1

CHILDREN IN STREET SITUATIONS

Picture by Gilbert Vogt, Inde 1995

INTRODUCTION We will use the general term “Children in Street Situations”, acronym CSS, to design children for whom the street is the main living place, all the while pointing out the diversity of situations these children can experience (see definitions). To open the Internet links, click on texts in blue.

This topic contains:

Introduction

General Information

Typology and Definitions

Statistics

Challenges

2

UN Committee on the Rights of the child

GENERAL INFORMATION The phenomenon of children in street situations has many root causes: economic, social and political, all of them interdependent. In this respect, the symptom is often taken for the cause. Conspicuous and “deviant” behaviour of under-privileged children and their families are pointed at, and much less so the macro-social dynamics underlying it. In most countries, the common attitude, driven by occasional contact with these children, is to consider the physical and emotional survival strategies (labour, theft, substance abuse, sexual promiscuity) of the children as the symptoms of a social pathology proper to the poor, themselves seen as a “dangerous class”. This sets off the vicious circle of deviancy and repression: starting from the point where vagrancy is considered an offence, criminalisation of children in street situations engenders more serious forms of delinquency. At the beginning, the child commits small offences to survive, and later on, being labelled a criminal, he assumes the role of a genuine criminal, eventually specializing in this career. Repression maintains children in the street. When political and social regulation allows for a more nuanced debate, public opinion wavers between solutions ranging from outright repression to rights-based empowerment measures. Institutionalization of children, still very pervasive in many countries, is a response to symptoms and not to root causes. Respect for children’s rights however implies to address causes: ECONOMIC ROOT CAUSES

The diversity of contexts, of regional dynamics or of local idiosyncrasy, is all face to face with a major tendency: antagonisms between globalized economic structures and national welfare systems emphasize marginalisation of the poorest. The population eking out a living in the informal sector is growing. The ensuing rapid urbanisation engenders huge problems in social life, education, health and housing, exceeding the capacities of a dwindling public sector. Slums are spreading without basic equipment, contributing to more people taking to the streets. The concept of “poverty” is clearly insufficient to explain life in the streets. Not all poor children take to the streets. The caring still provided to their children by most poor families is admirable indeed. However, slum children are often not taken into account till the moment they become “street children”, in other words a conspicuous public problem. Family breakdown and domestic violence can be considered as a motivation for children to run away, but they are no real and underlying root causes to life on the streets. Poverty is only one condition triggering the passage to the street, not a cause. Indigence is a “symptom”, a state one experiences. The real cause is impoverishment, the factors of which are first of all connected with economic policies. The more concentrated power and wealth (capitals and soil property) are, the larger inequalities in terms of statute and access to decent life and work levels. Invisible economic root causes force the child to alternate between domestic violence in the slums and public violence on the streets. Children waver between those two worlds. A high mobility characterizing them, makes it very difficult to collect reliable statistical data. Apart from being on the streets, they can be in prison or institution, back in the family for a while, involved in the activities of a project, or roaming from one city to another... SOCIAL ROOT CAUSES

Family breakdown

Pressured from all sides, whole families are breaking down. A typical scenario is frustration connected to under - or unemployment, or to poor working conditions, often aggravated by alcohol or drug consumption, with children sometimes involved in trafficking or other informal survival strategies. When the community is strained by the fight for survival, any break-up in the family will affect in an acute way the statute of the mother. She will be forced to seek protection with another man, who frequently reacts to the weakening of his maintaining role by violently rejecting the children who are not his. Trapped in a dependent link, the mother fails to fend for her children from a former home. Those children, feeling betrayed, eventually decide that time has come for them to move out.

3

Gender

While male teenagers tend more to “give out” their family when they are mistreated, the situation of girls is more critical, given that gender roles prevent them to reach the level of autonomy generally attributed to boys. As a consequence, the risk of being snatched up by underground networks of physical and sexual exploitation is more serious for girls than for boys. Child abuse, child trafficking and other intolerable violations of the International Convention on the Rights of the child (1989) are therefore also to put down on economic policies affecting primarily the statute and role of the most important person for any child: the mother. For the children, the alternative to being forced to sustain the family income and/or to being abused, then lies in individual survival on the streets. Social inclusion crisis Social inclusion can be defined as the reciprocal adjustment between individuals and groups, based on binding rights and legitimate mutual duties adding up to a “social contract”. Economic pressure and problems of regulation policies can engender a social inclusion crisis. The current process of globalization of liberal economy is shrinking the public sector. The function of the State is under trial, with as a result discriminatory practices like:

