logo
Commentary: Child abuse is harder to spot than we think

Commentary: Child abuse is harder to spot than we think

CNA23-06-2025
SINGAPORE: From Umaisyah and Megan Khung to the unnamed boy who was caged and scalded to death, several high-profile child abuse cases in recent years have captured public attention, not only for their severity, but for how long the harm went undetected. Each time, the same questions echo: How could so many eyes miss the signs? Why didn't someone step in sooner?
The uncomfortable truth is that most abuse doesn't look the way we expect.
It is rarely loud or dramatic. More often, it hides in silence, in carefully rehearsed responses, or in small changes in behaviour.
When tragedy unfolds, the public reflex is to ask who failed to act.
No one intends to overlook signs of harm. Child protection is more complex than that – it is a field shaped by ambiguity, judgment calls, and the difficult task of seeing what isn't always visible.
THE GREY AREAS OF HARM
The Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA) defines ill-treatment as the infliction of 'unnecessary' physical or emotional harm. But what qualifies as 'unnecessary' in parenting? And who decides when a line has been crossed?
These are real challenges for those on the ground – even when there are 'red flags' deemed to be obvious when abuse cases make the news.
While the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) encourages non-physical forms of discipline, there is no legislation in Singapore that explicitly prohibits parents from using corporal punishment at home. In some households across Singapore and Asia, corporal punishment such as caning is still sometimes seen as an acceptable form of discipline. The ambiguity leaves room for differing interpretations of where discipline ends and abuse begins.
Teachers, neighbours, healthcare workers and social service professionals may grapple with doubt – wondering whether what they've observed is serious enough to report, or whether stepping in might cause more harm than good.
ABUSE RARELY ANNOUNCES ITSELF
Child abuse is seldom a single, explosive event. More often, it unfolds gradually – a sustained pattern that chips away at a child's sense of safety and self-worth.
I recall a case that a colleague once shared involving a teenage girl living in a children's home. She would return to her family on weekends without incident. There were no bruises and no visible signs of distress.
But when her mother requested an extended home stay, the girl panicked and called the staff in tears, overwhelmed and afraid.
What followed was the uncovering of a troubling pattern of coercive control: Her mother had been demanding her part-time wages, coaching her on what to say to professionals, and threatening to cut off outings with friends or visits with her father and siblings.
There was no dramatic event, just a quiet erosion of her autonomy and sense of safety. The absence of clear warning signs delayed the recognition of what was happening.
THE ROLE OF PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT
Child protection work relies on professional judgment, but not in isolation. It requires training, clinical supervision and agency support. There must be an organisational culture that recognises the weight and complexity of these decisions, and strong internal structures and processes to support the work that comes after the judgment call is made.
Tools such as the Safe and Strong Support Guide and the Child Abuse Reporting Guide offer some clarity on when to report. But no checklist can replace the practice-honed skill of attentive listening and contextual understanding of what is said and unsaid. For instance, a child who does not say they are uncomfortable but appears to avoid physical contact with an adult might need to be interviewed individually to find out what the relationships are like in the family.
Even with these tools in hand, two professionals may reach different conclusions on when to report – not because one is wrong, but because each is interpreting a complex situation based on what information is known at the time.
A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY
Abuse thrives in secrecy, and perpetrators are highly adept at concealing, manipulating or deflecting scrutiny. We saw this in Umaisyah's tragic story: Her parents had managed to hide her death for years, by lying about her whereabouts or about the number of children they had.
That is why child protection must be a shared responsibility. Families, neighbours, teachers, healthcare providers, social service professionals, and members of the public – no one sees the full picture, but together, we can connect the dots.
The public needs to know that it's okay to raise a concern, even if they're unsure. Many people worry about being wrong, overstepping, or offending someone.
But the threshold for speaking up shouldn't be certainty – it should be concern. A question or observation could be the very clue that enables earlier and safer intervention.
WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO DO BETTER?
When abuse occurs, the responsibility lies first and foremost with the perpetrators. But these recent cases rightfully stir deep concern, and we must always ask: How can we strengthen the systems meant to protect children?
We must be willing to examine what's working, what isn't, and where the gaps lie.
For social service agencies, this means committing to ongoing training, establishing clear protocols for handling cases, and addressing the barriers that hinder detection, intervention, monitoring and collaboration. Beyond procedures, all parties involved in the child's well-being must find ways to overcome their organisational barriers.
But strengthening the system cannot rely on internal efforts alone. Are we making it easier – or harder – to work together across systems when so many different people are necessarily involved?
We also need independent oversight. A transparent review panel – one that brings together voices from across disciplines – can shine a light on the challenges faced by frontline professionals, uncover systemic roadblocks, and recommend practical changes at every level.
Child protection is complex work, but we owe it to the children to keep asking how we can do better.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Maid says, 'My employer attached a tracking device on me to track my whereabouts during my day off'
Maid says, 'My employer attached a tracking device on me to track my whereabouts during my day off'

