Family practices and child participation: an exploratory ... · Chairman Elizabeth Sussekind Executive Director Gary Barker Programmes Director Marcos Nascimento Programme Co-ordinator

Family practices and child participation: an exploratory study from the point of view of children and adults In Latin America and the Caribbean

Promundo ingles.indd 1 4/4/2008 16:22:00


Family practices and child participation: an exploratory study from the point of view of children and adults In Latin America and the Caribbean


PROMUNDO

Chairman ElizabethSussekindExecutive Director GaryBarkerProgrammes Director MarcosNascimentoProgramme Co-ordinator for Research and Evaluation MárcioSegundoProgramme Co-ordinator for Violence Prevention MariannaOlingerAddress RuaMéxico31sala1502BlocoD CentroRiodeJaneiroRJ CEP20031-904

Contact Tel./Fax:+55[21]2544.3114 Site:www.promundo.org.br

Researchers TeamBrazil:GaryBarker,MárcioSegundo,MarcosNascimento,TatianaAraújo,IsadoraGarcia,SimoneGomes,BrunoPizzi,JuanBlancoeHugoCorreaJamaica:JanetBrowneSharonJohnsonMexico:NashieliRamírezePatriciaUrbietaNicaragua:ManuelOrtegaHegg,LuisSerraVasquezeNancyArósteguiSanchesPeru:JorgeCastroMorales,AlejandroSamaniero,SofiaTheryeNadiaOrriloVenezuela:VerônicaZubillaga

Additional Analysis Edition SuyannaLinhalesBarker

Projeto gráfico de capa e miolo e diagramação IlustrarteDesigneProduçãoEditorial

Cover photo FábioCafé

Support SavetheChildrenSuécia FundaçãoBernardVanLeer

Translation NathalieCrawshawHeinzelmanneChristineCrawshaw

Viveiros de Castro Editora Ltda.R. Jardim Botânico 600 sl. 307 Rio de Janeiro RJ cep 22461-000

(21) [email protected]

ImpressonoBrasil

CIP-Brasil.Catalogação-na-fonteSindicatoNacionaldosEditoresdeLivros,RJ

P925 Práticasfamiliareseparticipaçãoinfantilapartirdavisãodecriançaseadultos:um estudo exploratório na América Latina e no Caribe / [estudo coordenado peloPromundo].–RiodeJaneiro:7Letras,2008. 128p. Incluibibliografia ISBN978-85-7577-456-4 1.Família–Pesquisa.2.Paisefilhos–Pesquisa.3.Crianças–Formação–Pesqui- sa.4.Criançaseadultos-Pesquisa.5.Comunicaçãonafamília–Pesquisa.I.Promundo.08-0236. CDD:306.87

CDU:392.3


Index

1.Isanotherchildhoodpossible?,9

1.Introduction,13

2.TheoreticalFramework,172.1.Theoreticalbackgroundonadult-childrelationshipinfamilies,172.2.Thelimitsofgeneralisation—differenttypesofparentalstyles,21

3.StudyContext,253.1.GeneralcharacteristicsoffamilypracticeswithinthesocioculturalcontextofLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,253.2.Legalframeworkofprotectionandpromotionofchildrightsin researchedcountries,28

4.Methodology,314.1.UnderstandingfamilypracticesinLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean:methodologicalpaths,31

5.PartI:ComparativeAnalysis,355.1.Results,35

5.1.1.Familypractices,familyinteractionandphysicalpunishment,375.1.2.Familypractices,domesticchoresandchildlabour,485.1.3.Familypracticesandformaleducation,555.1.4.Familypracticesandinteractionbetweenchildren,59

5.2.Finalconsiderations,645.3.Recommendationsforaction,70


Family practices and child participation�

6.PartII:Summaryofcountryreports,736.1.BrazilSummary,736.2.JamaicaSummary,806.3.MéxicoSummary,856.4.NicaráguaSummary,936.5.PeruSummary,976.6.VenezuelaSummary,102

7.BibliographicReferences,107


Wewouldliketothankthechildren,parentsandcarersinallthecountriesstudied,fortakingpartinthisresearch.Withouttheircontributionitwouldnothavebeenpossibletobeaware

oftherealityexperiencedbythefamiliesinthevariousenviron-mentsinLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean.



Is another childhood possible?