Education policies: direct and indirect costs of basic education;

Labour policies: lack of vocational training positions;

Juvenile justice systems: massive institutionalization of children in conflict with the law, legal texts only partially applied;

Expeditious justice: Unofficial norms, shaped by public opinion, are favoured, which in turn reinforce power and coercion, as well as measures with limited – if not inexistent – legal foundations

1;

Media: sensationalism. However every context has its specific problems. This calls for a local understanding of marginalization processes, and accordingly for strengthening of prevention of abuse and human rights awareness activities. The CRC is the main strategic lever to advocate for child respect and protection, and for a model of society where social inclusion relies on access to basic services.

1 Public order – related interests often minimize article 3 CRC (best interests of the child) and related formalities (probation,

separated detention places for adults and minors, etc.)

4

DEFINITIONS Definitions vary according to context and time. The (non-exhaustive) graph below illustrates this variety of definitions.

Source Categories Definitions

Declaration on the Rights of the Child (1959)

Street children

Separated children or those without sufficient subsistence means.(No accurate hint on CSS in the 1959 Declaration, but this part of principle 6 is close to existing definitions of CSS)

Inter-NGO Programme for Street Children and Street Youth (1982)

Street children

Those for whom the street (in the largest meaning) has become prior to their family circle, a real home, a situation devoid of any protection, supervision or guidance by reliable adult.

UNICEF (P. Taçon 1985)

Children in the street Street children

2

Those working in the street, but going back home at night. Those totally left to their own devices and whose surviving place is the street.

UNICEF (1986)

Children in especially difficult situations

Victims of apartheid and foreign

occupation. Orphans, street children and migrant

workers’ children. Displaced children and victims of

natural and manmade disasters. Children with disabilities, abused,

socially underprivileged and exploited children.

Committee on the Rights of the Child

Street children

Children who, in order to survive, are forced to live and/or work on the streets.

Mona Pare (2003)

Street children

Genuine street children (or the “core”).

This diversity makes it difficult to work out reliable statistics. It also raises the issue of the stakes of definitions and numbering.

2 Dichotomy based on the preposition: in French: Enfants dans la rue, Enfants de la rue

5

Categorizing definitions, such as “street children”, “children in the street”, are stigmatizing, discriminatory, and most of all, they do not take into account the child’s subjective perception. Emanating from a non-listening stand, in which the association of the child with a space perceived as negative and problematic, denies the child a statute of subject, those “objective” definitions reduce the child to an object on which interventions are carried out according to modalities disconnected with the child’s opinion. For children for whom the street is a prominent life setting, it is therefore preferable to use the idiom “Children in Street Situations” (CSS), in order to stress that the problem is not merely inherent to the child, but to the situations through which children find themselves on the street. To those objective definitions, we substitute a “subjective” definition implying to open one’s mind to the meaning that the actors, and primarily the children themselves, give to their situations: Children in street situations are children for whom the street has become a major consideration. The definition “children in street situations” is objective, meaning by it that it implies to find out the meaning that the subject (the child) gives to the street. When the street is for him/her a major preoccupation, the child can be said in a street situation. This means obviously to proceed by listening to the child. The worry of the child must be heard. It is only so that a conclusion can be reached as to whether the street is or is not a major consideration for a certain child. This can be inferred through various aspects of the child’s life: activities, motivation, identities, relationships, etc. When those items revolve around the street space, the street can be said to have become a major reference for the child. The choice of the word “consideration” is deliberate: it refers to article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. This article stipulates that in any decision about the child, the best interests of the child shall be a major consideration. The use of the term “consideration” implies that there are subjects considering an object, here the street. Those subjects include the child. That makes the difference between a subjective and an objective definition. In the objective definition, e.g. “street child”, the child is associated with the object (street), he/she is not seen as having an opinion about it, and accordingly neither a statute of subject. Those who have an opinion are in this case the ones pointing out the child as an object: the child is thus simply an object of or on the object “street”. On the contrary, in the subjective definition, the object is the street and the subject, those who express themselves about it, including the child. He/she is thus granted a position of subject, who, like other subjects, is legitimated to talk about the object “street”. The parallel to article 3 of CRC is therefore essential: if the best interests of the child must be a major consideration, this implies that the opinion of the child himself on what are his or her best interests must be taken into account (art. 12 CRC). Consequently, involving the child as a subject to find solutions in the child’s interests, is also a necessity as far as children in street situations are concerned. That is why a “subjective” definition is required. The idiom “children in street situations” meets this requirement. Another point must be made in this parallel to article 3 CDE. This article does not say “the” but “a” primary consideration. In the same way, we say that the street can be “a” major consideration, and not necessarily “the” prominent consideration. And this is as true for the subject “child” as it is for other (grown-up) subjects endowed with parental or professional responsibility towards the child in a street situation. In other words, general interests can prevail on the fact that this child or another considers the street as “his/her” major preoccupation. It is the case notably when behaviour, motivated by the major consideration for “his/her street” (with its codes, loyalties, etc.) is of a criminal nature. This must be taken into account when dealing with the offences committed, however social response cannot be based only on the reference to street, that would turn into “the” major consideration.

