MSF to investigate alleged childcare abuse incident

[wirehtc]

NTUC will be in big trouble if the incident turns out to be really a child abuse.

The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will conduct a thorough investigation of the alleged childcare abuse incident at My First Skool, said Acting Minister Chan Chun Sing on Sunday.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/msf-to-investigate/736822.html

[CondoInterested]

I am not siding any parties nor claiming any parties have below problems.

I hope we can discuss problem at large arising from the incident.

1. Caregiver 17 years have no bad records.
2. Does the kid has ADHL / Hyperactive problem?
3. If yes to 2, does the parents know?
4. If yes to 2, does the caregiver know?
5. If yes to 2, does NTUC equipped the caregiver the right skills to handle such situation?
6. If no to 2, what happened to caregiver at that instance of the incident?
7. If no to 2, was the selection process outdated and need regular update regulations and upgrade caregiver skill?
8. If single family income can cope with family livelihood, who would not want to take care their own children and put them to risk?

[RSG]

I am not siding any parties nor claiming any parties have below problems.

I hope we can discuss problem at large arising from the incident.

1. Caregiver 17 years have no bad records.
2. Does the kid has ADHL / Hyperactive problem?
3. If yes to 2, does the parents know?
4. If yes to 2, does the caregiver know?
5. If yes to 2, does NTUC equipped the caregiver the right skills to handle such situation?
6. If no to 2, what happened to caregiver at that instance of the incident?
7. If no to 2, was the selection process outdated and need regular update regulations and upgrade caregiver skill?
8. If single family income can cope with family livelihood, who would not want to take care their own children and put them to risk?


Good analysis.

[wirehtc]

I am not siding any parties nor claiming any parties have below problems.

I hope we can discuss problem at large arising from the incident.

1. Caregiver 17 years have no bad records.
2. Does the kid has ADHL / Hyperactive problem?
3. If yes to 2, does the parents know?
4. If yes to 2, does the caregiver know?
5. If yes to 2, does NTUC equipped the caregiver the right skills to handle such situation?
6. If no to 2, what happened to caregiver at that instance of the incident?
7. If no to 2, was the selection process outdated and need regular update regulations and upgrade caregiver skill?
8. If single family income can cope with family livelihood, who would not want to take care their own children and put them to risk?

Injuries involving broken bones are very serious, especially for young children physically and pyschologically.

[CondoInterested]

When I saw the video, I was shock by the action of the caregiver and wonder how could she do such thing.

But after more info surfaces, the only thing can be concluded now is the little child is innocent.

Besides the child, the rest of the parties need to review themselves for their actions or even their non actions.

[bigbertha]

I am not siding any parties nor claiming any parties have below problems.

I hope we can discuss problem at large arising from the incident.

1. Caregiver 17 years have no bad records.
2. Does the kid has ADHL / Hyperactive problem?
3. If yes to 2, does the parents know?
4. If yes to 2, does the caregiver know?
5. If yes to 2, does NTUC equipped the caregiver the right skills to handle such situation?
6. If no to 2, what happened to caregiver at that instance of the incident?
7. If no to 2, was the selection process outdated and need regular update regulations and upgrade caregiver skill?
8. If single family income can cope with family livelihood, who would not want to take care their own children and put them to risk?

All these are not important when someone got hurt - especially if it is a child and the perpetrator is an adult. Simply no excuse at all ! :tsk-tsk::tsk-tsk:

MHO

[eng81157]

I am not siding any parties nor claiming any parties have below problems.

I hope we can discuss problem at large arising from the incident.

1. Caregiver 17 years have no bad records.
2. Does the kid has ADHL / Hyperactive problem?
3. If yes to 2, does the parents know?
4. If yes to 2, does the caregiver know?
5. If yes to 2, does NTUC equipped the caregiver the right skills to handle such situation?
6. If no to 2, what happened to caregiver at that instance of the incident?
7. If no to 2, was the selection process outdated and need regular update regulations and upgrade caregiver skill?
8. If single family income can cope with family livelihood, who would not want to take care their own children and put them to risk?

all these questions don't even touch the surface of the problem. firstly, the suspect has no bad records does not mean that she has not abused children previously.

1. a kid was injured, why didn't the school conduct its own round of investigations??

2. what if the parents didn't ask to view the CCTV? what if the centre does not have CCTV? not only the perpetuator would have gotten away scott-free, the school would be culpable in condoning such acts, unknowingly. the principal should be held responsible as well.

3. if the above is true, then how many more cases had taken place without knowledge? how does the centre, then, appraise its teachers? what safeguards are there in the first place to prevent such incidents from happening? from the video, there were at least 3 (if not 4) adults in the classroom and NO one noticed the wrestling move?

