A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

Quality Institutional Care and Alternatives for Children (QIC&AC)

The Right to a home and a family... a dream. For India's Most Invisible Children

Update on QICAC: April2, 2005

CRY's QICAC initiative has made inroads into the North East of India. A 21 member core committee was constituted on 1 March 2005, in Manipur. The group will work towards improving standards in institutions and promoting alternatives to institutional care such as adoption, community based rehabilitation and sponsorships. Members of the committee include The Director, Deputy Director and Probation Officer of the Social Welfare Department, Chairperson of CWC, Members of Juvenile Justice Board, Councillor of Imphal Municipality and representatives from other NGOs.

Most of us believe that children in institutional care are there because they are orphans or have been abandoned by their parents. In reality, most of them have both or at least one parent. Poverty, illness, an unsafe environment, inadequate schooling facilities, lack of access to education - all these are factors that make parents seek institutional care for their children. As a result, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of children seeking and entering the institutional system.

How it Works

Abandoned children are brought to the institution by the police, well-wishers or someone from the Juvenile Welfare Board/Child Welfare Committee. Probation officers try to trace the child's family. If they are not able to do so, or the family is not willing/able to take the child, the child is sent to a Juvenile Home, Fit Persons Institution, NGO-run institution or Street Children's Shelter. On turning 18, the child moves on to an After Care Home to continue studying/ training. If employed, they move out to live independently.

Once they are in institutional care, the children are marginalised to the point of becoming invisible. They are inaccessible. Even after the passing of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, there is no authentic database of children in institutions, or of the institutions themselves. Their living conditions are deplorable, and the de-personalised setup invariably leads to long term psychological and emotional damage. Rehabilitation efforts are negligible and alternatives rarely considered, even though they exist. While some parents do visit their children, few seek premature discharge. As a result, several children who should never have entered institutional care are stuck there.

CRY's Quality Institutional Care and Alternatives for Children (QICAC) initiative was born out of this scenario. It is based on some beliefs firmly held by CRY:

• the family is the primary unit for the growth and welfare of children
• parents are the primary care givers of their children
• every child has the right to a family-biological, adoptive, foster or sponsored
• institutional care should only be a solution of last resort, in cases where there is no family or the family is detrimental to the growth of the child (as in cases of child sexual abuse)
• institutional care should be used for the least possible time
• alternatives to institutional care, including adoption and foster care, should be promoted
• special consideration should be given to girl children and children with disabilities with regard to institutional care
• the child's interests are of paramount importance
• every child must be heard in decisions that concern them

Keeping these beliefs in mind, QICAC's activities focus on (a) reducing the need for children to be in institutional care by sensitising, involving and empowering parents, families and communities, and (b) improving the quality of institutional care, whether it is by the government or an NGO.

We work towards these objectives by:

- setting quality standards
- establishing resource organisations
- enabling relevant training resources and trained personnel
- organising capacity building training

The partners of this initiative are at 2 levels:

Macro: the Central and State governments, legal, CARA, adoption agencies, state level networks and the media
Micro: Resource Organisations, children involved and their families, staff in the institutions, district and village-level government officials and the local community