The disturbing video of a mother physically assaulting her school-aged daughter aboard a minibus and then continuing the confrontation on a public roadway has understandably generated widespread outrage.
Shared repeatedly on social media, the footage quickly became food for public debate, with many choosing sides between parent and child. That response, however, misses the larger issue.
As ChildLinK Managing Director Omattie Madray observed, “It is always alarming to see violence being perpetrated against anyone.” More significantly, she argued that what unfolded was not simply an act of discipline gone too far but evidence of deeper failures affecting families and children in Guyana.
“The young girl [was] being publicly shamed and violated by her mother under the guise of discipline and the mother… clearly [didn’t] have adequate parenting skills,” Ms Madray said. That assessment deserves far more attention than the endless arguments over whether the child was disrespectful or whether the mother was justified.
It has been previously argued that Guyana requires a cultural shift in its approach to child protection. That observation remains as relevant today as it was when the public debated the flogging of Queen’s College students and other incidents involving violence against children. While many Guyanese continue to regard corporal punishment as an acceptable form of discipline, there is an increasing body of evidence—and growing public recognition—that violence teaches little beyond fear, resentment and aggression.
Ms Madray’s blunt observation should therefore not be dismissed. “Hitting anyone is abusive, it is violence and it is preventable and should be stopped.”
For many, that statement challenges deeply rooted beliefs. Generations of Guyanese were raised under the saying that “licks never hurt anybody.” Yet countless adults readily recount painful memories of public beatings, humiliation and fear. The persistence of these experiences suggests that corporal punishment has survived less because of its effectiveness than because it has become culturally normalised.
Indeed, one of the most troubling aspects of the viral confrontation was not only the violence itself but the public’s reaction. Social media became a courtroom in which strangers debated whether the child ‘deserved it.’ Such discussions risk shifting attention away from the central issue: a child was assaulted in public and then exposed to further humiliation as the video spread across multiple online platforms.
“The public shaming of this young girl is most distressing for her,” Ms Madray warned. “This has further eroded any relationship she had with the mother and has really damaged her self-esteem.”
Those words should not be lightly dismissed. Today’s digital environment ensures that moments of trauma can be replayed indefinitely. For a child, the emotional consequences may far outlast any physical injuries.
The incident also exposes the immense pressures confronting many parents. Economic hardship, absent fathers, long working hours and inadequate social support all place enormous strain on families. As Ms Madray noted, many single parents struggle to provide financially while also meeting the emotional and developmental needs of their children. These realities do not excuse violence, but they do underscore the importance of ensuring that parents have access to counselling, parenting education and community support before relationships deteriorate into confrontation.
ChildLinK’s own figures reinforce the urgency. Reports of violence against children continue to increase in the regions where the organisation operates. National child protection data indicate that neglect accounts for almost half of the reported cases involving children, while physical violence and sexual abuse continue to represent significant proportions. These statistics point not to isolated incidents but to a systemic problem requiring sustained national attention.
Equally compelling is Ms Madray’s observation that “violence begets violence.” Children learn behaviour from the adults around them. When physical force becomes the accepted means of resolving conflict within families, it is hardly surprising that violence continues to manifest itself in schools, communities and intimate relationships.
This is not a new call but one worth repeating. The call for a broader national conversation on child protection. That conversation must now move beyond periodic outrage whenever another disturbing video emerges. It should include renewed consideration of whether corporal punishment still has a place in Guyanese society, greater investment in parenting programmes, expanded counselling services and earlier intervention for families experiencing conflict.
The lesson from the viral video is therefore not simply that one family experienced a public breakdown. Rather, it is that too many Guyanese continue to confuse violence with discipline and humiliation with correction. Until that distinction is clearly understood, similar incidents will continue to occur.
As Ms Madray aptly concluded, “Overall as a society, we have to strengthen the responses for everyone who needs help to be able to access that help quickly and effectively.”
That is the challenge before Guyana. Protecting children requires more than condemning the latest viral spectacle. It requires a sustained commitment to helping parents, strengthening families and rejecting the notion that violence is an acceptable tool for raising the nation’s children.
Discussion