Independent Singapore

time2 hours ago

  • Independent Singapore

Maid says, 'My employer attached a tracking device on me to track my whereabouts during my day off'

SINGAPORE: In a now 'self-destructed' post from the Direct Hire Transfer Singapore Maid / Domestic Helper Facebook group, one foreign domestic worker spilled the beans about how her employer doesn't just monitor her work — they apparently monitor her entire existence, even on her day off. 'Every day off, my employer keeps tracking me through my spare key. It got a tracking device connected to her phone,' the maid revealed. Looks like her employer has gone full-blown 'Mission: Impossible' instead of the usual suspicious texts or clingy check-in calls. The spare house key — something meant for emergencies — allegedly came with an attached tracking device that's synced to the employer's phone. The maid didn't say if it beeps when she gets near bubble tea shops or if it vibrates every time she steps into a shopping mall, but the implication was clear: freedom of movement is monitored, and personal time isn't entirely… personal. And it doesn't end there. 'Sometimes when I do marketing, she sets me 1 hour for my market time…' So on top of tracking the maid's whereabouts during her day off, she's also reportedly on a literal kitchen timer when sent out for groceries. Go over the 60-minute mark, and she gets a call from her employer to investigate what her helper is up to. This digital leash is enough to raise eyebrows (and hackles). In recent years, debates over the rights and treatment of domestic workers have only intensified, especially with stories like this shining a light on questionable employer behaviour. While many Singaporean households treat their helpers like extended family, stories like this one remind us that others are, well… treating them like state secrets. Breach of personal privacy While the use of tracking devices on pets and children has grown in popularity (GPS collars and smartwatches), placing one on a domestic helper — especially without consent — enters murky ethical waters. Some would argue it's a breach of personal privacy. Singapore's Ministry of Manpower (MOM) doesn't specifically address GPS tracking of helpers in its employment guidelines, but it does encourage employers to respect their helpers' dignity and rest days. Constant surveillance and rigid time limits probably aren't what MOM had in mind when they promoted open communication and mutual respect in employer-helper relationships. Spy tech can backfire! It's no secret that some employers worry about what their helpers do on their day off — whether it's concerns about safety, social circles, or even moonlighting, but placing a tracker on a human being — without full transparency — is likely to backfire. Many in the group suggested that if safety was genuinely a concern, there were better ways to address it: open conversation, mutual agreements, shared location apps — used with consent. However, in this case, it seems the employer skipped the chat and went straight for spy tech. Group members collectively state that: 'This kind of behaviour gives good employers a bad name. Most helpers already live where they work. They deserve trust and autonomy, especially on their day off. Tracking them like this is just not okay.' Humanity must come first It's unclear why the post was deleted. Perhaps the maid feared retaliation from group members or even from her spying employer. Maybe someone advised her to take it down to avoid conflict, or perhaps the tracker started buzzing suspiciously as she typed. Whatever the reason, the conversation it sparked isn't going away anytime soon. Because at the heart of it is a bigger question: How far is too far when it comes to managing domestic helpers? Singapore prides itself on efficiency and order, but even in the most efficient systems, humanity must come first. After all, trust can't be installed with a tracking chip. In other news, another Maid asks, 'Dear employer, how do you just lie on the sofa every day holding your mobile phone? Do you realize that servants are also human and feel tired?' Let's just hope this maid's employer isn't tracking her helper, too.

