kasia
02-10-2005, 12:53 AM
Misconception of Child Abuse and Discipline in the United States
Excerpts from an Essay by Kieu Tran
Undergraduate, University of Colorado at Boulder
There is a deep misunderstanding in the way Westerners define child abuse and the way Asians understand it. In Eastern languages, there is no such phrase as "child abuse," and even if there were statistics on child abuse, I am sure the that the rate of child abuse would be very low.
But to American (1) parents, such actions are considered abusive and are not allowed by law. The American concept of child abuse has affected most Asian parents living in the United States. The stereotype held by most American people is that Asian parents always hit their children. This stereotype also affects Asians. When Asians first arrive in the United States, they do not realize that it is against the law to discipline children by striking them, even if they have reason to do so. Simultaneously, Asian children are taught at school about child abuse and that adults, even their parents, have no right to hurt or strike them. If they happen to be physically punished at home by their parents, they may tell their friends or teachers when they go to school. Of course, the teachers will report the "abuse" to the police. These parents will be questioned or brought into court for trial. I know some Vietnamese parents who were questioned by social workers because they applied strict punishment to their children. The consequence of such action is that the bond between parents and children falls apart. The children have a misconception of punishment; they think that their parents hate them. As a result, Asian parents feel discouraged and desperate, since they think they have lost their authority to raise their children.
.....
Physical punishment in Asian traditions is not considered child abuse. In Vietnam, it is the traditional way of raising children, and is a part of Vietnamese culture that has existed for many years. Physical punishment does not work in America, but it does in Vietnam. I want to focus on differences between abuse, punishment, and discipline. Punishment by striking a child does not qualify as abuse. Vietnamese parents should discipline their children if they are bad. However, what consequences and problems will Asian parents face if they discipline or punish their children in America?
...
As I see it, in America, the family structure seems to be unimportant. Discipline in the American family does not seem to be strict because the meaning of the term "everyone is equal" influences American families. Parents and children have equal rights. Children can argue, talk back, and even fight for their own rights. There is no hierarchy in the family system. American parents can play two roles at the same time: parents and friends. There is no way that they can physically punish their children, if their children perform badly. They can only talk about their children's mistakes and give verbal advice.
Physical punishment may also mean discipline for the Vietnamese family. Children feel shamed, along with their pain, when they are being punished. Next time, they will remember that, if they do not obey their parents, they will get pain again, so they avoid making mistakes.
This way of disciplining does not exist in American society; it is called child abuse. The Ma family is an example of Vietnamese American discipline problems. They moved to the United States some time ago. Their youngest daughter is 15 years old now. She came with her family, when she was young. She learned English, and was influenced by American customs very quickly. She gained many friends and used to stay over night at her friends' houses on the weekends. She was always on the phone and, of course, she did not do well in school.
Mrs. Ma tried to talk to her daughter and both her parents also resisted punishing her, but she never listened to them. She thought that her parents would not dare beat her, because they were living in America. Her parents saw that she was getting worse and worse and, when they could not endure such behavior any more, Mr. Ma did strike her. She called the police and her father was charged some money and he was warned that, if he struck her again, he would be put in jail. Afterwards, because Mr. Ma struck his daughter again, he was jailed for three days. After his release, he became angry and desperate because he realized he could not discipline his daughter in this country the way he wanted. As a result, he let things go and ignored his daughter. He thought that, sooner or later, his daughter would learn good things through the errors she made.
I feel sorry for Mr. Ma. He was hurt very much and felt ashamed. He never believed that his own daughter could be against him. He felt that he was losing face with his neighbors, friends and relatives. What happened to Mr. Ma could never happen in Vietnam, for that would be against Vietnam traditional culture. Even in Vietnam, if she had called the police, they would not have interfered in the case. American law destroys parental authority.