Democracybeginsatbirth.Citizenshipstartsduringtheearlymonthsandyearsinahumanbeing’slife.Itmayseemcommonsense,butitisimportanttopointoutthatitisduringtheinteractionandexchangebetweenchildren,theirfathers,mothers,thoseresponsibleforthemand/orcarersthatthefirstimpres-sionsoftheworldareformed.Duringthesemomentsandprocesses,welearndifferentstylesandwaysofinteractingwiththeworldandwithothers,welearnhowtoexpressourwishesandalsoto listenandnegotiatewithothers–andthese are the foundations of citizenship. But is there “citizenship” in today’sfamilies inLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean?Dofathers,mothersandothercarersreally interactwiththeirchildren inwaysthatpromotethepracticeoftruecitizenship?

Westartedthisexploratorystudyontheassumptionthattheparticipationofthechildren–whichwedefinedasa“combinationofpracticesthataimtoencourage,stimulateandallowchildrentoexpresstheirviewsonthesubjectsthatrelatetothem”–isanimportantprecursortolearninghowtofeelandhowtodefineoneselfasacitizen.Welistenedtofathers,mothers,carersandchildreninurbanandruralareas,oflowincomeandmiddleclassesinsixcountriesinCentralAmerica,theCaribbeanandSouthAmerica,totrytounderstandhowandiftheyexperience“childparticipation”.

Unfortunatelytheresultswerenotveryoptimistic.Thechildrenreportedandthefathers,mothersandcarersaffirmedthat,ingeneral,theuseofphysicalpunishmentprevailsasadisciplinarymeasureandisseenbymanyparentsasa“necessaryevil”andexperiencedbythechildrenasaviolationoftheirrights.Inspiteofappearinginallthecontextsstudied,physicalpunishmentemerg-


Family practices and child participation10

esnoticeably inruralareas,andinsomecases, it seemstogoalongwiththeacceptanceoftheuseofviolenceamongcouples(particularlyofmenagainstwomen).

Wealsoheardcriticismfromthechildrenaboutthelackofdialoguewiththeir fathers,mothersandcarers,andofthe littleamountoftimetheysharewiththem–particularlywhereadultswoulddedicatetimetoenteringandun-derstandingthechildren’sworld.Childrenalsoreportedpain,stressandlackofunderstanding in separationsand familydisruptions thatoccur frequently inallsocialclasses,inallthecountriesresearched.Itisworthwhilepointingoutthattheseparationsanddisruptionsarenotnecessarilyproblematicalinthem-selves–theproblemliesinnotexplainingthereasonsfortheseparationtothechildren,andenteringintoadialoguetoallowthemtobetterunderstandandexpresstheirfeelingsregardingthesituationtheyareexperiencing.

Withregardtodomesticchores,wefoundthatinthelowincomefamiliesinallsixcountries,bothinruralandurbanareas,thechildrenareinvolvedinthesechores,fromatenderage,withlittlepossibilityofchoosingornegotiatinghoworwhichchorestheywishtotakepartin.Inseveralcontexts,theoverloadofdomesticworkcarriedoutbychildrenwasremarkable.Thechildrenalsore-portedthatnotcarryingoutthesechores,wasacommonreasonforthemtobesubjectedtophysicalpunishmentbytheirparents/carers.

Inallthecountries,thechildrensaiditisatschoolandwiththeirfriendsthattheyfindroomforgreaterautonomyandrelationshipsbasedondialogue.Somechildren complained about bullying, about authoritarian teachers, about thelackofsafeplacestomeettheirfriendsandaboutviolentorgossipingfriends.However,generallyspeaking,thechildrenfindroomforgreaterparticipationandautonomywiththeirpeersatschoolorinleisurecentres.

Afterall,whatdothechildrenwant?Theywantmoreaffection.Theywanttobeheard.Theywantsafeenvironmentstomeettheirfriends.Theywanttimetoplaywiththeirparentsandmomentsinwhichtheirparentsstepintotheirinnocentuniverses.It is importanttoemphasizethattheyarenotnecessarilytalkingabout“more”timewiththeirparents,butaboutmoremomentswhenparentsaretotallydevotedtothem.

Ifgenerallyspeakingthepicturewasdiscouraging,wealsofoundgroundsforoptimism,particularlyinthevoicesofthechildrenandparentswhowantchanges andareworking towards them.Generally speaking,parents seem towant other alternatives to physical punishment and want a better future fortheirchildren.


