IT review identifies risks and suggests proactive cleanup for outdated technology systems.

When immoral acts and heinous crimes are perpetrated against our children, we want to speak about child protection. We hear the words Child Care and Protection Act 2015 and expect it to heal the pain and cure the disorder. Sadly, we’ve become a nation that relies heavily on the aftermath, expecting reactive justice to kick in after a child goes missing, or is raped and brutally murdered. But what happens before this? Why are we always speaking out only after a gruesome and brutal act, patrolling streets with a strong police presence and instilling lockdowns only after the fact? Only then do we raise our concerns and seek justice. Of course, these are needed, but is this always going to be our first and last resort? The difference between child safeguarding and child protection rings loud in these times. We should rather be a proactive than reactive nation. Understanding the difference between child safeguarding and child protection is key to creating a comprehensive and proactive approach to child safety. While child protection is response focused, it responds only after a concern or an incident is identified and is only aimed at those specific children who require protection at that given time. Child safeguarding, on the other hand, happens before the fact. Safeguarding is prevention-focused and aims to minimise risks before harm occurs. This process is broad and preventative and considers all children. Strengthening child safeguarding to reduce reliance on child protection means investing in prevention rather than reaction. In Namibia, this is especially critical. The Namibian education ministry, in collaboration with the United Nations Children’s Fund Namibia, has developed several key resources to guide schools in implementing child safeguarding measures. These resources are part of the National Safe Schools Framework, which is a practical guide to building safe schools. These are great on paper, but need to be strengthened, altered or reinforced where needed. These mechanisms should be functional and visible at all schools and monitored and evaluated regularly. Children should be and feel safe at school; the enforced measures of patrolling they felt after the brutal acts should be the same safety net they feel at school every day. Safety is a combination of emotional, psychological and physical security, but they need to see physical security measures on the school terrain and when walking home. Child participation is pivotal in this regard. Children need to be asked if they feel safe and asked who they would turn to if they did not feel safe. Safety should be discussed with those affected. Child safeguarding could be a great place to start, and optimistically, where this matter should end. Nolizel Franks The post Child Safeguarding vs Child Protection appeared first on The Namibian.