Pamela Mayhall and Katherine Norgard, the authors of Child Abuse and Neglect: Sharing Responsibility define physical child abuse as a "non-accidental injury inflicted on a child by the child's parent or caretaker" (110). They include common injuries such as, "diaper rash or uncleanness, bite marks, grab marks, belt lashes, ping pong bruises, and lacerated lips" in a list of "primary indicators of physical child abuse," which they define as "injuries of the skin, to the face, head or body" (111). I have heard many cases of child abuse on the news and TV, like the cases of child abuse caused by alcoholic or drug-addicted parents. When American parents have trouble with their bosses, their jobs, bills, and many accumulated problems, they get stressed easily and become desperate. This could cause them to be abusive to their children.
In my opinion, these troubled these parents have suffered from psychological problems and therefore, their emotional behavior is abnormal. They lose their tempers even in minor desperation. In low-income families, the parents are faced with financial destitution that can easily instigate their outrage without any reason. Sometimes, they release their outrage by physically hurting their children. All these acts of violence are considered child abuse. Of course, all these actions are not forgivable, and are quite different from the definition of child punishment.
In conclusion, Vietnamese family structure tends to be a little unique community, while the Western family structure tends to focus more on individualism. In Vietnam, parents must discipline their children, even striking them at times, because that is part of our traditional culture. Any Vietnamese parent who does not discipline their child is considered to be non-traditional. As a result, the concept does not exist in Vietnam, or in other Asian countries.
...
WORKS CITED
Mayhall, Pamela D. and Katherine Eastlack Norgard. Child Abuse and Neglect: Sharing Responsibility NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1983.
Wong, Jade Snow. "A Measure of Freedom."
"Misconception of Child Abuse and Discipline in the United States" © 1996,1997 by Kieu Tran
i have major issues with this analysis of child abuse & discipline within apia households. it almost sounds as though the author is arguing that there is no such thing as child abuse within our households (as defined in asian cultures) but i think that itself is a misconception.
for starters, there is a term for child abuse in most asian cultures, contrary to what the author states in her first paragraph. in chinese, we call it "yee tung yerk doi," and that is punishable by law in hong kong. further, even if we accepted her argument that there is no such concept in asian cultures, that can hardly serve as a justification. not too long ago, there was no common phrase to depict spousal abuse, and spousal abuse was (and in some countries still is) not recognized by the law. but how does that make it right? and the fact that there is a low reported number of incidents of abuse? since when do we look at *reported* numbers of anything to determine what goes on in the asian community?
further, most child protective agencies, at least in california, recognize the difference between abuse and discipline, and typically make a greater effort to differentiate the two when dealing with minority communities (e.g., latino communities share the same problem as us.) simply spanking a child is usually not sufficient for even a reprimand.
the author goes on to seemingly criticize a definition of child abuse proposed by two american authors. she quoted examples that they cited, namely, "diaper rash or uncleanness, bite marks, grab marks, belt lashes, ping pong bruises, and lacerated lips." in my opinion, babies with diaper rashes or who are wearing the soiled clothing, etc., are being neglected by their parents. even asian parents would recognize this. bite marks, belt lashes, lacerated lips? c'mon. what business does a parent have punching a child in the mouth? that is hardly a form a discipline and can only be chalked up to a parent losing his/her temper.
finally, she seems to believe that the acts of injuring a child when committed by american parents are distinctive and "abnormal" as opposed to the "normal" behavior of asian parents using corporal punishment, but that is a very superficial way of looking at the matter. while i don't doubt that the truth of the fact that much of the child abuse in american families can be traced to the "financial destitution" of the family, the same can be said for asian families. it is even further compounded by the fact that many asian parents are faced with racism and a loss of dignity from the outside society, and that asian children are experiencing the backlash of their parents' frustration. so many times i've asked my asian clients whether these acts of violence occurred in asia and at what point they started occurring. the answer is typically that they abuse did not start until they immigrated to the united states. isn't that indicative of something?
i think it's ludicrous to make the argument that abuse does not occur in asian american homes - or that it ought not to be defined as abuse. if children are being thrown against walls by their alcoholic parents, sent to bed hungry as a form of punishment, forced to eat chili peppers as a form of punishment (latino families), etc., i think we should be able to say, regardless of the history, those are, cross-culturally, unacceptable forms of child abuse. and don't hit your kids in the face. wth?
