Lam2008.docx

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575 – 584 www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

Chinese policy reaction to the problem of street children: An analysis from the perspective of street children Debbie Lam a,⁎, Fucai Cheng b a

Department of Social Work and Social Administration, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China b Institute of Youth and Juvenile Studies, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, China Received 2 September 2007; received in revised form 28 October 2007; accepted 4 November 2007 Available online 4 December 2007

Abstract The effectiveness of the government-managed Protection and Education Centre for Street Children program in China was examined based on a 7-month ethnographic study of street children in public streets and at the centre in Shanghai. The program's intermediate goals are to provide education and protection for street children, and its ultimate goal is to restore them back to their own families. However, this study shows that most of the street children disliked the high security of the centre and many had rejected going home. So they tended to keep away from the centre even though it could provide them with lodging and food. It is suggested that the policy for street children should be reviewed with consideration given to street children's family situations and the children's own thoughts and preferences. The programs at the Centre should be enriched and training of staff should be provided. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Street children; Protection and Education Centre; China; Closed-door policy

1. Introduction With the number of street children increasing, different countries have developed different programs to serve this population (Ferguson, Dabir, Dortzbach, Dyrness, & Spruijt-Metz, 2006; Karabanow, 1999, 2003). In China, street children have also drawn attention from the central government. The Protection and Education Centre for Street Children (PEC) is the institution established under the Ministry of Civil Affairs (MCA) to serve street children. To examine how well the program is dealing with the problem, a study was carried out in Shanghai, the largest city in China. The study examined the Chinese welfare program for street children from the perspective of the children themselves. 2. The Protection and Education Centre for Street Children (PEC) In 1995, the MCA established the Protection and Education Centre for Street Children (PEC) to provide care and protection to street children. Since 1995, about 150,000 child admissions have been handled each year (MCA, 2003b). This officially released figure is believed to account for just a small percentage of the actual population (Zhang & Yang, ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 28592082. E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Lam). 0190-7409/$ - see front matter © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.11.009

576

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

2002). The MCA requires every city to establish one PEC to “protect and educate” street children. By 2006, the number of government funded and managed PECs had reached 130 (Jiang, 2006). Through the PECs, the state provides temporary care for street children and arranges for them to be returned to their homes whenever possible. There is no official manual guiding the operation of the PECs. The core guiding references are the 1991 Law of People's Republic of China on the Protection of Minors (Law of People's Republic of China on the Protection of Minors, 1991), which was introduced to protect children in general, and the Measures to Help Migrants with No Means of Livelihood in Urban Cities (MCA, 2003a), which was developed to help migrants without any means of support in urban areas. Neither document targets street children. PECs would design their services according to their own, differing interpretations of the documents and their resources. The MCA encourages PECs in different areas to design their own ways of tackling the problem of street children (MCA, 2005). In accordance with the Measures to Help Migrants with No Means of Livelihood in Urban Cities (2003) developed by the central government, the PECs generally provide the children with basic necessities, shelter, and emergency medical care. The MCA suggests that the PECs provide the necessary psychological counselling and education for the children. But such services are not mandatory. The general practice is that as soon as the children enter the PEC, the centre will try to contact the children's parents or guardians. If the parents can be reached, the children will be escorted back to their homes by the staff of the PEC or directly collected by their guardians. If the children's guardians cannot be located for a long period of time, the children will be transferred to child welfare institutions or other government institutions for children.1 The MCA expects to achieve the following goals through the operation of the PECs: 1) to ensure that at least 70% of the street children get education, protection and knowledge of self-protection from the PEC; 2) to ensure that at least 90% of the street children obtain help and education from society, and get government relief when necessary; and 3) to ensure that at least 60% of the street children are well settled after receiving help and protection from the centre (Zhang, 1999). The PEC program has been operating for nearly 10 years. Has it achieved the anticipated goals? Has the program effectively helped street children? Few data are available to answer these questions, although the MCA continues to urge local governments to establish more PECs. 3. The research site — Shanghai The PECs are set up in large cities in China where a large number of street children are found. Shanghai was chosen as the site for this study as it is the largest city in China. For the past 15 years, Shanghai has experienced dramatic development both socially and economically. More and more people from different parts of China are moving to Shanghai, trying to realize their dreams. According to official statistics, by the end of the year 2003, there were about 5 million migrants in Shanghai, and about 608,000 of them were children less than 14 years old (Shanghai Statistics Bureau, 2004). Increasing numbers of children from all over the country are entering Shanghai and becoming street children (Hu, 2003; Ma, 2003; Wu, 2003). 4. Methodology 4.1. Data collection This study is part of a larger research project on street children in China. Street children are defined as those children who stay out of their homes or schools and spend most of their time in public places of the city, with little or no responsible adult supervision or protection. The project adopted an ethnographic approach that allows the researcher to build a close relationship with the children by long-term interaction, and provides the chance to explore their life in a natural setting (Bemak, 1996; Young & Barrett, 2001a). In this study, the street children were approached in two main areas: the PEC and the streets (including the Shanghai Railway Station Plaza, the small canteens and the enclosed abolished garden in the neighbourhood of the railway station, the underground mass transit railway, and other places they frequented). One of the authors stayed in Shanghai from April to September 2005 and returned in January 2006 for data collection, spending two to five days in the street and one to two days in the PEC each week. A total of 122 days’ 1 There is no official regulation specifying the time period that street children can spend at the centre. In China, government child welfare institutions seldom accept children who are not orphans.

