NOTIONS OF CHILDHOOD differ within and across cultures.
There is no ‘one’ or ‘correct’ childhood. But surely there is one
ingredient that must be present in all: of being loved and cared
for. And so it is that when we think of a child, it is usually in a
home within a familial set-up. Apart from providing physical
shelter, a home promises care and security. Family members,
and their love and support, constitute a home for a child.
The United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child
(UNCRC) recognizes that all children should be able to grow
up in a happy and loving family environment. When India ratified
the CRC in 1992, it conferred on India’s children rights to
survival, development, protection and participation. In addition,
one of the guiding principles of the CRC, the ‘best interest of
the child’, was to be a primary consideration in all decisions or
procedures related to the child.
From the time of Independence, India has shown its
commitment against exploitation of children. The Constitution
of India enshrines certain rights to a child, based on the premise
that a child constitutes the most precious of all human resources.
Several laws have been enacted that deal directly or indirectly
with the welfare of the child, indicating the conscious efforts of
our lawmakers to give special protection to the children in the
fields of education, health, labour and so on. For instance, the
Factories Act (1948) increased the minimum age for employment
in factories from twelve years to fourteen years. Further, the
Plantation Labour Act (1951) prohibits employment of children
less than twelve years in plantations and the Child Labour
(Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986 prohibits the
employment of children in ‘hazardous’ occupations up to the
age of fourteen.
Legally, the very definition of who constitutes a child is
ambiguous. In India, there was no comprehensive definition of
‘who a child is’ and the maximum age was set differently in
different state and Central acts. However, the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection) Act 2000, designed to care for and protect
the ‘neglected juvenile’, defines a child as a person up to eighteen
years of age. It applies uniformly to both boys and girls, unlike
its predecessor, the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986. The new act is
‘more child friendly’ and focuses on ‘the best interest of the
child’. It also seeks to lay down a differential approach towards
children in conflict with law and those in need of care and
protection, and proposes to provide various alternatives for
rehabilitation.
Despite all this, India is home to the largest number of child
labourers in the world. In fact child labour has increased from
11.59 million in 1991 to 12.66 million in 2001. And sixty-five
million children aged six to fourteen years were not attending
any educational institutions in India, (Census 2001, released in
2005). Child labour in our country is a result of complex
interrelated economic, political, social and cultural factors. The
processes of industrialization and urbanization have in turn added
to child labour. The prevalence of child labour is often justified
by the argument that the child’s wages augment the family’s
income and help to feed their younger siblings. Employers too
find it profitable to employ children. Children are more amenable
to discipline and cannot organize themselves to fight for their
rights. They can also be paid less and be bullied into obedience.
Child labour can also be attributed to the lack of awareness
among parents of the value and benefits of education. But most
significantly, it is poverty that is sighted as reason for the
continuance of child labour. According to the Planning
Commission, 260 million people (that is more than one in four
people) still live below the poverty line in India. Little wonder
then that the number of full-time child labourers runs into the
millions thus stating the association between poverty, out of
school children and child labour.
It is now recognized that domestic child labour is one of the
most exploited forms of child labour. Children kept as domestic
servants are ill treated, abused, overworked and underpaid.
However, domestic work is not regarded as child labour by the
Child Labour (Regulation and Prohibition) Act of 1986 as it
comes under the unorganized sector. Those working in the
unorganized sector are not protected, and prosecution of the
employer is possible only if the age of the child is established,
although in poor, illiterate families, to which most child workers
belong, there is never an age proof (Reddy, 1988). Our
indifference towards children at work makes us equally culpable
for the large child labour force in India.
CHILDREN MAKE ME smile. I love being in their company and
learning from them the simple ways of staying happy.
Through my years in school and college, I was determined to
do something for the welfare of disadvantaged children in India.
During those days and after, I volunteered with organizations
working with street and working children, children living in
slums and disabled children. The experiences lead me to become
interested in learning more and more about the social sector
and finding a place for myself to creatively reach out to children
and those affecting their world. It also brought me to understand
the importance of child rights for which I work today.
Various labels are used to refer to disadvantaged children.
The term ‘street children’ is used simultaneously and
synonymously with ‘neglected’, ‘working’ and ‘destitute’
children. Homeless children are also called any of the above. .
The homeless child cannot be held responsible for his insecure,
uncertain and unsafe condition; his present situation is a result of the
fact that adults around him and the larger society have failed him.
As Harsh Mander of ActionAid India, New Delhi said in 2001,
‘Homelessness itself is perceived in India as a crime.’ The Census
of India defines the ‘houseless population’ as persons who are
not living in ‘census houses’, that is, structures with a roof. This
part of the population includes those sleeping without a shelter,
in constructions not meant for habitation and those in welfare
institutions. The 1991 census estimates the number of homeless
households by this definition at two million (Mander, 2001).
