A Study of Shelters for Street Children from an Organizational ...
A Study of Shelters for Street Children from an Organizational ... A Study of Shelters for Street Children from an Organizational ...
explained, was their priority. It is plausible to conclude that due to the lack and non availability of jobs particularly in South Africa, any employee would be tempted to play safe and hold on to available job (Nicholson, 2001). According to Archer, (2000: 9-11) human beings have the capacity that allows them to conscientiously reflect on their actions and behaviour. This realism with regard to staff could be construed as a form of conformity, that is, the capacity to re-invent oneself in line with the objectives of the shelters and positions of managements. Staff in this regard, subjected their power of agency as individuals and as a group to serving shelters. In their view, their services, contributed to the welfare of children in need and this provided them with impetus for job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was also based on children's responses to services they received. Staffs were happy when children valued their services. Further, they were satisfied when children advanced well in education and excelled in sports. 5.7.3 Experiences of Children Ennew (1994: 19-20) argues that there has been little research done to correspond what children say regarding their families. However, according to Schurink (1993) life of children living and/or working on the streets begins with problematic experiences from home, the community and from school. Ennew (1994: 19) further notes that rather than the families abandoning the children, they abandoned their families due to difficulties and poor relationships at home. When children abandon their families, they leave their communities and loose the chances of attending school. Giddens (1989) argued that the three structures of society are the primary agents of socialization and when they become dysfunctional the process of socialization is put on hold or becomes problematic. In this regard, when children abandon their home or families' environments they consequently put on hold the normal processes of socialization. On the streets, they come into contact with second environmental experience which introduces different forms of socialisation. While on the streets children experienced harsh conditions, but the streets offer children chances of expressing their liberties, have opportunities to make and earn money through various activities that help them live. Faced with street conditions, children living and/or working on the streets develop tactics that help them cope and survive, which include support groups from other children and their peers. The support groups have elaborate survival mechanisms which are visible on the streets (Ennew, 1994; Aptekar, 1991; Blanc, 1995; Swart Kruger and Donald, 1994). However, due to public opinion pressure amounts that children be removed from the streets. Once interventions take place, shelters', 101
intervention programs and provision of services are the third level of experiences of the children's. Shelter intervention programs, first, are focused on removing children from the streets, secondly, disorient them from street life behaviours, and thirdly, reintegrate them into mainstream society. Consequently, children's experiences have three dimensions i.e. the home or community, the street culture and shelter's intervention programs which lead to re-integration into the mainstream society. A child from the streets has more to tell with regard to what he/she has gone through in life not withstanding experiences of abuse by adults on and off the streets. This study concentrated on children's experiences in the shelters, and the interplay of children, shelters staff, services, and programs of intervention/reintegration. 5.8 Reintegration and Reunification Process The process of reuniting children with families or communities of origin was not instant, or direct. Several factors hinder or derail the process. A major difficulty is poor information children give regarding their families or relatives. This arises because of children's fear and insecurity coupled with lack of trust in adults. Children in the discussions indicated that they knew finally they would be taken home or back to the communities they came from. They expressed their fear and doubt that if the same conditions which forced them into the streets still persisted, they would once again return to the streets. This uncertainty about their future caused some participants to suggest that shelters should devise a program that would retain them in shelters for a longer period of time. This view contradicts the rules governing the establishment of shelters and places of care (Child Care Act No. 74 of 1983, also the South African Children's Draft Bill 2002), because the Act stipulates clearly the duration that children should live in shelters, and that time should be spent to allow social workers to locate their families or relatives and communities of origin, but when that was not possible to try to find foster families. It could be argued that shelters' intervention programs should be redesigned to include: first, the perspectives of children, families or relatives and communities from where children come from. Secondly, to include preventive measures that would prevent children running away or abandoning their families to live and work on the streets. Preventive measures could focus on circumstances that affect family relationships, external factors of poverty and decease inclUding the prevalence of HIV/AIDS. Factors that trigger the phenomenon of children living and/or working on the streets should be addressed before, but the reality was shelters arose because children lived and/or worked on the streets not to prevent them coming on to the 102
- Page 59 and 60: 4.1 Introduction CHAPTER FOUR OATA
- Page 61 and 62: 4.2. Shelters Services and Programs
- Page 63 and 64: children with their families where
- Page 65 and 66: y the shelter's philosophy, goals,