6

The choice of the term “a major consideration” accordingly allows to locate subjects at an equidistance from the object (street), all the while introducing the principle of accountability towards behaviour: every of them being a subject, every of them is accountable towards the object (street). The (adult) subjects who reduce other (child) subjects to objects (street children) are accountable for this reductionism and the violence it engenders, justifies, and perpetuates. The (child) subjects who reduce their behaviour to a representation of their self as object (street child) are accountable for their “secondary deviance”: the stigma one may undergo cannot be invoked to justify any behaviour. The street thus cannot become “the” major consideration, not for children, nor for adults, insofar as it must not allow to consider street life conditions as a motive justifying any deed. This brings back to the reading of article 3 CRC, that considers the best interests of the child as “a” major element to take into account, among others. In just the same way, the street environment is a major element among others, to take into account, but it is not the only one. In a certain way, the idiom “children in street situations” is of as basic importance and presents the same requirements and the same difficulties as article 3 CRC: reference to an up-coming ideal (the best interests of the child) and to current or past circumstances (the street) must make up a major, but non-exclusive, element in decision-making. With our definition, we wish, starting from parallelism with article 3 CRC, to permit the child to shift from current or past upsetting circumstances (the street), to a future constructive project. This project is based on a protagonist and critic screening of street situations on the one hand, and on a judicious consideration of child’s best interests on the other hand. In the possibility that those two considerations do not annihilate each other, lies the guarantee of a procedure conform to article 12 CDE: one must consider that there can be, under certain circumstances, street situations compatible with the best interests of the child. Even if these are more likely to be the exception than the rule, the decisions to allow for a child to evolve principally on the street must not be excluded. Wiping out this possibility would come down to reductionism of the child-object (the “street “child one must extract from this belonging willy-nilly): one of the CRC objective is to overcome it. We are of the mind that our subjective definition allows to get rid of dogmatic, determinist answers, disrespectful to children’s rights.

STATISTICS Children in street situations (CSS) are present in nearly every country. UNICEF estimates rate their number at several millions worldwide. In the absence of census of these children, the only sources are estimates by local NGOs, at a city’s scale. However figures vary according to the definition used, and are sometimes inflated in order to “better” advocate for the cause. Estimates report 11 million children in street situations in India, 445’000 in Bangladesh, 250’000 in Kenya, 200’000 in Kinshasa, etc. (See extracts from State Reports presented to the Committee on the Rights of the Child) One has to take a look behind numbers, and ask oneself for whom, since when, how and why living on the streets has been a problem. The problem of CSS requires to investigate also on people in contact with them, for they are part of the problem, and, let us hope, also of the solution. When speaking of these children, people usually analyse the situation through their own values, stands and interests. For some, those children are bandits, for other victims. Some inflate statistics, which may increase their feeling of insecurity, that will be exploited in turn to justify street “cleansing” operations. Others underrate the problem, or more simply censor the issue. Finding reliable statistics on children in street situations is practically impossible, for three main reasons:

I. due to the important mobility of those children: CSS are very mobile, as a consequence of the grave instability and numerous moves that characterize life on the streets. It will be commonplace for them to move from a neighbourhood, or even a city, to another: the various surveys are confronted with this difficulty when trying to spot them with certainty, and number them with exhaustivness;

7

II. due to classification problems: comparative statistics are made uneasy by all the various

categories sorting out and regrouping CSS: “street children”, “children in the street”, “homeless children”, “abandoned children”, “children at risk”, “minors in conflict with the law”, “children in especially difficult situations”, etc. Those categories overlapping differently according to contexts, they can be neither compared nor unified;

III. due to particular interests: statistics are a questionable source of information, for they can be

the focus of institutional stakes, and are therefore sometimes selected, or even twisted to suit particular interests.