Is another childhood possible 11

Ingeneral,wenoticedthatfamilieswithmoredemocraticandparticipatorypractices in relationshipsbetweenadults andchildrenare the familieswithahigherequityofgender–meaningfamilieswheremenandwomenparticipateinamoreequalwayintheirdomesticandworkinglives.Ontheotherhand,moreparticipatoryfamiliesinfamilyrelationshipsdemonstratetheyhavehadgreateraccesstootherparticipatoryenvironmentsorhad,asarule,moreop-portunities to practice their own citizenship. It may seem obvious, but it isworthpointingoutthatinordertocreateandtooffercitizenshiptochildren,itisnecessarytoofferthesametotheparents.

Consideringthesmallnumberofchildrenwhohadtheopportunityofaneffectiveparticipation–eitherintheirfamiliesoratschool,theresultwasen-couraging:childrenassumeanassertiveposturetowardslife,whichdiffersalotfromasubmissiveandresignedattitude.Inotherwords,childrenwhoaregiventheopportunitytoparticipate,rightfromanearlyage,learnandshowrespecttoothersandfacetheworldwithgreaterself-esteem.

Inthefaceofallthis,isanotherkindofchildhoodpossible?Areotherchild-hoodspossible?Theyare.Buttoachievethem,weneedroomforcitizenshipfortheparentsandcarersthemselves,astheyarequiteoftenoverburdenedwithcontextsofsocialunevenness.Thedifferencesthataffectourregionareexperi-enceddailybythechildren.Thesedifferencesaffectdirectlyanddailythequal-ity of their lives, parental practices and recreate interactions based on stress,violenceandlackofcommunication.

Thechildrenarecomplaining.Theywanttobeheard.Theywanttobepartofafairerworld.Arewecapableoflistening?Areweabletotakeaction?Theyarewaitingforus.

Promundo



1. Introduction

Co-ordinatedbyPromundoandwithtechnicalandfinancialsupportfromSave theChildrenSweden(SCS)and theBernardVanLeerFoundation, themainpurposeofthisstudywastoidentifythefamilypracticesthatpromotetheparticipationofchildren,basedondialogueandunderstandingbetweenadultsandchildren,aswellasthosewhichinhibitorhindersuchparticipation.

Thefamilypracticesinthisstudyweredefinedasasetofparents’behavioursandattitudeswhichtransmittotheirchildrenwaysofbeingandbehavingintheworld.Thisdefinitionconsiders that familypracticeshavecomplexcomposi-tions,i.e.,whatistransmittedandlearntinthisexchangebetweenthechildrenandtheirparents/carerscontainnumerousnuancesthatcreateahistoricallyde-terminedcultureofinteractionbetweenthechildrenandtheadults.Parentsandcarers,wheneducatingchildren,notonlytransmittherulesoflivingtogetherbutalsohelpinbuildingupthechildren’sroleinsociety.

Inthisinvestigation,wehaveassociatedtheconceptofchildparticipationtothedefinitionoffamilypractices.Weunderstandchildparticipationasasetofpracticesthataimtoencourage,stimulateandallowchildrentoexpresstheiropinionsaboutmattersthataffectthem–andthattheseopinionsbetakenintoconsideration. Ineffect, thismeans thatadults should listentochildrenand,moreover,considertheirinput.Webelievethatgettingthechildreninvolvedindialoguesandinteractionsallowsthemtolearnconstructivewaystoinfluencetheworldsurroundingthemandthatthisparticipationshouldbeauthenticandsignificant.

Thus,thisinvestigationwasbasedontheprinciplethatthenotionofchildparticipationwithinfamiliesandcommunitiesisintrinsicallyassociatedtothe



socialrolethatisexpectedfromtheyoungstersineachcontext.Thisrolecanbedeterminedbyeithertheideathatchildrenareonlyincompleteadultsand,assuch,havenorighttobeheardnortovoteinthesocietydecisions,or,onthecontrary,considerandrecognisechildrenasimportantactorsintheconstruc-tionofademocraticandparticipatorysociety,whichtakesintoconsiderationtheneedsandwishesofallitscitizenswithoutdiscriminationofcreed,gender,race,class,nationalityorage.