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

577

field notes were generated, of which 21 related to the field work in the PEC. The remainders were devoted to the fieldwork in the streets. Unstructured interviews, semi-structured interviews and observation were the three main methods of data collection. Unstructured interviews allowed a more natural discourse. The children were encouraged to freely express themselves. A natural group setting further provided opportunities for cross-stimulation and data checking among informants. When the researcher talked to one child, the peers would naturally join in the conversation. They were quite happy to share their perceptions and feelings, and they were always ready to correct what the others said. Semi-structured individual interviews were only used at the PEC, as the environment was enclosed and the daily life of the street children was more structured, making a focused interview more feasible. The main questions posed in the semistructured interviews included: “How did you enter the Erbao?”,2 “Do you like the Erbao? Why?” and “How would you feel if you were sent back to your home?” Some of the interviews were taped with the permission of the children and the PEC. Observation was focused on how the PEC operated, the street children's life in the PEC, and their reactions to the operation of the PEC. 4.2. The informants The number of street children at the PEC varied from 31 to 83 during the days the researcher visited. The researcher met more than 300 different children in the PEC, more than 50 of whom talked to him about various matters such as their family background and life in the streets. But the quotes provided here mainly come from eleven key informants because they were more ready to share their feelings about the PEC, and they provided much relevant “data”. Seven of them were inmates at the PEC. Four other key informants were contacted in the streets: one informant had very fresh experience of the PEC; two others had stayed at the PEC before, and the other child was quite familiar with the institution's operation through the information of his friend. The key informants were aged from 13 to 16. Three of them were girls, and eight were boys. All of them came from other provinces of China. The time they had spent in the streets ranged from one day to five years. Their years of schooling varied from zero to seven years. 4.3. Data analysis Ethnographic data analysis was carried out simultaneously with data collection (Brewer, 2000; Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). In this study, field notes were prepared and tapes were transcribed immediately after the fieldwork. Codes were developed and themes gradually emerged. The method of constant comparison suggested by Glaser and Strauss (1968) was adopted to keep track of the themes. The credibility of the findings and the interpretations were tested through member checks, as suggested by Lincoln and Guba (1985). The key informants and other respondents helped to correct any errors in the data collected and the interpretations made. 5. Findings 5.1. The PEC in Shanghai — Good hardware with cold management The Shanghai Protection and Education Centre for Street Children is the only institution working for street children in Shanghai. It is affiliated to the Shanghai Aid Station, which was set up to help vagrants without any means of support. According to the unpublished report of Shanghai PEC, from August 2003 to August 2005, the PEC helped more than 9000 street children. The PEC is located at a remote site about 5 km from Shanghai Railway Station. It is a five-storey building with all the basic facilities. There is one reception room, three big function rooms, one classroom, one canteen, one computer room and one table-tennis room on the ground floor. Street children who are admitted spend most of the daytime on this floor. At supper time, the children are directed to the first floor. There are five dormitories (each can accommodate 20 children), one canteen, one bathroom and a staff office on this floor. The other three floors are as yet unused. All the big rooms of the PEC, including the function rooms, the dormitories and the canteen, have 2 Street children in Shanghai call the PEC “ErBao”, which is the abbreviation of the PEC's Chinese name “Liu Lang Er Tong Bao Hu Jiao Yu Zhong Xin”.