CHALLENGES SHIFTING FROM A WELFARE APPROACH TO A RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH

The diversity of situations has not been sufficiently analysed so far, and interventions are often based on a stereotyped vision of the “street child”. CSS thus become the object of interventions depending first of all of mediatisation and institutional interests, not always with regard to the child’s best interests. A lot has yet to be done to develop an approach respectful of the rights of these children. Encouraging signs are nevertheless popping up, in the shape of important steps forward, mainly in research. However, the implications of the Convention on the Rights of the Child for the intervention in favour of CSS are little translated into practice. One of the reasons of this state of affairs is the dependency of field workers towards donors evaluating their operational results through efficiency indicators conceived through a protective approach. On the opposite, the rights-based approach and tangible developments that should result of these principles and rights enshrined in the CRC, remain weak till today. LISTENING TO THE CHILD IN A STREET SITUATION AND PROMOTING PARTICIPATION

Living on the street is as well a problem as an opportunity of survival. It is therefore important to define in which circumstances life on the street is considered dangerous or threatening for a child’s welfare, and what are the concrete alternatives available for the child. In this respect, there can be no assessment of the child’s quality of life without taking in account the child’s opinion. This right is granted by the Convention on the Rights of the Child: when he or she is able to discerning, the child has the right to express freely his/her views on any issue concerning him/her (art. 12 CRC). Article 12 CRC obligates the State party to this Convention to consider the child’s views, in relation to his/her age and degree of maturity. This means that adequate procedure must be set up to give the child the opportunity to be heard. And yet, legal or administrative procedures mentioned in this CRC article do not operate only in isolation. When a child steps into a court or an office, he/she is burdened with the social prejudices singling him/her out. Listening to the child in a rights-based approach, accordingly starts with the term attributed to children living in particular circumstances. (See definitions) A DYNAMIC APPROACH

On the street, situations evolve. By pointing out this evolutive character of the situation, we consider “children in street situations” as “social actors”, i.e. subjects actively reacting to situations not suffering them passively. This dynamic approach is opposed to the definition-based, objectivist approach that locks up individuals in rigid categories. (See definitions) Those children are not simply victims or delinquents. Even if the problematic is made up of economic, political and social factors on which children have no grip, they are not only the victims of it. As is always the case with those living on the margin of society, children are not only adapting to the situations: they also try to overcome their difficulties by joining another world – the street –and by

8

creating their own world – their street. A global approach must therefore be adopted, for the intervention to fit the specific needs and abilities of these children, respectfully of their rights. Life on the street is made up of combinations between on the one hand various constraints weighing on the child, and on the other hand the child’s own survival strategies. Those realities must be qualified with those experiencing them, and not in their place. This must be done with qualitative tools. In this way, various child profiles can be identified, which is a necessary step to understand the social dynamics affecting them and consequently chose the types of intervention. It is not the child who is more or less in the street (as in the “street children” versus “children in the street” categories), it is rather the street’s realities that are more or less integrated by the child. The realities of the street vary from positive elements like immediate solidarity, and violations ranking among the most outrageous against human dignity. The child in a street situations is a child for whom the street has become the central point of his/her subjective world. This child can be de facto and objectively out of the street – in a home, prison, slum – but his/her thoughts are in the street, a “subjective world” shaped by interpersonal relations the child has entertained in the street, or in other places but connected to the street. It is therefore impossible to identify a child in a street situation at first sight (see statistics). But the problem, once more, is not the child, but the situation of abuse and victimization of the child, linked to the more general problem of social inclusion. It is a question of quality of the relationship between these children and the people surrounding them.

INSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES

Numerous institutional challenges depend on definitions of the population groups and on the statistics that these definitions permit to extract. The different institutional challenges rank from preserving the reputation of a country to the question of the legitimacy of intervention, with in-between the task of persuading donors. When taking up these challenges, children themselves are too often forgotten: the debate forgets to consider the ensuing consequences the children face for being classified or categorized in a certain way. For children themselves, plunged in daily survival, it is more urgent to be surrounded by adults who, before categorizing and counting them, first care to help them. Seen from a children’s rights perspective, the main stake is therefore to respect the principle of the child’s best interests. It implies turning away from practices locking up children in categories, and from rigid treatment. To find a balance between the challenges, balance in favour of children and not of institutions, one has to start from the CRC. The Convention on the Rights of the Child grants them rights too often ignored in practice. The CRC requires that adults take the trouble of an empirical, precise and qualitative understanding of the various situations experienced by children. It is not conform to the best interests of the child (art.3) to find oneself locked up in a category conveying in advance a judgment and an intervention.

COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD

The Committee on the Rights of the Child monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and of its optional protocols by State members

3.

3 The United States and Somalia are the only States not to have ratified the CRC.

9

THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD OF 1989 AND ITS

OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS OF 2000

The 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)

Optional Protocol to the CRC on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography

Optional Protocol to the CRC on the involvement of children in armed conflict

CSS IN STATE REPORTS PRESENTED TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE

CHILD: AN OVERVIEW

Picture by Gilbert Vogt, Guinea 1996, Damp in Conakry

ALBANIA, INITIAL REPORT 2003 Family and substitution care

Children deprived of family care (art.20) §290 (p.52) The street kids represent the most vulnerable group to the danger of maltreatment, insecurity, illiteracy, and malnutrition. Many economic, social, cultural, educational and family reasons support the marginalisation of this category of children. Incomplete data have identified nearly 800 street kids roaming the streets of Tirana as beggars, street sellers and shoeshine boys. The Committee on the Rights of Child is following implementation of the Convention on the rights of the childs and its optional protocols by member states.

4

4 Only the USA, Somalia and South Sudan have not ratified the CRC.

10

BRAZIL, INITIAL REPORT 2003

- Family and substitution care

Children deprived of family care (art. 20)

§242 (p.55) “One of the problems that most perturbs society, in the context of children and adolescents deprived of family life, concerns those that have made the street their survival zone, the so-called “street-children”. This problem has manifested itself strongly, particularly since the late 1970s. §243 (p.55-56) “Various studies and surveys have been carried out in the country in order to estimate the numbers, the causes of the phenomenon and the most efficient methods “to take children off the street”. Today it is known that the number of children and adolescents who actually live on the streets without any family ties, is much lower than the estimates which put it in the millions. In the city of São Paulo, the largest in South America, for example, a survey carried out by the Municipal Secretary for the Family and Social Welfare showed that about 3’000 children and adolescents frequented the street – but did not live in it – and that only 466 actually lived in the street. §244 (p.56) “The majority of them spend the day on the street, selling small times, sweets and candies, engaging in petty crimes and begging. At night, they return home, many to family dwelling. However, the situation of those who sleep out on the street in the big cities is dramatic; there they are exposed to all kinds of exploitation, substance abuse and child prostitution. Although the basic cause is related to poverty, other factors equally play a part: ill-treatment and abuse, changes in patterns of behaviour, crises and family ruptures, and the lack of education, sport and leisure compatible with the needs and aspirations of young people. §245 (p.56) “The way of dealing with the problem, prior to the 1988 Constitution and the ECA, was marked by repressive action, the rounding-up of children and adolescents and their placement in homes and shelters. Only in the mid-19809s did a group of technicians from the institution then called FUNABEM, with the support of UNICEF, question Government, which were not only inefficient but harmful and unjust, and began to look at alternative experiences of childcare that were being carried out in the country under the auspices of non-governmental organizations. The activities of this pioneer group were given the name of the “Project for community Alternative Care for Street children” by the Pastoral do Menhor of the Archdiocese of São Paulo.” §246 (p.56) “In 1985, one of the most influential non-governmental organizations for the enforcement of children and adolescent’s rights in Brazil was created: the National Street Children Movement, which together with other human rights NGOs, particularly Pastoral do Menhor, began to play an important role in elaborating article 227 of the Constitution, the Statute of the Child and Adolescent (ECA) and disseminating the principles and dictates of the Convention. The Movement also made a contribution, through the experience of its militants, to reformulating public social assistance programmes. The Movement has already staged National Meetings of Street Children, which have been helping to increase the participation of children and adolescents in discussing their own problems and making society aware of the question of children who are excluded and are victims of violence.

11

EGYPT, PERIODIC REPORT 1998

- Family and substitution care

Children deprived of family care (art. 20)

§93 (p.31) “On 31 December 1996, there were 4’225 children placed with foster families. According to Ministry of Social Affairs statistics, most of these children were foundlings (95.4 per cent); the next largest category consisted of illegitimate children (2.1 per cent), followed by homes (1.8 per cent) and, finally, stray children (0.7 per cent). §94 (p.31) “... the Minister of social affairs seeks to ensure that social, psychological, health and occupational care is given to children over the age of 2 whose natural families are unable to bring them up decently, namely: a) abandoned children; b)stray children whose parentage or residence the authorities are unable to determine;...”