With the purpose of understanding this complexity, Promundo reunitedpartnersofotherfivecountries fromLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,withvast experience in the approachandanalysisof childhood in their respectivecountries andhas triggered the researchprocess reported in thispublication.Thepartnerswere:

Jamaica:ParentingPartnersCaribbeanMexico:RirikiIntervenciónSocialNicaragua:SocioculturalAnalysisCentreoftheUniversidadCentroameri-canaPeru:InstitutodeFormacionparaEducadoreseJovenes,NinosyAdoles-centesTrabajadoresdeAmericaLatinayelCaribeVenezuela:UniversidadSimonBolivarThebasisofthestudywastohearthevoicesofthechildrenandarticulate

themwiththedifferentfamilypracticesdominantineachstudiedcontext.Tolistentothechildrentomakeitpossibleforthemtoexpressthepracticesthatthey considermost appropriate and as expressedby theVenezuelan childrenwhenrequestedtosendmessagestotheirparentsaboutdisciplinarypracticesintheirfamilies.

8-yearoldboy: “Not to smack themand, if theymisbehave, just talk tothem.”9-yearoldgirl:“Nottosmackthem,begentle,becauseiftheyaresmacked,when they grow up they will beat their children andwill also be full ofhate.”(ChildrenoftheurbanlowincomesettinginVenezuela.)

Basedontheabove,thispublicationisorganisedintwosections.Thefirstonecontainsthetheoreticlimitused,wherewepresentahistoryofthemainstudies regarding the subject throughout history, discussing its limitations.Then,thegeneralcharacteristicsoffamilypracticesinthesocioculturalcontext


15

ofLatinAmericaandtheCaribbeanpresentedalongwithchildren’slegalrightsfromthepointofviewofprotectionandpromotionintheresearchedcountries.Attheendofthissection,themethodologyusedtocarryoutthisinvestigationisdescribed.

Thesecondsectionpresentstheresultsoftheinvestigation.Thepresenta-tionof the results isdivided in two:Part I–ComparativeAnalysis andPartII–Summaryofresearchespercountry.Thefirstpresentsthemainresultsofthecomparativestudy.Theresultsweregroupedin(1)Familypractices,familyinteractionandphysicalpunishment;(2)Familypractices,domesticchoresandchildlabour;(3)Familypracticesandformaleducation;and(4)Familyprac-tices and interaction between children. The final section presents some gen-eralconclusionsandrecommendations.PartIIcontainsthesummariesofthestudiescarriedout ineachcountry.Thesummariesaredividedinfourparts:themaincharacteristicsofthemethodologyused,thegeneralconfigurationsoffamilies,themainfindingsandtherevisedbibliographyineachcountrytakingpartofthisstudy.

Introduction



2. Theoretical framework

Inthissection,wewillreviewsomeresearchesinseveralareaswhichaimedtounderstandthedifferentwaysofeducatingchildren,theimpactandconse-quencesofthisupbringinginthedevelopmentofinfants.Thus,thetheoreticalbodyofthisstudypresentstheconceptsofparentalpractices,parentalstylesandtheirtypologies.Andlast,itpresentsareflectiononthelimitationsofgeneralis-ingtypologiesofparentalstyles,whichleadsustojustifytheoptionoffamilypracticesas lenses for the readingandunderstandingof the familydynamicswithregardstothepromotionofchildparticipationwithinthefamily.

2.1. Theoretical background on the adult-child relationship in families

In spiteof thegrowing interestof researchers invarious areas inmattersrelatedtothebestwayofupbringingchildren,aswellasinstudyingtheseveralconsequencesresultingfromcertainfamilypractices,theexistingliteratureonthesubjectisnotvast,focusingmainlyontheso-calledparentalstyles.Itisim-portanttopointoutthatthroughouttherevisedbibliography,parentalstyles,familypractices,parentalpracticesandeducationalparentalpracticesweretermsusedtodescribetherelationshipbetweenparentsandtheirchildren.

AccordingtoDarling&Steinberg(1993),educationalpracticesrefertothestrategiesusedbyparentstoreachspecificgoalsindifferentdomains(academ-



ic,social,affective).Theyconfirmthatthesocialisingbehavioursofdisciplineandsupportandtheinteractivebehaviourbetweenparentsandchildrenvaryaccordingtoagivencontextand/orsituation.Withregardstoparentalstyle,theauthorsdefinethisasaglobalstandardofcharacteristicsoftheinteractionofparentswithchildreninseveralsituationswhichcreateanemotionalatmo-sphere, i.e.ansettingwhere thebehaviourof theparents isexpressed,whichincludetheparentalpracticesandotheraspectsoftheinteractionparent-childthathaveadefinedobjective,suchas:toneofvoice,bodylanguage,carelessness,moodswings.

