Child Abuse Research in South Africa

This article looks at children as a vulnerable group in society who need protection, especially those who come into conflict with the law. In particular, those accused of committing crime need to be diverted from entering the criminal justice system and if this is not possible, measures should be put in place to prevent the stigmatisation associated with having a criminal record. Section 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) endorses such protection. This article outlines the role played by a probation officer in the diversion process. It examines international and national instruments that promote the protection of children in conflict with the law. It looks at how probation officers and other stakeholders in the justice system regarding the handling of children accused of committing crimes.

The issue of corporal punishment has always been controversial. Controversies concern, in particular, whether use of physical force against children should be abolished in its totality, or, whether room should be left for parents to minimally use physical force for discipline. In the South African 2017 judgment of YG v S (YG case), the Court ruled that the common law defence of reasonable and moderate chastisement is unconstitutional and no longer applies to South African law. This decision has the effect of totally abolishing the use of physical force against children, even for purposes of child discipline by parents. In the 2004 case of Canadian Foundation for Children v Canada (The Canadian Foundation case), Canada took a path different from South Africa’s, with the Supreme Court of Canada invoking an approach leaving room for use of physical force by parents for purposes of discipline and education. Both approaches have been subject to condescending criticism. South Africa’s approach is faulted for being individualistic and hardly taking the relational nature of rights in the family unit into account while Canada’s approach is criticized for being insensitive to children’s rights. In light of the limitations of either approaches, it remains perplexing whether there exists an approach that can strike a balance between children’s rights and parental rights within a family unit. This article demonstrates that by reconceptualising the notion of “discipline”, such a balance could be struck. It is underscored that if child discipline is understood beyond the archaic lens of “inflicting pain upon a child”, parents still enjoy discretion within the family unit to discipline their children through the various alternatives to physical force. The discretion at the disposal of parents therefore suggests that South Africa’s approach, if invoked, can accord due regard to children’s best interest and parental right’s within the family unit.

This article provides an overview of a family play therapy intervention developed in the design and early development and pilot testing phase of an intervention research process. The family play therapy intervention was implemented with families affected by child sexual abuse (CSA). The families’ reflections on how they experienced the family play therapy process and techniques implemented as part of the intervention process, will be described in this article.