Violence and neglect at home
Physical punishment, deprivation or neglect at home at a rate of about 34% across the governorates — with caregivers tending to play down how serious it is or not admit its true scale.
A summary of a rapid community needs assessment on child protection that covered six Jordanian governorates and listened directly to children and caregivers before any intervention was designed.
Download the full study — PDF (109 pages, Arabic)These four categories came up in all six governorates. Tap any circle around the child to read the details.
Physical punishment, deprivation or neglect at home at a rate of about 34% across the governorates — with caregivers tending to play down how serious it is or not admit its true scale.
Bullying and peer violence are the biggest risk at school in every location: about a third of children have experienced it — by far the top school risk.
Harassment and physical violence in public spaces, above 50% in Zarqa, Amman and Irbid, 45% in Karak, 44% in Madaba and 34% in Balqa.
The internet emerged as more dangerous than the street itself: cyberbullying, violent or sexual content and online exploitation. About 44% of caregivers saw it as the biggest risk to their children.
The overall risks are similar, but each governorate has its own profile.
46% of children experienced violence at home, and over 50% of caregivers reported high levels of community violence in their neighbourhoods.
44% domestic violence and 43% violence between students at school — among the highest rates of the six governorates.
39% of children faced material deprivation and an unstable environment linked to severe economic pressure on families.
45% of caregivers reported high levels of violence in the public spaces around children.
60% material deprivation and environmental instability — the highest of the six governorates — alongside community violence above 50%.
The lowest recorded rate of community violence (34%), but formal services are thinner on the ground and families rely on local community figures.
A full picture of the shared trends across all areas.
A space with two faces: full of risks, yet described as safe by over 90% of caregivers — even though the numbers show violence and deprivation at home are widespread.
Peer violence, bullying and misconduct by some teachers — while most caregivers hold a very optimistic view of school safety that clashes with what children themselves experience.
Harmful content and violence are among the top online risks, and the community response is weak because of little parental supervision and limited digital literacy.
Academic pressure (32%), family conflict and economic hardship. Children turn mainly to family and friends rather than professional services, which only 1–2% use.
About 90% of caregivers never tried to report formally, even though they knew the channels — because of stigma, low trust in confidentiality, complicated procedures and long distances.
Four main areas to guide the next program response.
Strengthen government oversight and quality monitoring of child protection services, with complaint mechanisms and external audits in line with the Child Rights Law and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Build child protection and human values into school and university curricula, and create and maintain safe public spaces for children.
Advocate for national policies that make children safer online, alongside ongoing digital-literacy and awareness initiatives for children and families.
Targeted financial and material support for vulnerable families, and practical training for parents on safe child development and non-violent discipline.