Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
| Jian Seo, left, and David Tizzard |
Celebrities and influential public figures had joined the cause, raising their voices, and making known their sadness.
Though I contemplated placing the same hashtag on my own pages, I couldn't bring myself to do it. A sense of guilt overcame me: What would these words really achieve? What would carrying out a public display of sympathy really do?
Basically…shouldn't there be more than that? In response to a young child's death, all I've got is a hashtag?
These thoughts ran through my mind as I reflected on how our society deals with cases of child abuse. Through continued study and reflection, it feels as if there are patterns emerging.
The roots of this idea were presented in a piece we wrote last June lamenting the nation's institutional failures to deal with the continuing and growing violence against children when it was revealed that, among the many other and seemingly endless series of child abuse cases that took place, a young child had been killed after being locked in a suitcase.
The first step of this pattern begins with public outrage. This is the fuel that drives the entire thing. Without it, stories remain dormant, and hidden: out of sight and out of mind.
A lot can and does happen in Korean society, but it's when the public gets wind of something and the story fills not just the news cycle but the broader social consciousness and domestic narrative that things really ignite. The gusts of popular feeling serve as tinder.
Then, petitions are placed on the Blue House website by enraged citizens. This has become a measure of societal sentiment in recent years and news reports are often accompanied by statistics on how many (or how few) people have signed their names to a digital movement.
Following this, bills are proposed in the National Assembly. The politicians present themselves as caring and responsible leaders listening to the concerns of the community.
Institutions and government organizations create committees, taskforces, and other such things where bureaucrats wear special jackets and promise to get to the bottom of something.
So far, everything seems to be working. But it's at this stage that things start going awry.
Because just as it feels like progress is being made, when hope seems just around the corner, another story suddenly grips the nation's attention, dominates the discourse, and the issue of child abuse becomes forgotten in the vortex of the life of the society.
The conversation then stops until another child is seriously abused or killed. Or buried.
Jung-in was a 16-month year old girl who suffered brutal violence at the hands of her adoptive parents.
But most tragically, there were three clear and obvious opportunities for the authorities to have acted and prevented this young girl with her whole life in front of her from being senselessly abused in the cruelest of manners.
Three opportunities. And each time, the system failed to act.
Had it done so, had it taken the appropriate measures to look into her well-being, had it carried out its responsibility as it had been entrusted to do, quite simply, Jung-in would likely still be alive today.
And despite the system's clear and obvious failure, there were many who had tried to help her.
First were the perceptive and caring teachers at the daycare center who looked after Jung-in. They found bruises on the young girl's body and took her to hospital. Because of the obvious signs of abuse on the child, the police were informed and asked to investigate the case.
When the police confronted the mother about the marks on the young girl's body, however, they were told that these were the results of massages and the whole thing was just a big misunderstanding. The teachers found such excuses incredulous; the police, however, seemingly took the side of the mother.
The justification for not pursuing the case any further at this stage was that there were no broken bones nor was the skin pierced in any way. This was the first opportunity to save Jung-in's life, yet the ignorance, laziness and ineptitude of the police meant that it was missed.
The second chance came when Jung-in was found alone inside her adoptive parents' car by a neighbor. Realizing that the child had been alone there for more than ninety minutes, the neighbor immediately reported the abuse to the police.
Surely this time justice would be done?
Despite having the opportunity to investigate right away, the police moved slowly, taking more than a month to process and examine the details of what was taking place.
And once more they were persuaded by the parents who claimed that the act of leaving a baby alone in a car was their right in disciplining a child who had not yet learned to "sleep correctly." The neighbor, like the teachers before her, felt otherwise.
The pattern being suggested here already is that society was in fact doing its job while the authorities, who should have demonstrated greater responsibility, knowledge and care, failed to do so.
The third and final chance for Jung-in to be saved was when a professional pediatrician filed a child abuse report. Surely now the police were no longer dealing with an over-vigilant teacher or a nosey neighbor but a licensed and qualified professional ― would they finally take the requisite action?
For you the reader, the pattern should be clear now. The police ended the investigation believing the claims to not be serious enough for Jung-in to be separated from her adoptive parents.
As part of a social contract, the police in our society adopt a position of authority bestowed upon them by the citizens. As such, they are responsible for our well-being, safety, and the protection of our rights. We frequently uphold our end of the bargain; it is only natural that we ask the police to do the same in return.
Jung-in died last October but the story only really caught the nation's interest in the New Year following the airing of an SBS investigative program titled "Unanswered Questions." It was not until this had gained the public's interest that the police and government finally actually seemed to start doing anything.
One might suggest that these institutions began acting not out of compassion, duty, or a desire to serve, but rather to quell public anger and ensure that they would not be seen as culpable and lose either votes or their jobs. In the meantime, they fight with each other for position, privilege and power.
Soung Jea-hyeun, a researcher at the Korean Institute of Criminology, sarcastically observed that the only thing likely to change this continued wave of neglect would be if we were to give babies the right to vote. One can only wonder who Jung-in would vote for right now.
The case revealed the brutal side of our society: one in which there is a continued lack of concern among those in power for the physically and socially weak. This manifests negatively for those working underneath them and eventually fails to protect those like Jung-in who are not always able to stand-up for themselves and raise their own voices. Such a situation is not tenable in the long run.
Adults in this society, particularly those in positions of power who are able to affect change, have continually said that progress and improvements will be brought about. But these have to ultimately be more than just empty words.
What should also be highlighted are the reactions of these ordinary Korean citizens. The teachers at the daycare center, the neighbor, and the doctor. None of them simply passed by when they saw another member of society suffering. They took it upon themselves to do something. This should be applauded and seen as a sign of hope for the future. Korea has the potential to improve should we keep taking the correct actions and speaking up.
What is necessary now is for there to be institutional change and reform. Fundamental restructuring of the law is required along with a greater social safety net. These are important to protect the most vulnerable in our societies from what can only be described as murder. There must not be another tragedy like we have seen with Jung-in.
More than ever it seems we face a never-ending series of stories, scandals, and controversies. You are reading about Jung-in today, but what happens tomorrow? Or when the next big political intrigue hits the headlines?
This must be more than just a hashtag. This must be the start of something. We know the pattern. It's very clear. And it ends in the death of children unless something is done about it.
Jian Seo (jiannieforever@gmail.com) studies International studies and Clothing and Textiles at Hanyang University.
Dr. David Tizzard (datizzard@swu.ac.kr) has a Ph.D. in Korean studies and is an assistant professor at Seoul Women's University. He discusses the week's hottest issues on TBS eFM (101.3 FM) on "Life Abroad" live every Thursday from 9:35 a.m. to 10 a.m.
