Why do children stay silent — even when dozens of “responsible” adults are around?

In Dnipro, a long-term torture of six children in a family-type orphanage (DBST) has been exposed. According to the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Prosecutor's Office and police , the children lived for years in an atmosphere of fear, physical pain, and systemic humiliation. The facts, published in the materials of " Ukrainska Pravda " , are shocking: this was not a single outburst of anger, but a pattern of violence built up over years.

However, it is important to understand the context: despite this terrible incident, family-type orphanages remain a worthy and necessary alternative to boarding schools. All over the world, boarding schools are officially recognized as places of deprivation of freedom, where torture and degradation of the personality are often part of the system itself, and not the crime of individual people. In boarding schools, the child is deprived of individuality, and violence often becomes a tool for “management” of a large group. DBST, even in crisis situations, provides for a family model, which, provided that proper control is provided, is the only chance for the child for a normal future.

But the most painful question in the Dnipro case is another: How could it have lasted five years?

During this time, a group of people were with the children to ensure their safety:

• Children's Services. They are required to conduct regular inspections and monitor living conditions.

• School. Teachers saw the children every day, their psychological state, and their physical appearance.

• Doctors: Routine examinations and treatments should reveal traces of physical impact.

• Social workers. Those who should provide support to the family.

This case does not indicate the shortcomings of the idea of family upbringing itself, but the critical failure of control mechanisms. When inspections become a formality, and state bodies turn a blind eye to "inconvenient" signals, the system becomes an accomplice in the crime. The tragedy in Dnipro is a call for an immediate revision of how the state supervises the safety of children in all forms of upbringing.

Why do children stay silent?

We often assume that a child will tell us if they are in pain. But abuse is not just about hitting. It is about a complete loss of control over one's life and sense of security.

A child is silent when:

• does not trust adults;

• she had already tried to speak and was not heard;

• afraid that it will get worse;

• convinced that she is to blame;

• lives in an environment where violence is called "upbringing."

In this case, the signal appeared only when the eldest child left the system and was able to seek help. Before that, she turned to various institutions, trying to get support, but was actually not heard. Only after contacting public organizations and providing legal support by MARTIN Club, the case received procedural movement and an investigation began. This is a very revealing moment. A safe environment for a complaint arose not inside the system, but outside it.

This means that the problem is not just the cruelty of specific people. The problem is in the defense mechanisms that have not worked.

Formal control ≠ real security

The presence of inspections does not guarantee their effectiveness, and control focused on papers does not provide security to the child.

The child protection system often works reactively — after a complaint is made. But if a child doesn't have a real, safe channel to report abuse, a complaint won't come forward.

And then silence is perceived as the absence of a problem.

The head of the NGO MARTIN-club, Victoria Fedotova, describes this situation as follows:

"Analysis of the current situation indicates the inexpediency of searching for individual culprits, the problem is the lack of timely detection of violations. The reasons for silence were institutional weakness and professional deformation and indifference of responsible persons to signals from children. The combination of these factors — from an inadequate level of qualification to a formal approach to performing duties — created an environment in which the child was left without proper protection."

What needs to change — otherwise it will happen again

This case cannot remain just another criminal proceeding. If we do not change our approaches, similar stories will be repeated — in another community, in another family, in another institution.

After this case, at the system level it is necessary to:

1. Real independent monitoring.

Not just official inspections, but mechanisms that do not depend on the same decision-making structures.

2. Regular individual conversations with children without the presence of guardians are mandatory.

The child must have a guaranteed space to talk.

3. Effective complaint channels available to the child himself.

Not formal "hotlines", but clear and safe tools.

4. Personal liability of officials in case of ignoring signals.

Without this, control remains a formality.

5. Working with trust.

The most important thing is that the system should not be punitive, but one that the child believes in.

Because the main problem of this story is not only torture.

The main problem is that for years the children did not believe that anyone would hear them.

And if we don't create an environment in which a child knows they won't be betrayed, no amount of reform will be enough.

MARTIN-club accompanies the affected children in this proceeding and represents their interests in the courts and law enforcement agencies. We provide not only legal, but also psychological support to minimize the risk of re-traumatization and help children go through this difficult process without additional pressure. Our task is to ensure that this case does not disappear in the system, and that the rights of children are truly protected.