578

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

good-quality wooden floorboards and large open windows. There are electric fans, a colour television and a toilet in each room. The classroom and the canteen are air-conditioned. The PEC provides every child with the basic necessities, such as a uniform, toothpaste, towel and slippers. The bedrooms are kept very neat and clean. Medical care is provided if the children get sick. Street children are usually referred to the PEC by law enforcement officials such as policemen and city inspectors.3 Newcomers are first asked to take a bath and change into the uniform provided. Then, basic information about the name, age, education, hometown and family background of the child is asked for, as well as a means of contacting his or her parents or other family members. The staffs check the information with the relevant government departments in the child's hometown and with their family members by telephone. Should the information be incorrect, the staff will check with the child again. If the parents or other family members are successfully contacted, they are asked to come to Shanghai with official documents to prove their relationship to the child, and take the child back home. The PEC will provide a subsidy for a poor parent's return train ticket if he or she is willing to collect the child. If the parents decline to come to Shanghai, the staffs of the PEC escort the child back to the hometown. The PEC adopts a “protective approach”. According to the Law for the Protection of Minors (1991), the PEC automatically becomes the temporary guardian of a street child once the child has been admitted to the centre. To avoid being prosecuted by the street child's parents for not taking good care of him or her, once the child has been admitted, he or she is not allowed to leave unless in the company of a responsible adult, regardless of whether he or she has come to the centre voluntarily or not. The PEC also takes a series of preventive measures. For example, the inmates are not allowed to go beyond the main door of the centre, and the windows and the doors of the rooms of the centre are reinforced with iron bars. The children are locked in different rooms at different times of the day unless particular activities are organized. Free roaming within the centre is prohibited. The inmates are put into four to five groups according to their age, health condition and attitude towards the PEC. Members of each group live and play together. It is also hoped that the children can self-manage their group life. So each group is led by a group leader appointed by the staff. The leader organizes the group members to carry out the cleaning of the dormitories. Life in the PEC is quite routine. At 08:00 hours, the inmates are required to get up and have their breakfast; at about 09:30, they do physical exercises in the yard for 20 to 45 min. Then they go to the function rooms to watch television or sit quietly. At about 11:30, lunch is provided. After lunch, there is a one-hour break in the function room. At 14:00, they have a cultural education lesson for an hour. In the lesson, basic literacy, mathematics, music and legal knowledge are taught in an informal manner. After class, they watch television or rest in the function room. At 16:45, the children are taken to the first floor to have their supper. After supper, they watch television or rest again in the dormitory. At 20:00, the lights in the dormitory are turned off and the children are expected to go to bed. Most of the PEC staff come from the Aid Station (known as the Reception and Dispatch Station before 2003), which is responsible for locating and dispatching unemployed migrants without means back to their homes. They have no prior training in working with street children. The PEC at Shanghai has one registered social worker (not officially required), but her duties are mainly administrative and differ little from those of the others. Within such a service environment, it is doubtful if the PEC can really achieve its intended goals. The children's feedback provides more information. 5.2. “Protection” or “imprisonment”? Nearly all the street children contacted in the study were opposed to the “protective” measures of the PEC. The informants detested being locked inside the centre. They did not have enough space to play, and they had little freedom to move around, even within the centre. During the interview, Li Tao, 4 a street boy aged 15, eagerly asked the researcher to help him get out of the PEC: Do you have any way of letting me out? I want to leave… Yes, I came here by myself. But now I think I have made the wrong decision. I used to think the Erbao was a good place. A guy in the street told me that Erbao was a happy 3

According to the Administrative Regulations on the Appearance and Environmental Health of Cities ratified by the State Council of China in 1992, the main role of the city inspector is to ensure a “clean”, “beautiful” and “hygienic” image of the city. In past years, because some city inspectors adopted unauthorized measures such as physical punishment or illegal confinement to deal with people who violated the regulation, city inspectors have earned a bad social reputation in society. 4 The names of the children that appear in this paper have been modified for the sake of confidentiality.

