The Convention on the Rights of the Child (friendly version) states at number 19 heading among other others of equal importance that:
In recent days Barbadians have been expressing outrage in response to the report of a teenager at the Government Industrial School (GIS) recorded naked in solitary confinement. The blogmaster is acutely aware the danger of blogging about matters involving children given the inclination by some in Internet fora to be irresponsible.
Troubling to the blogmaster is the breach of the rights of the teenager occurred while under the care of government. It is not lost on the blogmaster that in other jurisdictions persons charged with the responsibility of managing the GIS would have tendered resignations forthwith.
There is no need for the blogmaster to be prolix sharing thoughts on the heinous act that has occurred at the GIS. It should never have happened. Successive governments by mediocre decision-making are responsible. Adults whether employed at the GIS or parents are responsible. The country is responsible for protecting our children. Faith Marshall-Harris is correct when she reminds us that adults have a moral and LEGAL duty to report incidents of child abuse to the authorities- even if the abuse occurred at a government institution responsible for enforcing the very rights of children.
The blogmaster congratulates children advocates who champion the rights of children every day, every week and all the time. Blogs have been posted over the years (not enough) to expose challenges children face in the country. The number of comments these types of blogs garner is always an indication of the level of public interest in these types of matters. Then there is a predictable reaction when the matter currently provoking rage occurs. We are reactive to the inevitable.
The following related links were posted on Barbados Underground in 2017 to support a similar matter.
We do not place enough importance on little problems until there is a crisis situation.
The blogmaster refuses to consider the problems were not being highlighted to the management of the GIS and at other similar institutions over time.
The blogmaster refuses to consider the problems were not being highlighted to the Board of the GIS and at other similar institutions over time.
The blogmaster refuses to consider that the problems were not being highlighted to the minister responsibly for the GIS and at other similar institutions over time.
The blogmaster refuses to consider that the problems were not being highlighted to the general population by current and former employees of the GIS and other over time.
When we make the logical conclusion what does it translate to?