Poverty took Anucha's life, not boxing

Poverty took Anucha's life, not boxing

At the age of eight, do any of you remember what did you do for your family? Did anyone have to work to feed yourself? Or earn money for textbooks and clothes? Or bus fares?

This was the life of young boxer Anucha "Nong Lek" Thasako who died from severe head injuries this week during a fateful match at a temple in Samut Prakan. Known better by his fighting name "Petmongkol Sor Wilaithong", the boxer was just 13. His death has sparked a debate about the safety of Muay Thai and the minimum age at which children should be allowed to participate.

Anucha didn't grow up with his estranged parents. His single mother, a low-skilled labourer, is working at a restaurant abroad, while his father's whereabouts are unknown. The boy was raised by his uncle (but after becoming a professional boxer, it's Anucha who was the one who provided for the family).

I feel sad when reading about how he died. It makes me even more sad -- and angry -- to read about his life and plight.

Anucha took part in his first fight at eight years old. Isn't this the time kids are supposed to have a pleasant and comfortable life? Once he entered the sport, Anucha never had a break from the fighting. It might have been his "dream sport" as his mother told the media but did he really have a choice?

Boxing, as we all know, is one of the few professions that enables those from poor families to make a living, and for the very few, to make a fortune. It's a risky job that can kill or cause long-term damages but boxing is also something that can make their dreams of a better life come true.

I don't know if Anucha -- like many other kids in the lower social spectrum -- ever had that "children's day" moment in which he received a gift he dreamed of. Was there any minute of his life that he did not have to worry about family burdens and could spend his free time after school having fun like most kids? I think not.

Over the past five years, Anucha had fought in more than 170 bouts or three fights per month on average. According to a safety rule, each fighter is required to take a 21-day break before engaging in another fight. Big questions have been raised about how this rule was breached.

While his sad and untimely death has caused a stir, with people debating how to make the national sport safer for kids, those in the government have talked mostly about how to make everyone involved in organising the events adhere to safety rules and regulations.

Boxing experts have tried to pinpoint the loopholes that resulted in this tragedy. Many have raised questions such as: Were there paramedics at the ringside and did the referees react promptly enough? The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) is vetting an amended version of the boxing act that which will seek to slap a ban on children below the age of 12 becoming fighters. Human rights advocacy groups have also complained about child exploitation, and so on and so forth.

But all those debates deviate us from the real point. Lest we forget, it's poverty that forced eight-year-old Anucha to enter this risky profession in the first place. The boy, if not extremely poor, would have had other options, like not engaging in so many for-money fights. The breach of the safety rule, with him fighting three fights in one month, may have had something to do with the need for hard-earned cash.

Just as the Prayut Chan-o-cha government boasts about the success of measures to tackle poverty through all the multi-billion-baht Pracharath schemes, a poor, young fighter like Anucha was left fighting just to make a living. We are not convinced that the young Anucha ever had a chance to receive any benefits or have his sorrows eased from such high-profile schemes.

His death makes us realise how flawed our welfare system is and leaves people like Anucha out in the cold. How many boys are in the same situation as Anucha was?

Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, who is known as the economic czar, wowed many during a speech late last year when he revealed his ambition: poverty will be eradicated by this year. Had Mr Somkid's his ambition been translated into action, Anucha would have had other choices.

But the state seems to be complacent with its anti-poverty measures, while there are many young boys struggling bitterly in the same manner as Anucha did.

On the surface, Anucha died in a fight. But deep inside, we all know it's poverty that cut short his life. As the authorities rush to fix the safety rule, the real problem remains untouched.


Ploenpote Atthakor is editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.

Ploenpote Atthakor

Former editorial page Editor

Ploenpote Atthakor is former editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (25)