Psychologists at U.P.N.G. have for the last year and a half projected a prominent profile on the issue of “child abuse” in P.N.G. It seems that before the discovery of this problem by the psychologists of U.P.N.G., “child abuse” was not an issue in P.N.G. Since this “discovery” there have been: a workshop on “child abuse in P.N.G.” in July of 1994, an editorial in the nation's second national newspaper on this evil, an interview with the chairman of the psychology department, Dr. David Boorer, enlightening us as to the problem, and a one day seminar on Sept 6, 1995, on the topic of “child Abuse and Pornography”. This problem which U.P.N.G. psychologists have allegedly discovered raises a number of questions. First, has sufficient statistical evidence been offered to substantiate that the original problem of noteworthy magnitude, indeed exists. Second, is there any significant evidence offered to substantiate that there exists “growing concern about child abuse” beyond the statements which have been made by members the psychology staff alleging such concern? Third, “child abuse” is a general term which has become current among certain first world professionals in specific first world contexts. Even in this original context it is very loosely (vaguely?) defined to cover a variety of phenomena: physical, sexual, mental and emotional. Have the U.P.N.G. psychologists given sufficient empirical definition to this first world concept so that it is meaningfully behavioural descriptive in the different third world context of P.N.G.?