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

579

place… The reality is not as I expected. When I stepped through the door, my first impression was that this was a prison … You can look around: there are iron windows and iron doors with big iron locks. And there are security guards … Tell me please, how can I leave here? Li Tao hated the iron bars at the door and windows. He said the life at the PEC was “absolutely” boring, since they were restricted to their rooms most of the time. He also resisted the idea of being brought home by the adults. He protested: I can find my way home if I want to go back there. You know, I left home by myself. I am already 15 years old now. I do not need other people's company. Together with some other kids, he had been looking for a chance to escape from the PEC. He claimed that he could not tolerate the life there any longer.5 When asked, “How do you feel about the life in the Erbao?”, the 14-year-old street boy Zhang Qiang responded quickly: It's bad! Very bad! … Have to clean the toilet. Have to sit quietly for several hours… Very uncomfortable! This comment was echoed by “Peanut”, a 14-year-old girl in the streets. When she chatted with her companions at the railway station, she strongly criticized the centre: Shit! Erbao is not built for human beings… There is no freedom, there are no leisure activities, you just sit there, from morning to night… If you stayed there for a year, I am sure you would become retarded… I never want to be there again. During the period when the researcher was doing field work in the PEC, many children attempted to run away from the centre. At least four succeeded. Zhang Qiang described his experience of escaping from the PEC: It was the year before last [2003]. I was locked on the third floor, together with some 20 children. Every day, I wanted to escape. One day, when I was using the toilet in our room, I found by chance that there was a pipe outside the window of the toilet. I found it was possible to get out through the window, and climb down the pipe… At that time, the windows were not yet further strengthened with iron bars… I shared the idea with two mates. We were excited. But we did not tell others. We had to do it secretly so that the uncles would not find out. 6 Later, we had a good chance. It was a dark night, with heavy rain. The security guards were asleep. We opened the window, and climbed down the pipe … not very dangerous. When we were on the ground, we ran to the high wall, climbed up it and then jumped down. Our actions were copied by many of our room mates… We all escaped. They should thank me that they got their freedom. The children's dislike for the centre was obvious. When escaping from the centre, they did not care about the dangers of falling from the third floor or from the high wall. They were cooperative in keeping their plan to themselves. Once the chance presented itself, they took action without hesitation. The underlying motivation came from the boring and purposeless life behind the locked doors of the centre, and their urge for freedom. Although two years had elapsed since Zhang Qiang left the centre, he still declared that under no circumstances would he return to the PEC. He also seriously warned his friend Guan Tou, a 13-year-old street boy, not to seek help from the PEC: Zhang Qiang: I tell you, never go there [the PEC]! Not under any circumstances! Once you enter the Erbao, you will have to stay in a room day and night. You will not be allowed to go onto the street until you're sent back to your home. Guan Tou: It does not matter. If so, I can escape. It's easy. Zhang Qiang: Escape? Let me tell you. It's not easy now. Now the door and the windows have iron bars. Can you escape? Guan Tou: You mean it is just like a prison?! 5

But he did not get the chance to put his plan into practice. He was collected by his father, who was asked to do so by the PEC. And later, he abandoned his father at the railway station, and wandered into the streets again. 6 At the centre, the street children are required to call the male staff “uncles” and the female staff “aunts”.

580

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

Zhang Qiang: Like? It is a real prison. Not “like”! I will never go there any more. Guan Tou: Then I will also not go there. The security measures of the PEC completely removed Guan Tou's interest in using the service. In fact, nearly all the children interviewed complained about the boring life in the PEC. Even the two children Li Hua (a 15-year-old street boy) and Shen Fang (a 15-year-old street girl), who liked staying at the PEC, also claimed they were unhappy with the closed-door policy of the management. These two children chose to stay at the PEC because they regarded the centre as the only place where they could live. They hated the street life as well as their families. Li Hua frequently complained about the lack of freedom at the centre; he absolutely loathed the fact that they were not allowed outside. But later he was selected to be a helper at the centre, which meant he would help the staff to do some work (mainly cleaning), and could get particular free time and permission to move around. He deeply cherished the opportunity. The job of “helper” signified freedom to the children. So despite the provision of basic needs to the children and the good intention behind the protection, the way the PEC operated actually turned most street children away. The children needed not only tangible resources for survival, but also freedom and stimulation. 5.3. “Family integration” — Whose goal? As noted above, to help the children reunite with their families is the ultimate goal of the PEC. Regardless of the wishes of the children, the children's guardians are contacted to take them back home. But the study reveals that such efforts are meaningless to the vast majority of the children. Street children who had no emotional connection with their families rejected going home. The response of those children who had actually been abused in the family was even more negative. Take Guan Tou as an example. Guan Tou came from Anhui province. As a very young child, he was adopted by his paternal aunt. He complained that he received little care or love from his adoptive parents. He was frequently picked on, scolded and beaten. His natural parents, though had been informed of his situation, did not care either. So he abandoned his adoptive family in 2005. He left home quietly, boarded a coach to Shanghai and began his vagrant life. Although he could not tell why his natural and adoptive parents treated him the way they did, he told the researcher firmly that he did not want to go back home. So although he was very interested in the PEC initially, he became very disappointed after he learned that he would be sent home. He said, “There is no sun in my home. The house is totally dark… No smiles! And no love! Just victimization and beating! Every day!” For him, going home meant daily suffering. His hatred towards his family easily destroyed his interest in the PEC. Guan Tou was not the only child to react in this way. Other street children who ran away from home because of family neglect and abuse had similar thoughts. When Li Hua learned that he would be sent back home by the PEC staff, he was disappointed. He tried to persuade the staff to change this plan: I would rather stay here… I never want to go back home. My parents only care for my elder sister. They bought nice clothes for her and low-quality ones for me. I frequently complained that it was unfair, and I was then frequently beaten. My father always wants to beat me. He is very cruel. Really! … Can you imagine he once forced me to stand on ice with my naked feet for a long time? He does not care for me… The same with my mother: my mother always finds fault with me and then asks my father to punish me. … I hate my family. I will never go back there. In contrast to Guan Tou, Anhui (a 16-year-old street boy) was very happy to receive the news that he was going home. But he further explained: Oh, good! It has been a long time since I was in the streets. Let me go home. Well, that's good news… I will certainly not go back home. I will try to escape on the way home. I'm sure I can meet you [the researcher] at the railway station two days later. Tell “Peanut” and “Short Hair” to wait for me at the canteen.7 I will come back to Shanghai as soon as possible. 7