LEBANON, REPORT 2004

- The governmental role in combating child labor

Ministry of interior and municipalities project for combating working street children

§573 (p. 153) “The project included the following: a) Establishing and capacity building of unit for combating working street child labor. B)Training of trainers of Internal Security Forces, Civil Defense and Municipality police, in order to train other groups on methods of dealing with working street children, as well as methods for their legal and procedural referral to specialized organizations (relevant Ministries, Income generating opportunities for parents,….). c) Setting up a joint monitoring team from the Ministry of Interior and other relevant stakeholders, encompassing social specialists from the Ministry of Social Affairs and NGOs aiming at preventing street child labor, and referral of working children to specialized institutions based on their respective needs. d) Public awareness raising on child labor issues and ways to protect working children and reduce the extent of their exploitation. A television advertisement was produced in that framework. e) Training of Governors on the effective enactment of national legislations and international labor standards, and prevention methods. f) Conducting a comprehensive study on working street children, which is the first ever study on that level. It is to be noted that the various activities are still in need of additional promotion and follow-up.

MOROCCO REPORT,2000

- Protection of the child against any form of abuse and neglect, including rehabilitation and reintegration (art. 39)

Protecting the child from all forms of violence and negligence

§318 The Ministry of State in charge of social welfare, family and childhood has also conducted a study on street children, which included a sample from selected large and mid-size cities of children whose ages ranged from 6 to 18, broken down as follows:

29.52 per cent under 10 years of age;

39.71 per cent between 10 and 14 years of age;

30.77 per cent between 15 and 18 years of age.

12

§ 319 The study brings to light the fact that the phenomenon of street children is a complex one, as they are not homogeneous, and that the problem requires mobilization of the efforts of all concerned to find appropriate solutions. § 320 The study aims at developing elements of a draft plan of action for reintegration of street children.

MOLDOVA, INITIAL REPORT 2001

- Specific child protection measures

§388 (p.69) “…An unfavourable family climate forces children to abandon their home and to live in the street, under the influence of delinquents.”

GOOD PRACTICE

Groundbreaking approach for children in street situations in Egypt

John-Bosco’s journey: Sustainable solutions for children in street situations in Kigali

REFERENCES

IDE Publications Visit our page of documentation!

- RIZZINI Irène, MANDEL Udi, STOEKLIN Daniel, Life on the Streets - Children and adolescents on the Streets. Inevitable Trajectories? The International Institute for the Rights of the Child, Institut Universitaire Kurt Bösch, December 2007.

- Children in street situations. Prevention, intervention, rights-based approach, 2007 seminar

proceedings, Institut international des Droits de l’Enfant, Institut Universitaire Kurt Bösch, May 2008.

Other publications

- APTEKAR Lewis, STOECKLIN Daniel, Street Children and Homeless Youth: a cross-cultural perspective. Dordrecht: Springer Editions (240 pages), 2014.

- IDE library (EN/FR)

- Library UNIL-UNIGE-IUKB (FR)

- Lucchini Collection (FR)

- Bibliography compiled by Mr. Joël Mermet

13

Network

Child rights information network – CRIN

Consortium for Street Children – CSCCSC

Eurochild

European Federation for Street Children – EFSC

International Childhood and Youth Research Network – ICYRNET

Rede Amiga da Criança

The Childwatch International Reseach Network – CWI

Internet links

Action for Brazil’s Children Trust - ABC

Calcuta Hope

Médecins sans frontières

Mith Samlanh

Save the children

Service Social International (SSI)

Street Action

Street Child Africa

Street Kids Direct

Street Kids International (ISK)

Students Supporting Street Kids (SSSK)

Task Brasil – Abandoned Street Kids of Brazil Trust

Terre des hommes – aide à l’enfance (Tdh)

UNICEF

14

TRAINING

Thirteenth International Seminar in Sion (October, 2007) on the theme “Children in street situations. Prevention, intervention, rights-based approach.”

Interdisciplinary Master’s Degree in Children’s Rights (MIDE)

Master of Advanced Studies in Children’s Rights (MCR)

European Network of Masters in Children's Rights

Latin American Network of Masters in Children’s Rights

Picture by Gilbert Vogt Colombia 1999, Youngster under glue effect, Bogotá

DS ACM 02.10.2008 (rectified 26.09.2016)