Excerpts from an Essay by Kieu Tran
Undergraduate, University of Colorado at Boulder
There is a deep misunderstanding in the way Westerners define child abuse and the way Asians understand it. In Eastern languages, there is no such phrase as "child abuse," and even if there were statistics on child abuse, I am sure the that the rate of child abuse would be very low.
But to American (1) parents, such actions are considered abusive and are not allowed by law. The American concept of child abuse has affected most Asian parents living in the United States. The stereotype held by most American people is that Asian parents always hit their children. This stereotype also affects Asians. When Asians first arrive in the United States, they do not realize that it is against the law to discipline children by striking them, even if they have reason to do so. Simultaneously, Asian children are taught at school about child abuse and that adults, even their parents, have no right to hurt or strike them. If they happen to be physically punished at home by their parents, they may tell their friends or teachers when they go to school. Of course, the teachers will report the "abuse" to the police. These parents will be questioned or brought into court for trial. I know some Vietnamese parents who were questioned by social workers because they applied strict punishment to their children. The consequence of such action is that the bond between parents and children falls apart. The children have a misconception of punishment; they think that their parents hate them. As a result, Asian parents feel discouraged and desperate, since they think they have lost their authority to raise their children.
.....
Physical punishment in Asian traditions is not considered child abuse. In Vietnam, it is the traditional way of raising children, and is a part of Vietnamese culture that has existed for many years. Physical punishment does not work in America, but it does in Vietnam. I want to focus on differences between abuse, punishment, and discipline. Punishment by striking a child does not qualify as abuse. Vietnamese parents should discipline their children if they are bad. However, what consequences and problems will Asian parents face if they discipline or punish their children in America?
...
As I see it, in America, the family structure seems to be unimportant. Discipline in the American family does not seem to be strict because the meaning of the term "everyone is equal" influences American families. Parents and children have equal rights. Children can argue, talk back, and even fight for their own rights. There is no hierarchy in the family system. American parents can play two roles at the same time: parents and friends. There is no way that they can physically punish their children, if their children perform badly. They can only talk about their children's mistakes and give verbal advice.
Physical punishment may also mean discipline for the Vietnamese family. Children feel shamed, along with their pain, when they are being punished. Next time, they will remember that, if they do not obey their parents, they will get pain again, so they avoid making mistakes.
This way of disciplining does not exist in American society; it is called child abuse. The Ma family is an example of Vietnamese American discipline problems. They moved to the United States some time ago. Their youngest daughter is 15 years old now. She came with her family, when she was young. She learned English, and was influenced by American customs very quickly. She gained many friends and used to stay over night at her friends' houses on the weekends. She was always on the phone and, of course, she did not do well in school.
Mrs. Ma tried to talk to her daughter and both her parents also resisted punishing her, but she never listened to them. She thought that her parents would not dare beat her, because they were living in America. Her parents saw that she was getting worse and worse and, when they could not endure such behavior any more, Mr. Ma did strike her. She called the police and her father was charged some money and he was warned that, if he struck her again, he would be put in jail. Afterwards, because Mr. Ma struck his daughter again, he was jailed for three days. After his release, he became angry and desperate because he realized he could not discipline his daughter in this country the way he wanted. As a result, he let things go and ignored his daughter. He thought that, sooner or later, his daughter would learn good things through the errors she made.
I feel sorry for Mr. Ma. He was hurt very much and felt ashamed. He never believed that his own daughter could be against him. He felt that he was losing face with his neighbors, friends and relatives. What happened to Mr. Ma could never happen in Vietnam, for that would be against Vietnam traditional culture. Even in Vietnam, if she had called the police, they would not have interfered in the case. American law destroys parental authority.