The researcher had known Anhui in the canteen near the railway station before he met him at the PEC. In the neighbourhood of the railway station, Anhui lived together with several other street children, including “Peanut”, “Short Hair” and some other children. One night, when he was trying to steal someone's car, having been forced to do so by a criminal, he was arrested by the police and later taken to the PEC.

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

581

Though the two boys responded differently to the news that they would be sent home, neither of them wanted to go home. The next day, the two children were taken away by the staff of the Anhui (their hometown) Aid Station for the Homeless.8 Three days later, in the canteen near the railway station where street children frequently gathered, the researcher met Anhui again. He smiled, and said he had not gone home even for one minute. In the afternoon, when he was sent to the Aid Station in his hometown, he escaped. He recounted the story: You know, it is a small city. The controls are not very strict. I simply told the doorkeeper I wanted to go out to have a rest, and he agreed to let me. When I was out of the door, I suddenly ran away, as fast as possible… When I was in the streets, I began to look for the railway station. It's not difficult. I got on a train to Shanghai that night… About nine o'clock the next day, I was here. Well, it's great! I'm finally back here. Anhui was happy restarting his street life. Some of his friends had already come to the canteen to meet him after learning that he was back. Since he had just left the PEC, he had no money, but his friends — other street children — provided everything he needed. This made him quite happy — he enjoyed the mutual help that was available in the streets. The other boy, Li Hua, did not go home either. When the researcher revisited the PEC one week after the two children had been sent home, he recognized him at once. He seemed very happy and was eager to tell him that he had not actually gone home: When I was sent to the County Civil Affairs Bureau in my hometown,9 the staff asked me to wait there for my parents; they said they would contact them. I told them it was not necessary. I could find my way back. They agreed and I left there quickly. That was fine. But I had no money… I wanted to come back to this Erbao all the time, ever since I was told that I would be sent back home. To get some money to buy a train ticket, I tricked the police. I went to a police station, told the policemen that I had lost my way and had no money to go home. I asked them to give me some money. I succeeded. One policeman gave me five dollars. Then I went to another police station, and I got another five dollars. It was great! The policemen were great! However, at the third police station, my trick didn't work; I was nearly sent back to my home by the policeman. The head of the station asked a policeman to accompany me home after he heard my story. I was frightened! You know I absolutely do not want to go home. So I quickly ran away from the station. Then I dared not beg money from police stations any more. I went to the railway station and bought the cheapest ticket to Shanghai. I told you before that I would be back here. I did not lie, right? Li Hua could not accept going back to his family where he experienced only victimization and abuse. He would rather be locked up at the PEC. Although he was repatriated to his hometown by force, he actively looked for ways to come back to Shanghai. What he wanted was to stay far away from his unpleasant family, not be reintegrated with them. Among the 11 key informants in this study, only two had good connections with their families and appreciated the PEC's goal of family integration. These two were taken away from home by criminals. Ka Shi (a 15-year-old street boy) was kidnapped and brought to Shanghai when he was playing by himself near his own home. In Shanghai, he was forced to steal for the criminals. He hated the job and refused to do the stealing. As a result, he was frequently beaten. Fortunately, he escaped from these people with the help of the police. He missed his parents, and his parents missed him too. He was eager to be reunited with his family. The story of Chen Qing, (a 16-year-old street girl) was similar. Her relatives offered to help her find a job in Shanghai. Yet when she arrived in Shanghai, she was forced to work as a prostitute. She escaped 15 days later. She was also eager to be reunited with her poor parents. These two children only became street children involuntarily. They had good relationships with their parents, who cared for them and loved them although they were not rich. The PEC's goal of family integration is very helpful for street children of this kind. But for the many street children with uncaring or abusive parents, being reunited with their families was definitely not their choice. It offered no protection for them and might just start another process of suffering. 6. Discussion and policy implications The government's goals for helping street children may be commendable but the findings of this study indicate that they cannot really be achieved. The intended “protection” turns the PEC into a “prison” depriving the children of their 8

