Tag Archives child care

Development Dialogue 19 | The right to be heard: How listening to children’s perspectives can help challenge North–South dichotomies in development

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) is the most ratified international human rights treaty in the world. But much more needs to be done to ensure that more children have their voices heard on their needs and perspectives. In this blog article, Timisha Dadhich acknowledges the nuanced experiences of children in the Global South with the example of children’s representation within the normative debates on child labour. We need a pragmatic child rights-based approach that prioritizes the inclusion of children, respects children’s agency, and fosters intergenerational collaboration to effectively ensure children get the right support as soon as they need it, she argues.

Image by Leonardo Burgos/Unsplash

Children’s voices still go unheard

There is a robust understanding in international law that children and young people hold the fundamental right to freely express their views on anything that impacts them. Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 notably recognizes that children have the right to be heard.[i] This convention implies that children are agents who can determine their own fate through their involvement in decision-making processes instead of being passive recipients of aid.[ii] However, the lack of representation of children’s perspectives in development research and practice persists, and many development initiatives are contributing to persistent disparities instead of having an enduring and sustainable impact. We are still not listening to children despite our pledge to heed their right to be heard.

How can we prevent this from happening? We first need to remind ourselves why we need to listen to children and how it impacts them if we don’t. As I will show in this article, in order to truly enrich and enhance our understanding of the role children’s rights can and should play in development interventions, it is important to listen to the viewpoints of children that contest the normative assumption of ‘best interest of the child’.[iii] Child rights advocates believe that to improve children’s well-being, we should unlearn our assumptions about their needs.

 

Child labour requires a nuanced understanding

Take the example of child labour, which is a complex challenge, especially in post-colonial societies. Child labour is commonly either demonized or normalized; this duality in perspectives hides the bigger picture that not all forms of child labour are extreme forms (slavery and trafficking, for example). In fact, children mostly work on smallholder farms — 70% of all child labour worldwide takes place in the agriculture sector.[iv] The ‘abolitionist approach’ focused only on completely eradicating child labour denies children their right to protection from the oppressive and challenging circumstances at work, which further adds to their systematic exploitation. Institutionalization or banning child labour is seen as a one-stop solution, but the emphasis must be on protecting (working) children.[v]

Moreover, ‘rescue attempts’ are rarely successful. Due to the absence of effective measures to compensate or rehabilitate children ‘rescued’ from child labour, many children end up returning to the same work ‘post-rescue’ because of financial constraints, a lack of alternative opportunities, weak law enforcement, social pressures, and debt bondage.[vi]

India is one example. The economic and labour market disruption and increased school dropout rates after the COVID-19 pandemic worsened the child labour situation, with a growing demand for cheap labour and an amplified need for an additional household income.[vii] Thus, in India, approximately 13 million children between the ages of 7 and 17 work, primarily in the agriculture sector or doing unpaid family work.[viii] Similar trends can be observed in many other countries. It is therefore vital to understand the unique developmental stages and needs of countries and to tailor a more inclusive and just collaboration between the Global North and Global South for ensuring children’s rights.

 

We need to start recognizing children as agents and political actors

It is necessary to intervene — we need to protect children facing abuse or unsafe working environments. But while child labour undoubtedly deprives children of their rights, understanding its role in access to education and the right to survival is crucial for taking actions in the ‘best interests’ of the working children. We need to take action by listening to them. Beyond the label of ‘innocence,’ their opinions should be at the forefront when we make decisions that shape their lives.

Moreover, the dominant narrative on working children as passive victims waiting to be rescued is challenged by working children who as political actors assert their right to dignified work.[ix] Bhima Sangha, a union for working children, for example claimed, “Let anti-child labour not be anti-child,” which to me stands as a testament to the enduring struggles of working children in Asia.[x] It also demonstrates how complex the issue is and why inputs from children are crucial for finding the most suited ways to tackle it. Crucially, children have views of their own situation and of proposed interventions.

Thus, contrary to the assumptions about how to improve the working conditions and lives of children that negate children’s agency, we should define clear boundaries for policy making that assure the ‘best interests’ of the child as seen from an informed perspective. It is high time we move past the quick fixes and work towards sustainable solutions that empower both children and their communities — and asking children about their experience is an important starting point.

