Glenda SimmsIT WAS recently reported in the local media that Robert Gregory, the chief executive officer of HEART/NTA, has once again raised the issue of the low levels of literacy among the Jamaican population. Like Mr. Gregory, Wayne Chen of the Super Plus food chain, and other private and public sector leaders have on several occasions commented on the poor communication skills, the absence of civility and life skills such as: common courtesy and common-sense problem-solving approaches among large sectors of the workforce.
In order to address some of the factors which have contributed to this state of affairs, Mr. Gregory is advocating "for legislation to make it a criminal offence for parents not to send their children to school".
Obviously it is incumbent on every leader and decision maker in the country to work at finding workable solutions to correct the present situation of non-education, miseducation and under-education of a significant sector of the Jamaican citizenry.
However, on all occasions such persons must ensure that every 'well-meaning sound bite' is fully thought through and honed in a framework that ensures ready and practical implementation.
By now the Jamaican public, in every corner of the country, ought to have been well informed that the Government of Jamaica has ratified and committed itself to all the requirements of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and also to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention on Child Labour.
Both of these treaty bodies clearly articulate the right of every Jamaican child to an education that ensures that he or she is developed in line with his or her full potential. These treaties also clearly point to the responsibility of both the State and the parents in ensuring that an optimal enabling environment is in place to guarantee the right of every Jamaican girl and boy to an education.
A DEVELOPMENT THREAT?
This writer is of the opinion that Mr. Gregory's call for the criminalisation of parents who do not live up their parenting mandate, is in recognition of the fact that the lack of responsibility on the part of parents, is a serious threat to development.
In this vein, Mr. Gregory is suggesting that the 'lock-up' offers the perfect solution in forcing parents to do what they should be doing to ensure the proper development of their children and, by extension, the development of the country.
It is important to note that in a very short time span, two important men have put revolutionary initiatives on the social agenda.
Both Senator Norman Grant, who proposed the 'Senatorial Two-Foot Puss' Flogging Bill, and Gregory, who has proposed the 'Lock-Them-Up' Absenteeism Bill, have much in common. Both are influential powerbrokers and both are relatively young and quite good-looking (relevant credentials for getting attention). Also, both have linked their proposals to serious issues that are challenging the entire society. Both men might, therefore, have the opportunity to see their ideas gain broad acceptance before long.
It is in this optimistic framework that I made some suggestions on the development of Senator Grant's 'Flogging Bill', and it is within this ideological frame that I hope that Mr. Gregory will reconsider the merits of his suggestion and think about the following guidelines to strengthen his initiative.
MERITS AND GUIDELINES
1. Every child has two parents and both must be locked up if they do not ensure the regular attendance in school of all their children below the age of 18. Such action would be justified on the basis of the commitment of the Jamaican State when it ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).
The relevant commitment states:
"Bearing in mind the great contribution of women to the welfare of the family and to the development of society, so far not fully recognised, the social significance of maternity and the role of both parents in the family and in the upbringing of children, and aware that the role of women in procreation should not be a basis for discrimination but that the upbringing of children requires a sharing of responsibility between men and women and society as a whole."
2. The State must, therefore, ensure that it has the capacity to research, guide and charge every deadbeat father and mother at home and in the diaspora, if their children are absent from school for reasons other than sickness or the effects of natural disasters.
3. In cases where the unemployed single parent cannot find bus fare, taxi fare or lunch money for his or her child to attend school every day, all the neighbours should be locked up for breaching the unwritten rule that 'it takes a village to raise a child'.
4. In cases where a child is always present in school and leaves years later in a semi-literate and/or unskilled state, all the teachers and principals of the school should also spend time in jail for committing the crime of 'non-education of the Jamaican child'. In this particular scenario, 'volunteer teachers' should not be penalised but all those who are paid by the State should certainly spend time in the 'slammer'.
5. Every case of absenteeism from school must be carefully investigated by a team of social workers, psychologists and representatives of civil society. These experts will be required to ask a number of questions relating to the availability of water and sanitation facilities, adequate food, parenting skills and the quality of the social and intellectual climate within the school.
In other words, before we lock up the parents of absentee children, we need to ensure that the school environment is not among the many variables that keep some children away. After all, children, like adults, try to avoid negative stimuli and toxic individuals.
I have no doubt that if Mr. Gregory's proposal gains some degree of traction, the State will have to contemplate building more prisons for poor women who cannot find the funds to send their 'father-neglected' children to school every day; those who send Sally on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, and Markie on Tuesdays and Thursdays in order to manage the primary school budget; fathers who gamble off all their earnings on a weekly basis; the happy 'father drunks' at the one-stop shop and all the teenage mothers who spend every penny on bling-bling and sexy outfits and have nothing left over to buy school lunch for Radeisha, Faneisha and Costareisha and Condoleisha.
It is very obvious that in situations of serious social problems and economic hardships, some radical and revolutionary ideas will be put forward on a regular basis. Hopefully these ideas will be well thought through and implementable.
At this point in time the Jamaican people need more than 'sexy sound bites!'
Dr. Glenda P. Simms is a gender expert and consultant.