Generally, a PEC is affiliated to an Aid Station. In regions where there is no PEC, the work for the street children is handled by the Aid Station. Both the PEC and the Aid Station are run by the Civil Affairs Department of the government. In areas where neither a PEC nor an Aid Station has been built, the work for street children is generally directed by the Civil Affairs Department of the government of the area. 9

582

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

freedom. The “education” offered to the children at the PEC is minimal; most of the informants claimed they were just wasting time there. The “knowledge of self-protection” introduced was not appreciated. Restoring them to their homes was a form of punishment in the eyes of many of the informants. Only a very small proportion of the street children appreciated the service of the PEC program and desired to be reunited with their families. For the majority of the street children, whose family connections are severely strained, family reintegration would be unfavourable or even harmful to them, unless there are public services in place to work on the parent–child relationship. Most of the informants roamed the streets again after leaving the centre. This finding is consistent with an earlier MCA report which stated that about 60,000 street children once served by the PEC would restart their urban street life (Wang, Zhang, & Zhang, 1999). The staffs of the centre were greatly puzzled by this phenomenon. The centre is clean, in good condition and generous in providing free necessities for the street children. They could not understand why the children always wanted to run away and return to the street. It would remain a puzzle if the voices of these children are not seriously taken. 6.1. Perceptual difference and adult dominance It is quite common for there to be flaws and inadequacies in a newly developed service. Often improvement can be made when feedback has been received. But why is this not leading to improvement at the centre? It is clear that the street children detest the security system. Some members of staff did not approve of the extreme security measures at the PEC either. The centre had to invest many resources to operate in this manner, and the staff frequently complained about the resulting tension at work. They felt they had to be on guard all the time. Yet the managers felt that the current system of operation was their only choice. As mentioned before, according to Chinese law, the centre has the legal responsibility to care of the children admitted. The staff of the PEC also believed they had a moral responsibility to restore the children safely to their families. If the children were allowed to roam free in the streets, they would be exposed to danger, so it was considered necessary to lock them in. Although the PEC staff were aware that the children resented being locked in, they had no plans to change the policy. The security measures are a clear reflection of adult society's mistrust of presumably vulnerable “minors”. 6.2. Street children as active agents The vast majority of the street children did not want to go back to their unloving or even rejecting parents. Efforts to force them home were futile, if not actually harmful to the children. Street children have their own life experience, their own judgments and preferences. Just as has been found in other studies, street children are competent active social actors rather than passive recipients (Aptekar, 1988; James & Prout, 1997; Stephenson, 2001). Bandura suggests that unless a child is included in the decision-making process, he or she will not actively involve himself or herself in the process of implementing the decision (Bandura, 1986). Kidd and his colleagues also argue that unless street children's voices are adequately listened to and respected, the trust between the street children and the workers will not be established, and effective work with the street children will not be possible (Kidd, Miner, Walker, & Davidson, 2007). The street children's own will is decisive if they are to give up their life on the streets (Hecht, 1998). If it lends only a deaf ear to the children's voices, the PEC is doomed to fail. 6.3. The lack of supportive services The government of China has already promised stable funding to develop the PEC program. Up to 2003, over a billion renminbi had already been spent on establishing the PECs (MCA, 2005). But the provision merely of a physical structure is not enough. Aside from the custodial function, the existing services at the PEC are poor. The activities provided by the PEC have to be improved. The educational program has to be better tailored to the needs of the street children. Counselling has to be offered to clarify their life goals. Volunteers can be mobilized to work with them so that they do not feel locked up in a secluded world. The feedback of the street children has already provided some direction for constructive changes. But lack of trained staff to launch new initiatives could be the constraint. The instructors at the PEC are not professional teachers. Little is being done to help the children reintegrate into a normal education program. There is only one registered social worker, who became qualified through self-study.