The first works in this field suggested typologies of parental styles up-bringing,ofwhich theBaumrind theoreticalmodel (1966) is a landmark inthestudiesthatarebeingcarriedoutontherelationshipbetweenparentsandchildren.Theauthorproposesaconceptofparentalstylethatintegratesbothemotionalandbehaviouralaspects,basedontheparentalcontrolexercisedonthechildren.

Baumrind(1966)proposedaparents1classifyingmodelas:1. Authoritative,i.e.,thosewhotrytodirecttheactivitiesoftheirchildrenin

arationalandorientedway,stimulatingdialogue,reasoningwiththeinfantonwhatmadehim/heractinsuchway–requestinghis/herreasonsforob-jectingwhenthechildrefusestoagree,exertingfirmcontrolonthediverg-ingpointswhileplacingtheirgrown-upperspectivebutwithoutrestrictingthechild,acknowledgingthathe/shehashis/herowninterestsandparticu-larways.However,theseparentsdonotbasetheirdecisionsinconsensusoronthechild’swishes.

2. Authoritarians,i.e.,thosewhomodel,controlandevaluatethechild’sbe-haviouraccordingtoestablishedandusuallyabsolutebehaviourrules,con-sideringobedienceasavirtueandbeinginfavourofpunishingmeasurestodealwiththoseaspectsofthechildwhichclashwithwhattheparentsbelievetobecorrect.

3. Permissive,i.e.,thosewhotrytobehaveinareceptiveandnon-punitivewaytowardsthechild’swishesandactions,presentingthemselvestothechildasresourcesforthefulfilmentoftheirwishesandnotasmodels,andneitherasagentsresponsibleformouldingordirectingtheirbehaviour.

� Refers to parents, carers and/or persons responsible for the upbringing of children.


Theoretical framework 19

Subsequently,Maccoby&Martin (apudWeber et al., 2004) introducedtwodimensions– requirementandresponsiveness– to the studyofparentalstyleswhichallowedthemtoreorganise thetypologyproposedbyBaumrind(1966).Responsiveparentsarethosewhocorrectlyperceivethechild’ssignsandreactinasensitivewaytotheirneeds(Bee,1996).Theseparentsgetinvolvedintheeducationoftheirchildren,respondingtotheneedsthatthechildhasforattention,encouragement,support,dialogueandentertaining.Demandingparentssuperviseandmonitorthebehaviourortheirchildren,demandingobe-diencetorulesandlimitsandthefulfilmentofduties.

Withinthisvision,authoritativeparentsaredemandingandresponsive,i.e.,there is reciprocitywherethechildrenshouldrespondtotheparents’ require-ments,butthesealsoaccepttheresponsibilityofresponding,asmuchaspossible,to thepointsofviewandreasonabledemandsof theirchildren.Authoritativeparentsestablishrulesforthebehaviouroftheirchildrenwhichareconsistentlyemphasized.Theymonitortheirconduct,correctingnegativeattitudesandre-wardingpositive attitudes.Discipline is imposed inan inductivemanner andcommunicationbetweenparentsandchildrenisclearandopen,basedonmutualrespect.Theseareparentsthathavehighexpectationswithregardstothebehav-iouroftheirchildreninrelationtoresponsibilityandmaturity.Besides,theyareaffectionatewheninteractingwiththeirchildren,responsivetotheirneedsandfrequently,askfortheiropinionwhentheyfinditappropriate,encouragingdeci-sionsandprovidingopportunitiesforthedevelopmentoftheirskills.

Authoritarian parents are demanding and non-responsive, i.e., their de-mandswouldnotbebalancedwithacceptingtheirchildren’sneeds,andexpectthechildrentorepress their requestsanddemands.Authoritarianparentsarestrict and autocratic. They impose high levels of demand, establishing strictrules,regardlessofanyparticipationofthechild.Theytendtoemphasizeobe-diencethroughrespectingauthorityandorderandtheyfrequently,usepunish-ment as ameansof controllingbehaviour.They also, giveno importance todialogueandautonomy,reactingwithrejectionandlowresponsivenesstothechild’squestioningandideas(Cecconelloetal.,2003).

