Revolting News

I know this is not the regular stuff I put in my blog but it was really a revolting situation in my country that I had to post! I hope you don't let something like this happen in your country!

Responsible for a caring center in Setúbal (Portugal) used inflicted phisical punishments
The Supreme Court's decision concerning abuse to children with mental retardations is "preoccupying and revolting"
12.04.2006 - 11h00 Lusa

Humberto Santos, the president of the Portuguese Association for the retarded (APD), considers that the fact that the Supreme Court of Justice defended the concept of "education by agression" when refering to mentally and phisically retarded children is "preoccupying and revolting".

"It is a unqualifying agression for whom is practicing it, but it is very concerning e profoundly revolting when it is defended, especially by a court of law", stated Humberto Santos.

The president of the Portuguese Association for the retarded (APD) stated also that this is "a Middle Ages descriptive picture". "The educative system accepted by this decision would be a natural act on a period of time that would be very different from the one we are on now that is the XXI century", he said.

"We are facing a grotesc violation of the human rights and this decision will allow everyone in a similar situation to keep the aggressions. This is very preoccupying", he remarked.

Humberto Santos believes that, by its serious nature, this case should be reviewed by the European Court for The Human Rights. "If we had been the promoting entity for this action, this would be the next step to take", he stated.

The president of the APD assured that he had no knowledge of what was happening in that caring center in Setúbal, nor he had known any similar situations in other institutions.

The Supreme Court of Justice considered the behaviour of the responsible of a caring center for retarded children accused of abuse to several children as "licit" and "acceptable".

The woman had been accused of various situations: beating children, locking them in dark rooms when they refused to eat. She was found guilty of only one situation (the court considered that, at least twice, she tied up the feet and the hands of a seven year old boy, as a way to avoid him to disturb her sleep by getting out of the bed), having she been condemned with suspended penalty.

The Public Prosecution Service has contested the decision but with no hope. The Supreme Court said that locking children in rooms is a regular punishment of any "good father". And that the beating, if otherwise done, can even inccur in "educational negligence".

"What man called a good father won't beat his kid when he doesn't want to go to school once or twice? (...) or won't send his child to his bedroom when he doesn't want to eat? As for the first two we can actually say that, when absent, can become a educational negligence. Most children refuse to go to school once or twice and this has to be imposed due to its vital importance. Of course that if its a school phobia it is important to ask the motives and professional counseling. But when we face one or two refusals, light beating is part of the education", the judges say in a decision taken last week.

In Publico, April 2 2006