 

We first need to address our ‘saviour complex’

When it comes to child labour, the focus is fortunately shifting to ensuring a social protection net for children and their families instead of just banning an act. This is impacting our programme designs, research, and development projects that continue to be based on the idea of ‘saving’ working children. However, there is still some way to go. A pluralistic and critical approach to child labour would entail recognizing, first and foremost, that children don’t necessarily “need to be saved”. This patronizing mindset is also symbolic of the colonial past that is inextricably linked to the ‘saviour complex’.

 

We also need to challenge our adult-centric views 

This mindset also stops us from creating a framework that properly considers the economic, cultural, and social realities children face. Globally, children are ignored also because they do not represent the values or discourses on children as presented by adults. In an important instance, when asked about participation of children’s unions in international conferences, an International Labour Organization (ILO) expert stated, “It’s a bit like getting invited to a vegetarian party and then ‘talking about the advantages of eating meat’.”[xi] This statement suggests that the participation of working children is considered ‘irrelevant’ at such conferences because they contradict the mainstream representation of all working children as ‘vulnerable victims’.

We need a gradual shift from ‘ritualised humility’ practiced by international and national agencies to rethinking power dynamics when facilitating children’s participation.[xii] Ritualised humility is perilous because it uses children for tokenism as they speak in sync with the adult-centric views of the organisations involved instead of having a constructive dialogue with them. A key element of children’s representation would be recognising them as partners, acknowledging their concerns and aspirations as crucial in catapulting development efforts to achieve meaningful transformation.

 

Toward a child rights-based approach

Building on a rights-based approach, we need to create solutions by redirecting our focus, rectifying disparities, and championing a more inclusive and equitable global conversation on childhood. The North–South dichotomies in child-centric development can be addressed by cultivating mutual trust and support, engaging in joint decision making and acknowledging significant barriers to development, including a lack of resources and complex institutional or political landscape.

A key shift would be toward a child rights-based approach that integrates the perspectives of children and makes the initiatives more inclusive and efficient. Based on the vision of the CRC, the development interventions that target children in the Global South should look beyond the ‘management’ of participatory initiatives and consider the right of children to be heard while conceptualizing, developing, and executing projects in diverse contexts.[xiii] The right of every child to be heard means all children should be included in discussions that affect them and that development actors should create programmes based on the needs, views and opinions of the children affected.[xiv]

The Lundy Model for Child Participation is one example of an effective framework that can provide guidance for meaningful children’s participation across four interrelated concepts: space, voice, audience, and influence.[xv] And, keeping this in mind, we should further make a special effort to include children who face digital access barriers in developing countries.[xvi] The inadequate representation of children’s voices from the Global South due to restricted access and infrastructure does not mean these children lack perspectives. It indicates the need for increased efforts on equitable collaboration to generate high-quality evidence for researchers and policymakers to achieve better outcomes for children-focused initiatives. And most importantly, it is crucial to protect children’s identities when local safeguards are insufficient to protect their privacy or if criticizing national policies places them at additional risk.

 


[i] https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

[ii] https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2009/en/70207

[iii] See the General Comment 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration: https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2013/en/95780

[iv] https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/06/1137567

[v] Read more on right to protection at work in this example of Bolivia: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manfred-Liebel-2/publication/283280916_Protecting_the_Rights_of_Working_Children_instead_of_Banning_Child_Labour/links/5a45fdf0a6fdcce1971a94f3/Protecting-the-Rights-of-Working-Children-instead-of-Banning-Child-Labour.pdf

[vi] https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2023/Dec/25/india-may-miss-international-target-of-eliminating-child-labour-by-2025-2644709.html;  https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/children-from-bengal-rescued-as-bonded-labourers-return-to-chennai-to-resume-same-work-after-turning-18/article67811584.ece

[vii] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/13/covid-19-prompts-enormous-rise-in-demand-for-cheap-child-labour-in-india

[viii] https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—asia/—ro-bangkok/—sro-new_delhi/documents/publication/wcms_359371.pdf

[ix] https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/61843/978-3-031-04480-9.pdf?sequence=1#page=143

[x] https://www.concernedforworkingchildren.org/empowering-children/childrens-unions/

[xi] https://www.spiegel.de/international/tomorrow/child-labor-in-bolivia-is-legally-permissable-a-1130131.html

[xii] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1080/09578810701667508

[xiii] Read more about children’s right to be heard: https://www.refworld.org/docid/4ae562c52.html

[xiv] https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/5259.pdf/

[xv] https://www.qub.ac.uk/Research/case-studies/childrens-participation-lundy-model.html#:~:text=SPACE%2C%20VOICE%2C%20AUDIENCE%2C%20INFLUENCE&text=SPACE%3A%20Children%20must%20be%20given,be%20acted%20upon%2C%20as%20appropriate.

