Abused and neglected children almost always come from poor, minority
Child abuse has been on the forefront of the public domain and the media. This is because although every body in the society seems to be aware of what child abuse is as well as its consequences, several cases of death are reported every day as a result of child abuse. A number of myths have been conceived in an attempt to explain the group of people who are most venerable to child abuse. In this paper, I give some critical facts, which dismiss the statement that abused and neglected children always come from poor, minority and the inner city families.
Child abuse as per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States is any action, order or a combination of actions, which are undertaken by a parent or any other person who is responsible for the well being of the child that can harm or amount to harm of the child (MedlinePlus, 2010). Child abuse takes several forms such as sexual, emotional and physical mistreatment of the child.
The definition given above is undoubtedly not restricted to any group of people but comprises of things which although are inhuman when not only done to children but also to the adults, can be done by any body regardless of education level and social economic status in the society (Baskerville, 2006). This definition therefore creates a dove tail for the following points to fit.
One of the reasons why the abused and neglected children are perceived always to come from poor, minority and inner city families is because in many a time, the poor and the minority resides in the inner cities where homes are close to each other and are densely populated. Based on this fact and judging by principles of reasoning, one can not fail to see t how easily it is to notice an abused child (Wolfe, 1999).
This point is overstressed by the fact that the minority and the poor often lives in open places where children are free to interact and play in open grounds and therefore any abused child or neglected can be easily noticed and the case reported to the concerned authorities.
On the other hand, the majority and the rich live in private apartments where interaction with neighbors is limited or even impossible (Wolfe, 1999). They have playing grounds within their home stead and therefore socialization and interaction of children is limited to the family members or a few of the neighbors who can be easily manipulated by the offenders especially if they are family members. As a consequence, many child abuse cases go unnoticed but they apparently occur. In my opinion, I am convinced that this is one of the reasons behind this myth and therefore it should be dismissed as wrong.
It is believed that many actions which amount to child abuse particularly sexual abuse are carried out by strangers. It is then argued that children of the poor and the minority are much more exposed to the strangers because of their living standards and environment than their counterpart (Buzawa, & Buzawa, 2003). But available and reliable information have it that child abuse is more prominent among the nuclear and extended family. The subject in this matter proves beyond any reasonable doubt that if the rich and the majority have families as well as extended families, then they are venerable to child abuse just like the poor and the minority.
In conclusion therefore, the author dismisses the proposed statement that abused and neglected children always come from poor and minority families.
Baskerville, S. (2006). Family Violence in America: The Truth about Domestic Violence and Children Abuse. Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://www.acfc.org/site/DocServer/familyviolence.pdf?docID=641
Buzawa, C., & Buzawa, E. (2003). Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Response. California: sage Publications.
MedlinePlus. (2010). Child Abuse. Retrieved August 11, 2010, from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/childabuse.html
Wolfe, D. (1999). Child Abuse: Implications for Child Development and Psychopathology. California: Sage Publications.