Pamela Mayhall and Katherine Norgard, the authors of Child Abuse and Neglect: Sharing Responsibility define physical child abuse as a "non-accidental injury inflicted on a child by the child's parent or caretaker" (110). They include common injuries such as, "diaper rash or uncleanness, bite marks, grab marks, belt lashes, ping pong bruises, and lacerated lips" in a list of "primary indicators of physical child abuse," which they define as "injuries of the skin, to the face, head or body" (111). I have heard many cases of child abuse on the news and TV, like the cases of child abuse caused by alcoholic or drug-addicted parents. When American parents have trouble with their bosses, their jobs, bills, and many accumulated problems, they get stressed easily and become desperate. This could cause them to be abusive to their children.
In my opinion, these troubled these parents have suffered from psychological problems and therefore, their emotional behavior is abnormal. They lose their tempers even in minor desperation. In low-income families, the parents are faced with financial destitution that can easily instigate their outrage without any reason. Sometimes, they release their outrage by physically hurting their children. All these acts of violence are considered child abuse. Of course, all these actions are not forgivable, and are quite different from the definition of child punishment.
In conclusion, Vietnamese family structure tends to be a little unique community, while the Western family structure tends to focus more on individualism. In Vietnam, parents must discipline their children, even striking them at times, because that is part of our traditional culture. Any Vietnamese parent who does not discipline their child is considered to be non-traditional. As a result, the concept does not exist in Vietnam, or in other Asian countries.
...
WORKS CITED
Mayhall, Pamela D. and Katherine Eastlack Norgard. Child Abuse and Neglect: Sharing Responsibility NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1983.
Wong, Jade Snow. "A Measure of Freedom."
"Misconception of Child Abuse and Discipline in the United States" © 1996,1997 by Kieu Tran
i have major issues with this analysis of child abuse & discipline within apia households. it almost sounds as though the author is arguing that there is no such thing as child abuse within our households (as defined in asian cultures) but i think that itself is a misconception.
for starters, there is a term for child abuse in most asian cultures, contrary to what the author states in her first paragraph. in chinese, we call it "yee tung yerk doi," and that is punishable by law in hong kong. further, even if we accepted her argument that there is no such concept in asian cultures, that can hardly serve as a justification. not too long ago, there was no common phrase to depict spousal abuse, and spousal abuse was (and in some countries still is) not recognized by the law. but how does that make it right? and the fact that there is a low reported number of incidents of abuse? since when do we look at *reported* numbers of anything to determine what goes on in the asian community?
further, most child protective agencies, at least in california, recognize the difference between abuse and discipline, and typically make a greater effort to differentiate the two when dealing with minority communities (e.g., latino communities share the same problem as us.) simply spanking a child is usually not sufficient for even a reprimand.
the author goes on to seemingly criticize a definition of child abuse proposed by two american authors. she quoted examples that they cited, namely, "diaper rash or uncleanness, bite marks, grab marks, belt lashes, ping pong bruises, and lacerated lips." in my opinion, babies with diaper rashes or who are wearing the soiled clothing, etc., are being neglected by their parents. even asian parents would recognize this. bite marks, belt lashes, lacerated lips? c'mon. what business does a parent have punching a child in the mouth? that is hardly a form a discipline and can only be chalked up to a parent losing his/her temper.
finally, she seems to believe that the acts of injuring a child when committed by american parents are distinctive and "abnormal" as opposed to the "normal" behavior of asian parents using corporal punishment, but that is a very superficial way of looking at the matter. while i don't doubt that the truth of the fact that much of the child abuse in american families can be traced to the "financial destitution" of the family, the same can be said for asian families. it is even further compounded by the fact that many asian parents are faced with racism and a loss of dignity from the outside society, and that asian children are experiencing the backlash of their parents' frustration. so many times i've asked my asian clients whether these acts of violence occurred in asia and at what point they started occurring. the answer is typically that they abuse did not start until they immigrated to the united states. isn't that indicative of something?
i think it's ludicrous to make the argument that abuse does not occur in asian american homes - or that it ought not to be defined as abuse. if children are being thrown against walls by their alcoholic parents, sent to bed hungry as a form of punishment, forced to eat chili peppers as a form of punishment (latino families), etc., i think we should be able to say, regardless of the history, those are, cross-culturally, unacceptable forms of child abuse. and don't hit your kids in the face. wth?