In 2001 the NGO Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan conducted a
survey of the homeless in New Delhi, which provides some
profiles of the homeless. According to it the homeless are a highly
heterogeneous population. They can be described as those who
have (a) been thrown out of their homes by their parents, children
or husband; (b) left their homes due to recurrent disputes and
fights; (c) migrated from their villages due to economic
compulsions and are largely employed as casual labour; or (d)
been born on the city’s pavements and know no other life.
A large number of children run away from their homes and
arrive in big cities such as Delhi and Mumbai. They are sometimes
apprehended by policemen at railway stations and taken to
government-run homes. According to a report submitted to the
Delhi High Court, almost 60 per cent of the children are brought
forcibly to the observation home (now referred to as Children’s
Home as per the Juvenile Justice Act 2000) by the police
(Ganapathy, 2001). Under the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, children
(both boys and girls) placed in homes are to be kept there until
they turn eighteen years of age. Unfortunately, there is no
sufficient infrastructure or manpower to respond to the numbers
of children who may be defined as ‘in need’. Thus it is no surprise
that these children feel that they are being incarcerated in ‘jails’
where they are vulnerable to further neglect, as well as
emotional, physical and sexual abuse. Strong feelings of hatred
and revenge simmer in them. They look back with nostalgia on
their days on the streets-intimidating surely, but adventurous
and exciting too, free from bondage and living on one’s own
with no rules and regulations. Once used to such ‘freedom’,
their capacity to adjust to discipline and routine is greatly
weakened.
Children living in institutions are thought to be in ‘safe’
conditions, but what does the future hold for them? Will they
be able to integrate into their families and accept the norms of
the society? One child I spoke to wanted to know how people
could even expect them to stay in a place where they were not
allowed any freedom. And this when they have always done as
they pleased in the past. Some were of the view that, if the
institutions did not provide them with useful vocational training
or place them in jobs, it was futile to have kept them there for
such a long period. It is hard to imagine how they will structure
their lives once discharged at the age of eighteen. Studies reveal
that ‘their life in the homes stigmatizes them and reinforces their
low self-esteem’ (Mohaptra, 1999). Thus it will appear that the
present system grooms rebels out of innocent children. Yet
another reality is that children aged sixteen to eighteen years
are highly impressionable and need care and protection. And
dedicated individuals working for children believe that some
day they will re-enter ‘our’ world, and are working towards
achieving this.
Despite their difficult living conditions and harsh working
environments, children living on their own have the courage to
survive and the will to carry on. They are indeed very resilient
individuals. Their capacity to cope effectively with their
vulnerabilities and external brutalities is truly admirable.
My interactions with such children have brought home the
truth to me that these children often emerge stronger and also
learn to smile in pain. Take, for instance, the case of Sunil (name
changed). Sunil, a five-year-old boy, found a watch and brought
it to me, smiling with pride as he asked me to strap it around his
wrist. I patted him gently on his back, but he moved away with
a startled cry of pain. I asked him if it hurt. Saying yes, he turned,
lifted his T-shirt in one quick gesture and pointed to his lower
back. I saw three lines of dried blood. The caretaker of the ‘home’
he lived in had hit him with a stick. The caretaker would beat
him at the slightest pretext; this time it was for picking up a
dirty stick from the road. Just then the watch fell. Sunil picked
it up, strapped it back on and walked away with a smile. Sunil’s
mother was a ragpicker unable to provide for him, and his father
was no more. He now lives at a home for the destitute.
IT IS NOW being increasingly recognized that children largely
determine their own environment. They actively participate in
the process of shaping their own worlds. It is thus important
that children be given a chance to voice their opinions in decisions
affecting them, and also to know from the children when and
how they feel empowered. This will provide valuable data to
policy makers as well as social institutions and individuals
working for and with children.
As human beings we need a ‘script to live by’, a coherent
scheme, preferably a story that can integrate our past and present
experiences and that can project our lives into the future in a
way that creates a basis for predictability, order and self-respect
(Hundeide, 2001). Given a chance, children can paint a clear
picture of their lives, dreams, aspirations and needs. By listening
to them, we may find ways of understanding their experiences
which can form the basis for designing empowering programmes
and policies (Oliveira, 1997).
Towards this end, I embarked on a project to record children’s
narratives of their lives of being homeless, from their own
perspectives. What makes them survive? What makes these
children smile? What makes them carry on? It was important
that the children not only consent to share their life stories but
also remain in the study from the beginning to the end, which
meant approaching children who were living in institutions
working for the welfare of ‘street and working’ children. In semistructured
interviews with eleven such children, I used ‘tracing
the history’ technique to draw out their life experiences. I guided
the child to talk about events and experiences from the present
to the past, marking important milestones in the journey from
home to homelessness. But they were also encouraged to talk
about the things they wanted to, which ensured that what the
children found important to communicate was recorded.
To get a glimpse into the future aspirations of the children,
they were asked to visualize themselves ‘ten years from today’.
Then narrowing it down from ten to five to two years, the focus
was brought back to the present. This was expected to help in
throwing light on whether the children were aware that their
actions today shaped their future.
I encapsulate below some of the key findings of the project.
