were being sent to schools for the educationally subnormal. It was important that education systems be adapted to accommodate the different cultural backgrounds of immigrant children.
There was some disagreement with the pessimistic view. The point was made that, although delinquency was a problem, thousands of children in Britain were well housed, well clothed, well fed, and well educated. The discrimination in Australia was acknowledged, but there was no need for it to continue. In Jamaica much more was being done for children than for any other group.
The view that an "International Year against Discrimination and Inflation" would have been more appropriate than an "International Year of the Child" was expressed. Brutality and discrimination were being meted out to parent and child alike, and to single out the child at the expense of the parent was dangerous, because it tended to obscure the real problems. If children were being brutalised it was because their parents had been brutalised. Certain countries were using the Year of the Child as a ruse to prevent economic change.
The children of today were entitled to equality in education, equality in health care, adequate nutrition, and the opportunity to pursue special interests; but in meeting those requirements care should be taken not to pamper the child. Malta, which subscribed to the view that good child care depended on educated and responsible parents, had initiated instruction programmes for prospective parents.
The question of when a child became a child, and ceased to be a child, was raised, as was the question of abortion, the view of one panellist being that abortion was a compromise measure adopted by people only when they were hard pressed and prepared to act against the principles of life. Love was a very important factor in a child's development, and a panellist, noting the fact that so many children were deprived of love, observed that the best parents were very often the poorest materially.