- Page 67 and 68: 4.2.5 Shelter Routine and Regulatio
- Page 69 and 70: 4.2.6 Policy on Visitors The four s
- Page 71 and 72: children played; this was done depe
- Page 73 and 74: living and/or working on the street
- Page 75 and 76: 4.3.1 Structure and physical locati
- Page 77 and 78: Apart from management of shelters,
- Page 79 and 80: Regarding transparency, accountabil
- Page 81 and 82: Staff expressed that children shoul
- Page 83 and 84: was immediately reassuring to child
- Page 85 and 86: will to choose whether to or not li
- Page 87 and 88: Sangoma (traditional doctor) and I
- Page 89 and 90: Look at this shelter look at the do
- Page 91 and 92: preferable. Participants continued
- Page 93 and 94: It is okay when one is going with a
- Page 95 and 96: 5.1 Introduction CHAPTER FIVE DISCU
- Page 100 and 101: The challenges of children living a
- Page 102 and 103: differed greatly from the feelings
- Page 104 and 105: een on the streets for a very long
- Page 106 and 107: from the overseas. Some of the loca
- Page 108 and 109: programs to communities and familie
- Page 112 and 113: streets, consequently, shelters int
- Page 114 and 115: perspectives, understanding, and ca
- Page 116 and 117: understand such discourses. Through
- Page 118 and 119: 6.1.3 Conclusions Regarding Researc
- Page 120 and 121: and appreciation that the children
- Page 122 and 123: Shelters could endeavour to reinfor
- Page 124 and 125: The effort is to move the children
- Page 126 and 127: macroeconomic factors, the local mi
- Page 128 and 129: REFERENCES Acker, A. (1986). Childr
- Page 130 and 131: Brown, D. C. (1996). 'Why ask why:
- Page 132 and 133: Gronbjen, K. A. (1992). Nonprofit H
- Page 134 and 135: Mills C. W. (1971). The Sociologica
- Page 136 and 137: Swart, J. (1987). 'Street Children:
- Page 138 and 139: Street children in http://allafrica
- Page 140 and 141: 3.1.5. Does the shelter have any re
- Page 142 and 143: 4. Social and Recreation 4.1. How a
- Page 144 and 145: Follow-up questions What are the sh
- Page 146 and 147: APPENDIX 3 FOCUS GROUPS CHILDREN Pl
- Page 148: 6. Shelter routine and Discipline:
explained, was their priority. It is plausible to conclude that due to the lack <strong>an</strong>d non<br />
availability <strong>of</strong> jobs particularly in South Africa, <strong>an</strong>y employee would be tempted to play<br />
safe <strong>an</strong>d hold on to available job (Nicholson, 2001). According to Archer, (2000: 9-11)<br />
hum<strong>an</strong> beings have the capacity that allows them to conscientiously reflect on their<br />
actions <strong>an</strong>d behaviour. This realism with regard to staff could be construed as a <strong>for</strong>m <strong>of</strong><br />
con<strong>for</strong>mity, that is, the capacity to re-invent oneself in line with the objectives <strong>of</strong> the<br />
shelters <strong>an</strong>d positions <strong>of</strong> m<strong>an</strong>agements. Staff in this regard, subjected their power <strong>of</strong><br />
agency as individuals <strong>an</strong>d as a group to serving shelters. In their view, their services,<br />
contributed to the welfare <strong>of</strong> children in need <strong>an</strong>d this provided them with impetus <strong>for</strong><br />
job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was also based on children's responses to services<br />
they received. Staffs were happy when children valued their services. Further, they<br />
were satisfied when children adv<strong>an</strong>ced well in education <strong>an</strong>d excelled in sports.<br />
5.7.3 Experiences <strong>of</strong> <strong>Children</strong><br />
Ennew (1994: 19-20) argues that there has been little research done to correspond<br />
what children say regarding their families. However, according to Schurink (1993) life <strong>of</strong><br />
children living <strong>an</strong>d/or working on the streets begins with problematic experiences <strong>from</strong><br />
home, the community <strong>an</strong>d <strong>from</strong> school. Ennew (1994: 19) further notes that rather th<strong>an</strong><br />
the families ab<strong>an</strong>doning the children, they ab<strong>an</strong>doned their families due to difficulties<br />
<strong>an</strong>d poor relationships at home. When children ab<strong>an</strong>don their families, they leave their<br />
communities <strong>an</strong>d loose the ch<strong>an</strong>ces <strong>of</strong> attending school. Giddens (1989) argued that<br />
the three structures <strong>of</strong> society are the primary agents <strong>of</strong> socialization <strong>an</strong>d when they<br />
become dysfunctional the process <strong>of</strong> socialization is put on hold or becomes<br />
problematic. In this regard, when children ab<strong>an</strong>don their home or families'<br />
environments they consequently put on hold the normal processes <strong>of</strong> socialization. On<br />
the streets, they come into contact with second environmental experience which<br />
introduces different <strong>for</strong>ms <strong>of</strong> socialisation. While on the streets children experienced<br />
harsh conditions, but the streets <strong>of</strong>fer children ch<strong>an</strong>ces <strong>of</strong> expressing their liberties,<br />
have opportunities to make <strong>an</strong>d earn money through various activities that help them<br />
live. Faced with street conditions, children living <strong>an</strong>d/or working on the streets develop<br />
tactics that help them cope <strong>an</strong>d survive, which include support groups <strong>from</strong> other<br />
children <strong>an</strong>d their peers. The support groups have elaborate survival mech<strong>an</strong>isms<br />
which are visible on the streets (Ennew, 1994; Aptekar, 1991; Bl<strong>an</strong>c, 1995; Swart<br />
Kruger <strong>an</strong>d Donald, 1994). However, due to public opinion pressure amounts that<br />
children be removed <strong>from</strong> the streets. Once interventions take place, shelters',<br />
101
Change language