Latest news with #CYPA
CNA
23-06-2025
- CNA
Commentary: Child abuse is harder to spot than we think
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.
Straits Times
09-05-2025
- Straits Times
Married man touched foster son's genitals before allowing him to use computer
He had touched the child's private parts during all four incidents, court documents stated. Married man touched foster son's genitals before allowing him to use computer Shaffiq Alkhatib The Straits Times May 8, 2025 A married man committed indecent acts on his foster son, then aged between nine and 10 years old, on four separate occasions in their Choa Chu Kang home in 2016. He had touched the child's private parts during all four incidents, court documents stated. The offender, who turned 63 on May 7, 2025, was sentenced to 13 months' jail on May 8 after he pleaded guilty to one count of committing an indecent act on the victim - an offence under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA). Three other similar charges were considered during his sentencing. He cannot be named owing to a gag order to protect the victim's identity. Deputy public prosecutors Colin Ng and Yeo Kee Hwan stated in documents that the victim was four years old around 2010 to 2011 when he was placed in foster care for an undisclosed reason. The boy later moved to the Housing Board flat that the offender shared with his wife. He addressed the man as "dad". While they were alone at home in 2016, the boy asked his foster father for permission to use a desktop computer. The DPPs said: "To the victim's confusion, the accused replied that he would allow the victim to use the computer after (the accused) conducted a 'check'." The man then touched the boy's genitals before allowing him to use the computer. The victim did not tell anyone about the incident as he was unaware that the man had committed an unlawful act. Three years passed before the boy attended sexual education classes in school in 2019 and realised his foster father's earlier conduct was wrong. Despite this, it took the boy three more years before he told a school counsellor on May 10, 2022, about his ordeal. Court documents did not disclose what finally spurred him to break his silence. The counsellor related the incident to her reporting officer, and the matter was escalated to the authorities. Later that day, the victim was removed from the flat for his safety and placed in a home. He made a police report on May 11, 2022. The DPPs urged the court to sentence the offender to between 11 and 13 months' jail, stressing that the victim was between nine and 10 years old at the time of the offences. "The more vulnerable the minor is, the more protection he or she will require, and the more reprehensible will be the conduct of an offender in exploiting him or her for the offender's own gratification," they said. "An unequivocal and uncompromising message must be sent to all would-be sex offenders that abusing a relationship or a position of authority to gratify sexual impulse will inevitably be met with the harshest penal consequences." The offender had "utterly failed to act in a manner befitting of a father figure", the prosecutors added. For each charge under the CYPA, an offender can be jailed for up to five years and fined up to $10,000. A repeat offender can be jailed for up to seven years and fined up to $20,000. Click here to contribute a story or submit it to our WhatsApp Get more of Stomp's latest updates by following us on: Share this article Show Comments
New Paper
09-05-2025
- New Paper
Man jailed for committing indecent acts on foster son in 2016
A married man committed indecent acts on his foster son, then aged between nine and 10 years old, on four separate occasions in their Choa Chu Kang home in 2016. He had touched the child's private parts during all four incidents, court documents stated. The offender, who turned 63 on May 7, 2025, was sentenced to 13 months' jail on May 8 after he pleaded guilty to one count of committing an indecent act on the victim - an offence under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA). Three other similar charges were considered during his sentencing. He cannot be named owing to a gag order to protect the victim's identity. Deputy public prosecutors Colin Ng and Yeo Kee Hwan stated in documents that the victim was four years old around 2010 to 2011 when he was placed in foster care for an undisclosed reason. The boy later moved to the Housing Board flat that the offender shared with his wife. He addressed the man as "dad". While they were alone at home in 2016, the boy asked his foster father for permission to use a desktop computer. The DPPs said: "To the victim's confusion, the accused replied that he would allow the victim to use the computer after (the accused) conducted a 'check'." The man then touched the boy's genitals before allowing him to use the computer. The victim did not tell anyone about the incident as he was unaware that the man had committed an unlawful act. Three years passed before the boy attended sexual education classes in school in 2019 and realised his foster father's earlier conduct was wrong. Despite this, it took the boy three more years before he told a school counsellor on May 10, 2022, about his ordeal. Court documents did not disclose what finally spurred him to break his silence. The counsellor related the incident to her reporting officer, and the matter was escalated to the authorities. Later that day, the victim was removed from the flat for his safety and placed in a home. He made a police report on May 11, 2022. The DPPs urged the court to sentence the offender to between 11 and 13 months' jail, stressing that the victim was between nine and 10 years old at the time of the offences. "The more vulnerable the minor is, the more protection he or she will require, and the more reprehensible will be the conduct of an offender in exploiting him or her for the offender's own gratification," they said. "An unequivocal and uncompromising message must be sent to all would-be sex offenders that abusing a relationship or a position of authority to gratify sexual impulse will inevitably be met with the harshest penal consequences." The offender had "utterly failed to act in a manner befitting of a father figure", the prosecutors added. For each charge under the CYPA, an offender can be jailed for up to five years and fined up to $10,000. A repeat offender can be jailed for up to seven years and fined up to $20,000.
Straits Times
08-05-2025
- Straits Times
Jail for man who repeatedly committed indecent acts on foster son in 2016
Jail for man who repeatedly committed indecent acts on foster son in 2016 SINGAPORE – A married man committed indecent acts on his foster son, then aged between nine and 10 years' old, on four separate occasions in their Choa Chu Kang home in 2016. He had touched the child's private parts during all four incidents, court documents stated. The offender, who turned 63 on May 7, was sentenced to 13 months' jail on May 8 after he pleaded guilty to one count of committing an indecent act on the victim – an offence under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA). Three other similar charges were considered during his sentencing. He cannot be named owing to a gag order to protect the victim's identity. Deputy public prosecutors Colin Ng and Yeo Kee Hwan stated in documents that the victim was four years old around 2010 to 2011 when he was placed in foster care over an undisclosed reason. The boy later moved to the Housing Board flat that the offender shared with his wife. He addressed the man as 'dad'. While they were alone at home in 2016, the boy asked his foster father for permission to use a desktop computer. The DPPs said: 'To the victim's confusion, the accused replied that he would allow the victim to use the computer after (the accused) conducted a 'check'.' The man then touched the boy's genitals before allowing him to use the computer. The victim did not tell anyone about the incident as he was unaware that the man had committed an unlawful act. Three years passed before the boy attended sexual education classes in school in 2019 and realised his foster father's earlier conduct was wrong. Despite this, it took the boy three more years before he told a school counsellor on May 10, 2022, about his ordeal. Court documents did not disclose what finally spurred him to break his silence. The counsellor related the incident to her reporting officer and the matter was escalated to the authorities. Later that day, the victim was removed from the flat for his safety and placed in a home. He made a police report on May 11, 2022. The DPPs urged the court to sentence the offender to between 11 and 13 months' jail, stressing that the victim was between nine and 10 years old at the time of the offences. 'The more vulnerable the minor is, the more protection he or she will require, and the more reprehensible will be the conduct of an offender in exploiting him or her for the offender's own gratification,' they said. 'An unequivocal and uncompromising message must be sent to all would-be sex offenders that abusing a relationship or a position of authority to gratify sexual impulse will inevitably be met with the harshest penal consequences.' The offender had 'utterly failed to act in a manner befitting of a father figure', the prosecutors added. For each charge under the CYPA, an offender can be jailed for up to five years and fined up to $10,000. A repeat offender can be jailed for up to seven years and fined up to $20,000. Shaffiq Alkhatib is The Straits Times' court correspondent, covering mainly criminal cases heard at the State Courts. Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