[xvi] https://jprm.scholasticahq.com/article/38764-online-intergenerational-participatory-research-ingredients-for-meaningful-relationships-and-participation


Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Timisha Dadhich is an independent human rights consultant and holds a European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation (EMA). She is also a trained criminal justice social worker who is very passionate about access to justice and reducing social inequalities. She has the experience of working with international organizations, national NGOs and government agencies in India on issues related to children’s right to participation, child protection, education and juvenile justice.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Institutional care is an affront to rights of children with disabilities

In solidarity to the 16 days activism against gender-based violence, this article highlights the structural violence that impedes the rights of children with disabilities —including girls— in Kenya. The author Stephen Ucembe, who is an alumni of the International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, emphasizes the need to protect the rights of children confined to institutional care.

Image Credit: Hope and Homes for Children

Every child, including those with disabilities, is entitled to the rights enshrined in the Convention of the Rights of the Child which Kenya has ratified. As a country, we have agreed to uphold these rights through the Children’s Act 2022.

However, in contravention of their rights, children with disabilities are often hidden away in communities or sometimes separated and isolated in institutions against their wishes. Isolation from communities on the basis of disability is discriminatory. It is a dereliction of duty – an abdication of responsibility by the government. Supporting these children to be visible in our communities and families normalizes disability. Hiding them from others dehumanizes and perpetuates stigma and discrimination, hence exacerbating the problem.

Furthermore, unnecessary placement in residential care institutions often multiplies violations; children with disabilities are denied other rights, like the right to family and community care, to culture, to identity, to freedom of association.

A global Human Rights Watch report, published in 2017 titled, ‘Children with disabilities: Deprivation of liberty in the name of care and treatment’ documented that children with disabilities often face severe neglect and abuse. This included beatings and psychological violence, sexual violence, involuntary and inappropriate medical treatment, use of abusive physical restraints, seclusion and sedation, denial of education and denial of regular contacts with families.

An investigative media exposé traced how the problems described above play out locally. It uncovered multiple human rights violations perpetuated against institutionalized children with disabilities, by a government agency.

Nobody is seeking to romanticize families and communities. There are many children facing abuse, neglect and exploitation, including stigma and discrimination within family and community settings. However, studies consistently point to serious violations in institutional care settings. Moreover, over 80 years of research shows that supported families and communities are far better equipped than institutions when it comes to improvement of children’s overall well-being.

The primary role of government should not be to create more barriers, or spaces that deepen inequality and diminish inclusivity. Yet, this is exactly what we do when we institutionalize these children or neglect them in communities. The role of the government should be to ensure their protection and enjoyment of all rights, through full inclusion and participation in the community.

To make inclusion a reality, we need responsive initiatives that tackle ubiquitous stigma and discrimination. That starts with community services and facilities available to persons with disabilities, enabling them to access education, housing, rehabilitation and therapy.  It extends to respite care centers that allow struggling care-givers time off, or time to go and work. And it means we must improve infrastructure and provide necessary assistive devices, aids and services, like hearing aids, crutches, wheelchairs, tricycles, white canes and walking appliances to support full participation.

Lastly, it’s up to us to ensure we do not leave these children behind in the care reform processes that the government has initiated. To support governments to include disabled children in family based alternative care, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities developed ‘Guidelines on deinstitutionalization, including in emergencies’.

These guidelines are meant to ensure an end to rampant violence against institutionalized persons with disabilities, including children. This advice should ensure children with disabilities are included and supported in families and communities, and prevent their institutionalization.


This article was first published on The Standard.



Follow Bliss on LinkedIn.



Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Stephen Ucembe is the Regional Advocacy Manager, Hope and Homes for Children. He is a professional social worker with skills, knowledge, and experience working with children and young people without parental care, and vulnerable families. His preference is to work in Kenya, or regionally (east and southern Africa) with organization (s) whose mission and vision is family and child focused.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.