Homeless children spend their childhood being exposed to
neglect, ill treatment, violence and abuse. They have seen their
dreams disintegrate. They have had to learn to live life as it
unfolded. Having left home and lived in railway stations or on
the streets, they are looked down upon by the society. These
children are aware of their low status and have to learn to live
with it.
The overarching cause of homelessness in most cases I studied
was poverty. Breakdown of family, ill treatment by the stepparent,
aversion towards education and abandonment were other
contributing factors.
The children had positive as well as negative views of
themselves. Many a time, their perceptions of the ‘self’ were
connected to the ‘significant others’ in their lives. Self-esteem
was often low and many said that they felt ‘nothing’ about
themselves. The wider social context influenced their thoughts
and actions. They very rarely know how old they are. Mentally
they appear mature beyond their years. People perceive them to be
older, stronger and more daring than other children their age.
Future aspirations consisted of having a family, working and
earning money. The desire to earn money and regain respect
was uppermost in the minds of many. By earning for their parents
and families they hoped to be able to return and reintegrate into
their communities some day. For this the learning of trades was
considered crucial. For instance, the children yearned to learn
cycle-repair skills or to become motor mechanics. Tailoring and
electronics training are also valued. Girls are happy to learn the
‘beauty parlour’ course. Merely providing children with learning
opportunities is not enough; the children demand to see results.
Most felt that they had passed the age of studying or learning
how to draw, and now was the time for them to earn. Having
had the experience of dealing with money every day, they had a
confidence often missing in many others.
Most of the children had experienced ill treatment at the hands
of the police and some had been lodged in government shelters
forcibly. Thus police brutality was feared the most. Children
viewed the police as being unfair, biased and brutal. Homeless
children wish to be heard before the police hit them. They wish
to be treated with respect and dignity.
Borstals, set up by the government, under the purview of the
Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, are supposed to provide care and
protection to ‘children in need’. However, these ‘homes’ are
perceived as no less than jails by the children.
We often say that homeless children are without adult care
and protection. In addition we must note that they are also not
without adult abuse and ill treatment. Children, especially girls,
living and working in railway stations, or as domestic servants,
are prone to sexual abuse. Such experiences can damage children
for life. For some, sex becomes a matter of survival. Even within
the institutional set-up where children are supposed to be safe,
sexual abuse is common. On the streets it is rampant.
Street children invariably seek out support systems. One of
these is group affiliation. Children live and work in ‘groups’.
They become part of ‘gangs’ in railway stations and are bullied
by gang captains. Being able to survive includes adapting to work
situations. Rag-picking and selling of bottles are common
occupations. Rules of work are clearly demarcated and going
against authority poses serious consequences. Relationships are
made and broken easily. Often the children get attached to the
lives of others and become part of their joys and sorrows. They
help each other to survive and live. Even their employers are
‘like parents’ to them. Almost inevitably drugs, alcohol and
cigarette smoking provide solace and status. Belief in God and
religion shows up in their narratives and many of them believe
that ‘God is one’.
They learn survival strategies and become experts at the art
of living on their own. Most children were of the opinion that
children should never leave their homes. They felt that however
harsh the circumstances at home are one should learn to bear
them. Experiences on the streets included witnessing murders,
rapes and deaths. Naturally many were traumatized by
nightmares while some even seemed to have become
stonehearted.
In spite of living in harsh circumstances, these children are
generous enough to help others and risk their own lives to save
even strangers. They are never greedy for money. They may do
good deeds but never expect returns. For them recreation is
watching films, and play constitutes taking ‘free’ rides in trains,
joking with friends and making fun of others.
Contrary to common belief, street children rarely break family
ties completely. Some do maintain contact with their parents
and siblings, occasionally returning to give them money or to
check out how they are faring. However, they admit that they
have been unable to readjust into their homes and families.
Studies reveal that almost 90 per cent of the street children
maintain contact with their families, and most of them contribute
to the family income (Aptekar and Stocklin, 1997).
TO A LARGE extent the environment of the child can be held
responsible for what and where the child is today. Family, friends,
village, neighbourhood, you and me are part of that environment.
Parents in particular are the key players. We as adults need to
construct a world in which our children can grow, flourish,
realize their full potential and bloom into beautiful human beings.
The point is to be aware and sensitive and do our little bit in our
own ways. Each and every one of us can make a difference. All
we need is a little determination.
What then can we do to better the lives of homeless children?
Here are some pointers:
- Institutions should understand that the children have lived
on their own on the streets and hence value freedom. They
should be allowed more freedom of movement.
- Institutions, especially government-run, should be
discriminating in their approach in confining children and
not bringing them under the eye of suspicion.
- There must be special placement cells through which the
children can be given jobs once they turn eighteen years of
age.
- The solution of child labour is nested in the wider context of
removing poverty from society; hence, it should be addressed
more firmly.
- To use education as a means for empowering and rehabilitating
children, there must be greater flexibility and sensitivity in
the approach.
- The police should be sensitized towards children in difficult
circumstances.
- Counselling will perhaps play a very important role in helping
homeless children readjust into work situations and family
life.