4. granted that no one noticed the wrestling move, the second video showed another adult getting involved. did she have the presence of mind to ask why the boy was limping? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy himself? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy's classmates? if not, did the teacher restrain the boy from telling the truth? if not, how did the centre cover the act up? surely it takes more than one teacher to do it.

5. why did the school not get the suspect to sit in and explain the entire incident?


please, there are so many bloody loopholes in NTUC's story and policies.

[RSG]

all these questions don't even touch the surface of the problem. firstly, the suspect has no bad records does not mean that she has not abused children previously.

1. a kid was injured, why didn't the school conduct its own round of investigations??

2. what if the parents didn't ask to view the CCTV? what if the centre does not have CCTV? not only the perpetuator would have gotten away scott-free, the school would be culpable in condoning such acts, unknowingly. the principal should be held responsible as well.

3. if the above is true, then how many more cases had taken place without knowledge? how does the centre, then, appraise its teachers? what safeguards are there in the first place to prevent such incidents from happening? from the video, there were at least 3 (if not 4) adults in the classroom and NO one noticed the wrestling move?

4. granted that no one noticed the wrestling move, the second video showed another adult getting involved. did she have the presence of mind to ask why the boy was limping? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy himself? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy's classmates? if not, did the teacher restrain the boy from telling the truth? if not, how did the centre cover the act up? surely it takes more than one teacher to do it.

5. why did the school not get the suspect to sit in and explain the entire incident?


please, there are so many bloody loopholes in NTUC's story and policies.

What I like about CONDOINTERESTED's analysis is that he is looking at the root causes and the points are very valid for effective measures to be implemented.

[zzz1]

There were other adults there as well when the incident happened.
Question on why it was not being stopped?
Was it because lack or no supervisions on the caregivers ?

No matter on what medical conditions the kid may has will never jsutify the abuse.

[teddybear]

For all we know, may be NTUC will be going after the person who suggested to install CCTV in their childcare centres! :eek:


all these questions don't even touch the surface of the problem. firstly, the suspect has no bad records does not mean that she has not abused children previously.

1. a kid was injured, why didn't the school conduct its own round of investigations??

2. what if the parents didn't ask to view the CCTV? what if the centre does not have CCTV? not only the perpetuator would have gotten away scott-free, the school would be culpable in condoning such acts, unknowingly. the principal should be held responsible as well.

3. if the above is true, then how many more cases had taken place without knowledge? how does the centre, then, appraise its teachers? what safeguards are there in the first place to prevent such incidents from happening? from the video, there were at least 3 (if not 4) adults in the classroom and NO one noticed the wrestling move?

4. granted that no one noticed the wrestling move, the second video showed another adult getting involved. did she have the presence of mind to ask why the boy was limping? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy himself? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy's classmates? if not, did the teacher restrain the boy from telling the truth? if not, how did the centre cover the act up? surely it takes more than one teacher to do it.

5. why did the school not get the suspect to sit in and explain the entire incident?


please, there are so many bloody loopholes in NTUC's story and policies.

[hopeful]

hearsay that the parents told the teacher that the child is spirited.
the teacher misinterpreted that there is a spirit inside the child, hence the treatment of the child is actually to drive away the spirit.

so this boils down to a case of misunderstanding, albeit have 2 injured party, the child and the teacher.
the child will be traumatized and the teacher cannot enjoy what she loves best, teaching.

one good thing is people clamoring for cctv to be compulsary installed.
well, this is just like mrt, a few deaths, then implement barrier.
maids died cleaning windows, then implement some measure (i forgot what).

[Douk]

Agree totally.


all these questions don't even touch the surface of the problem. firstly, the suspect has no bad records does not mean that she has not abused children previously.

1. a kid was injured, why didn't the school conduct its own round of investigations??

2. what if the parents didn't ask to view the CCTV? what if the centre does not have CCTV? not only the perpetuator would have gotten away scott-free, the school would be culpable in condoning such acts, unknowingly. the principal should be held responsible as well.

3. if the above is true, then how many more cases had taken place without knowledge? how does the centre, then, appraise its teachers? what safeguards are there in the first place to prevent such incidents from happening? from the video, there were at least 3 (if not 4) adults in the classroom and NO one noticed the wrestling move?

4. granted that no one noticed the wrestling move, the second video showed another adult getting involved. did she have the presence of mind to ask why the boy was limping? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy himself? did she have the presence of mind to question the boy's classmates? if not, did the teacher restrain the boy from telling the truth? if not, how did the centre cover the act up? surely it takes more than one teacher to do it.

5. why did the school not get the suspect to sit in and explain the entire incident?


please, there are so many bloody loopholes in NTUC's story and policies.