‘Passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' — Netizens say after passenger scolded driver for driving off despite him waving ‘in front of the bus'
‘Passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' — Netizens say after passenger scolded driver for driving off despite him waving ‘in front of the bus'

Independent Singapore

time5 hours ago

  • Independent Singapore

‘Passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' — Netizens say after passenger scolded driver for driving off despite him waving ‘in front of the bus'

SINGAPORE: A heated video posted on Instagram by @thesgdaily, featuring a fiery encounter between a passenger and a Tower Transit bus driver, has left most netizens rallying behind the bus driver. The incident, which took place at night, was captured by the passenger himself: 'I was running towards you for such a long time, and I waved at you for super long,' the passenger insisted, claiming he was right in front of the bus when the bus driver drove off without stopping. The passenger continued pressing the issue, accusing the driver of ignoring him intentionally. The driver then lost his patience, and his voice went up: 'You listen first! If there is nobody at the bus stop, I won't stop; I will just go!' he retorted. View this post on Instagram A post shared by SG Daily 🇸🇬 (@thesgdaily) When the passenger refused to back down, the driver snapped, repeating his question three times before justifying his loss of composure: 'What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? What did you scold me now? You scold my mother, you know. Who the hell are you, man? You want me to call the police?' The confrontation quickly escalated into a shouting match, and when the driver, noticing he was being recorded on video via the passenger's mobile phone, appeared to reach for the phone and asked, 'Why you take photo?' 'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' The video lit up social media, but instead of sympathy for the out-of-breath passenger, most viewers threw their support behind the driver. 'The passenger is rude to the driver… So entitled!' one commenter wrote. 'He could have missed seeing you. He's driving and must also see who is running in the nighttime?' Another commenter dropped a truth bomb with comedic flair: 'It's called BUS STOP for a reason, not BUS RUNNING. Come on, bro, everyone must wait for you running, eh?' Many were quick to remind that bus drivers have schedules to follow — and obligations to everyone onboard. 'If you [run] not at the bus stop, it's not my [business] problem,' one quoted the driver, praising his response. 'He thinks the driver is his personal chauffeur?' another quipped while one more schooled him with: 'Go get your own car or take a cab, lah!' 'Both are wrong!' A few commenters pointed out that while the commuter was out of line, the driver's reaction could've been more measured. 'Both are wrong!' one commented. 'The passenger is too self-entitled, and the driver's aggressive behaviour is unacceptable. Just a small problem becomes a big problem,' another commented. Still, others rebutted that the driver only lost his temper after being insulted. 'He wasn't aggressive at first,' someone clarified. 'He got angry because the guy scolded his mother. Anybody would have reacted that way,' another chimed in. Also, perhaps one of the most pointed comments of all: 'You missed the bus, you just wait la. You miss the flight, you can run after the plane, meh?' Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble According to SBS Transit and Go-Ahead Singapore's FAQs, bus captains should stop for approaching passengers, but only if they are clearly within the bus stop bay. Once the bus starts to pull away, the driver's attention is on traffic. Chasing a moving bus from a distance is a gamble. In this case, it remains unclear whether the commuter reached the bus stop in time or was sprinting from afar. What's certain is that he managed to board eventually — and instead of taking the win, chose to confront the driver with a phone in hand and entitlement turned up to the max! Respect goes both ways… This viral episode isn't just about a missed bus. It's also about public civility, boundaries, and how not to act when things don't go your way. As one netizen put it for the passenger: 'The bus driver is NOT your personal chauffeur. This is public transport, not a private service.' And for the driver, another concluded with refreshing clarity: 'There is always a better way to resolve this. When both sides are on fire, look at it objectively.' If there's one thing this saga taught us, it's that being on time saves more than your seat — it might just save your dignity too. In other news, in Singapore's ever-evolving saga of ride-hailing dramas, another video surfaced — this time starring a Tada driver vs passenger whose simple request for cooler air ended with a chilling command: 'Get out!' You can read about their fiery encounter over here: 'Get out! Get out! This is my car, I'm asking you to get out!' — Tada driver ejects passenger for asking to 'increase air-con speed'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store