The legal dilemma of emotional child abuse... The main issues that lawyers say are

Workers at childcare and welfare facilities who have to care for a large number of children in one space face dilemmas every day. This is because actions taken to protect a large number of children may be seen as ‘emotional abuse’ of a specific child.

In particular, the most embarrassing moment is when a child needs ‘discipline.’ Due to the nature of group living, one child's problematic behavior can have a significant impact on other children, so appropriate restraint is essential. Sometimes it is necessary to separate children from other children. The problem is that such physical restraint and separation can be considered another form of child abuse.

A recent case I took on also began in this dilemmatic situation. Client A was a veteran childcare worker who had worked at a child welfare facility for several years. At the facility where Mr. A was working, group B, a child suffering from severe intellectual disability and ADHD, was living with him. The problem was that Group B continued to engage in unexpected behavior, such as yelling or throwing objects. On the day of the incident, Group B also acted threateningly towards other children, so the client briefly separated Group B into a separate space to minimize damage. However, due to this action, Mr. A became a suspect of child abuse.

According to Article 17, Paragraph 5 of the Child Welfare Act, no one may commit emotional abuse that harms a child's mental health and development. If you violate this, you may be subject to ‘imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to 50 million won.’ In particular, the situation becomes more serious when workers at childcare facilities, rather than ordinary people, are involved in related charges. The charge applied will be changed to ‘violation of the Special Act on Punishment of Child Abuse Crimes, etc.’, and the possibility of aggravated punishment will inevitably increase.

The defense team, including the author, focused on proving that Mr. A's actions were not 'abuse' intended to harm the child, but were 'legitimate disciplinary and protective measures' to protect all other children. Simply looking at the fact that the child was separated could be misleading, so we tried to convincingly explain the motive and purpose of the act, as well as the urgent situation at the time.

First of all, it was made clear that Mr. A’s actions were aimed at ‘protecting’ other children from violent situations. In addition, it was true that Group B was separated for nearly 30 minutes, but the door was not locked, and it was argued that this was the minimum amount of physical restraint to ensure the safety of other children at the time. In addition, Group B also emphasized that unilateral abuse did not occur, based on the fact that he usually showed a strong bond with the client. The investigative agency also accepted this claim and was able to conclude the case with a non-indictment.

As in the case above, measures that are good for everyone can be seen as abuse to one child. If you face a legal problem with a similar dilemma, you must prepare objective evidence and legal arguments to prove that your actions were a legitimate protective measure. It is most important to systematically explain the legitimate purpose and background of one's actions with the help of a legal expert from the early stage.

[View full article]
Lawleader - Legal Dilemma of Emotional Child Abuse... The main issues that lawyers talk about are (Go to)
Korea Law Daily - Emotional child abuse, legal dilemma of discipline and separation measures... The main issues discussed by lawyers are (link)