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

583

Working with street children requires deep understanding and special skills (Lucchini, 1996; Young & Barrett, 2001b). Lacking these, the PEC could do little. Street children leave home for different reasons. But many of them have relationship problems with their parents that might require the help of services such as parenting skills training, mediation or substitute child care arrangements. Within the PEC program, there are no such support services to help with the children's problems after they are sent back home. The roots of the problem are not tackled. Both preventive and remedial services for children at risk are not available. While the children in Shanghai and other big cities in China could be served like kings by their parents and grandparents, many of the street children have a completely different experience of life in other parts of the country. Without support services to deal with their family problems, these children would not stay long even if they were forced home. 6.4. Need for policy review and corresponding actions Based on the findings of the study, the policy of handling the problem of street children should be reviewed. At the macro level, street children are running away from the poorer parts of the country to the well-developed cities in search of better life opportunities. National efforts to help the developing economy in the poorer parts of the country are therefore crucial. Until the structural causes of the problem of street children are tackled, such children will continue to wander in the public streets (Kombarakaran, 2004). The policy of sending every child home, regardless of what their family background is like, has to be reviewed. According to the study by Bar-on, street life is actually a better choice for those children whose parents are unable to assume the responsibility of nurturing them (Bar-On, 1997). Thus, it may be more helpful to take action to help the street children to have a better life in the streets rather than simply sending them back to their homes. Collaboration with other departments to offer better protection and more constructive services to children is already a declared goal of the government. Concrete measures have to be devised to prevent these children from being harassed by criminals. An outreach program may help to prevent street children from engaging in illegal activities for their survival. Studies have found that many street children would not commit crime if they had other life choices (Sauvé, 2003). The PEC could actively go out onto the streets to locate and help these children. Police and city management officers could also help street children in need of emergency provisions or protection on the streets. At the same time, the issue of child abuse in the provinces also needs to be dealt with. Child abuse has not yet been recognized as a social problem worthy of public concern in China (Qiao & Chan, 2005). But that child abuse is forbidden is clearly stated in the 10th Article of the Law of PRC on the Protection of Minors. Article 8 also states the Women's Federation's legitimacy to help with parenting problems and conflict mediation. What may be needed is training for the officials. The phenomenon of street children in China is a new problem emerging from the rapid economic development of the cities. Knowledge and skills to handle the problem have yet to be properly accumulated. Involvement of more NGOs in dealing with the phenomenon would help to increase resources as well as to encourage more creative experimentation. Comparing the programs for street children in Los Angeles, Mumbai and Nairobi, Ferguson et al. (2006) found that collaborations between different organizations significantly facilitated the progress of working with street children. The MCA has already endorsed open experimentation within the PEC program. The next move would be training, program improvement, and research if better progress is to be made. 7. Conclusion Our study has found that the majority of street children are not attracted to the PEC program in Shanghai. Obtaining the necessities of life cost-free is not their only concern, as had been assumed by the government. They will stay away from a place that is physically restraining and they will try to avoid being sent home against their will. Consistent with the new paradigm of childhood outlined by James, Jenks, and Prout (1998), street children are competent social actors, rather than incompetent and dependent “human beings in the making”, who are being passively socialized. If we intend to help them, we have to listen to what they have to say and provide services that match their needs. The problem of street children is a result of macro-structural social changes (Onta-Bhatta, 2000). It is unrealistic to expect the problem to be fundamentally tackled by a simple custodial program. According to one group of researchers, the real answer “lies in large-scale social changes resulting in greater equity worldwide” (Scanlon, Scanlon, &

584

D. Lam, F. Cheng / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 575–584

Lamarao, 1993). However, there is also evidence that appropriate welfare could at least help street children to live with more dignity (Jacob, Smith, Hite, & Cheng, 2004; Scanlon, Tomkins, Lynch, & Scanlon, 1998). So more ‘appropriate services' for street children are definitely needed. In China, the process might be too slow if it relies only on the efforts of the state. More government collaboration with non-governmental organizations to serve street children would be favourable. References Aptekar, L. (1988). The street children of Cali Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice–Hall. Bar-On, A. (1997). Criminalising survival: Images and reality of street children. Journal of Social Policy, 26(1), 63−78. Bemak, F. (1996). A new paradigm redefining future research with street children. Childhood, 3, 147−156. Brewer, J. D. (2000). Ethnography Buckingham: Open University Press. Ferguson, K. M., Dabir, N., Dortzbach, K., Dyrness, G., & Spruijt-Metz, D. (2006). Comparative analysis of faith-based programs serving homeless and street-living youth in Los Angeles, Mumbai and Nairobi. Children and Youth Services Review, 28(12), 1512−1527. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles in practice, 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Hecht, T. (1998). At home in the street: Street children of Northeast Brazil Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hu, Z. (2003). An investigation of the “home of the beggar”. Xin Min Weekly (pp. 46). (in Chinese). Jacob, W. J., Smith, T. D., Hite, S. J., & Cheng, S. Y. (2004). Helping Uganda's street children: an analysis of the Model for Orphan Resettlement and Education (MORE). Journal of Children & Poverty, 10(1), 3−22. James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood Cambridge: Polity Press. James, A., & Prout, A. (1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood, 2nd ed. London: Falmer Press. Jiang, L. (2006). Taking efforts to well fulfill the work with marginal young people. China Civil Affairs, vol. 6. (pp. 10−11) (in Chinese). Karabanow, J. (1999). Creating community: A case study of a Montreal street kid agency. Community Development Journal, 34(4), 318−327. Karabanow, J. (2003, July). Creating a culture of hope: Lessons from street children agencies in Canada and Guatemala. International Social Work, 46(3), 369−386. Kidd, S. A., Miner, S., Walker, D., & Davidson, L. (2007). Stories of working with homeless youth: On being “mind-boggling”. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(1), 16−34. Kombarakaran, F. A. (2004). Street children of Bombay: Their stresses and strategies of coping. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(9), 853−871. Law of People's Republic of China on the Protection of Minors. (1991). Retrieved April 1, 2005, from http://china.chinalawinfo.com/newlaw2004/ show.asp?db=clr&Gid=5369 Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Pubns. Lucchini, R. (1996). Theory, method and triangulation in the study of street children. Childhood, 3, 167−170. Ma, M. (2003, November 15,). Actions must be taken to tackle the problem of begging.Wen Hui Daily. (in Chinese). MCA (2003a). Measures to help migrants with no means of livelihood in urban cities. (in Chinese). Retrieved. March 17, 2007, from http://www. mca.gov.cn/artical/content/PFLN/20031219144123.htm MCA (2003b). A report of working with street children. Retrieved June 11, 2004. from http://www.mca.gov.cn/artical/content/WTG_YWJS/ 200443185205.HTML MCA (2005). A report on the national conference on protection of street children held in Beijing (in Chinese). Retrieved December 6, 2005, from http://www.mca.gov.cn/news/content/recent/20053790129.html Onta-Bhatta, L. (2000). Street children's subcultures and cultural politics of childhood in Nepal. Unpublished Thesis Ph D –Cornell University. Qiao, D. P., & Chan, Y. C. (2005). Child abuse in China: A yet-to-be-acknowledged ‘social problem’ in the Chinese mainland. Child and Family Social Work, 10, 21−27. Sauvé, S. (2003). Changing paradigms for working with street youth: The experience of Street Kids International.Children, Youth and Environments, 13(1) (Retrieved March 27, 2006 from http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/13_1/Volume13_1FieldReports/) Scanlon, T., Scanlon, F., & Lamarao, M. L. N. (1993). Working with street children. Development in Practice, 3(1), 16−26. Scanlon, T. J., Tomkins, A., Lynch, M. A., & Scanlon, F. (1998). Street children in Latin America. British Medical Journal, 316(7144), 1596−1600. Shanghai Statistics Bureau (2004). Shanghai statistics yearbook 2004. Beijing: China Statistics Press. Stephenson, S. (2001). Street children in Moscow: Using and creating social capital. Sociological Review, 49(4), 530−547. Wang, J. A., Zhang, S. F., & Zhang, Q. A. (1999). An investigation about the work with street children. Forum of Civil Affairs, vol. 9. (pp. 7−10) (in Chinese). Wu, L. (2003, December 13). More and more beggars are found in Shanghai streets.City Lead News. (in Chinese). Young, L., & Barrett, H. (2001a). Adapting visual methods: Action research with Kampala street children. Area, 33(2), 141−152. Young, L., & Barrett, H. (2001b). Issues of access and identity: Adapting research methods with Kampala street children. Childhood, 8(3), 383−395. Zhang, Q. (1999). A companion book of civil affairs practice (in Chinese). Beijing: Chinese City Press. Zhang, Q. A., & Yang, H. Y. (2002). Street children in China.Social Welfare, 9, 18−22 (in Chinese).