Maccoby&Martin(apudWeberetal.,2004)alsoseparatedBaumrind’spermissive style in twocategories: indulgentparents,whoare responsiveandnon-demanding,andnegligentparents,whoareneitherdemandingnorrespon-sivebutinclinedtobeguidedbythearisinginconveniences,whichmakesthemrespond to thechild’s immediate requestswith theonlypurposeof solvingthem.



The indulgent style thus results from the combination of little controlandhighresponsiveness.Indulgentparents,opposedtoauthoritarians,donotimposerulesorlimitstothechild,establishingfewdemandsofresponsibilityandmaturity.Theyare excessively tolerant and receptivewith their children,allowingthechildtomonitorhis/herownbehaviourandtendingtosatisfyanydemandsfromthechild.

The negligent style, on the other hand, results from the combination ofcontrolwithresponsivenessinlowlevels.Negligentparentsareneitheraffectivenordemanding.Theydonotgetveryinvolvedwiththetaskofsocialisingthechild,anddonotmonitorhis/herbehaviour.Theytendtokeeptheirchildrenat bay, responding only to their basic needs. Whereas indulgent parents areinvolvedwiththeirchildren,negligentparentsarefrequentlyfocusedontheirowninterests.(Cecconelloetal.2003).

Inthe90s,atheoryrelatedtotheimpactsofthedifferentparentalstylesonchildren’s’developmentemerges.Bee(1996),affirmsthatcertaineffectsinachild’sdevelopmentcanbeidentifiedaccordingtotheparentalstyleinwhichhe/sheissocialized,andaredescribedasfollows:

Responsiveparents:Parentswhousethisstylehavechildrenthatlearntospeakalittleearlier,havehigherIQsandafastercognitivedevelopment;prob-ablydemonstrateconfidentaffection,aremoreobedienttoadults’requestsandaresociallymorecompetent.

Authoritativeorcompetentparents:Demonstratemoreconsistentpositiveresults,incaseswheretheparentsshowhighlevelsofbothcontrolandaffection,establishing clear limits, but also responding to the child’s individual needs.Childrenbroughtupinthesefamiliesusuallyhavehigherself-esteem,aremoreindependentandcanalsopresentamorealtruisticbehaviour.

Authoritarianparents:Childrengrowingupinauthoritarianfamilies–withhighlevelsofdemandandcontrolbutrelatively lowlevelsofaffectionorre-sponsiveness–don’tdosowellatschool,areusuallylesscleverwiththeirpeersthanchildrenfromotherkindsoffamiliesandhavelowself-esteem.Someofthesechildrenseemsubdued;otherscanexpresshighlevelsofaggressivenessordisplaysignsofbeingoutofcontrol.

Permissiveparents:Childrenwithindulgentorpermissiveparentsalsodisplaysomenegativeresults.Theydon’tdoverywellatschool,theyareusuallymoreaggressive-particularlyiftheparentsarespecificallypermissivewithregardstoaggressiveness–andmoreimmatureintheirbehaviourwithschoolmates.Theyarelesslikelytotakeoverresponsibilitiesandarelessindependent.



Indulgentparents:Themoreconsistentnegativeresultsareassociatedtothispattern.Thepsychologicalunavailabilityofparentsisoneofthecharacteristicsfrequentlyfoundinchildrenevaluatedas“insecure/avoiding”basedonananal-ysisbytheAttachmentTheory(BowlbyapudBee,1996).Themothermaybedepressedoroverwhelmedbyotherlifeconcernsandsimplyhasnotestablishedadeepemotionalrelationshipwiththechild.

Fromthisbriefpanoramaontheimpactsofparentalstylesuponchilddevel-opment,severalstudieshighlightthepositiveinfluenceoftheauthoritativestyleonthepsychologicaldevelopmentofchildrenandadolescents.Thisstylewouldberelatedtosocialcompetence,assertivenessandindependentbehaviourofchil-dren(Baumrind,1966).Inadolescents,itwouldbeassociatedtobetterlevelsofpsychologicaladaptation,socialcompetence,self-esteem,academicperformance,self-confidenceandlowlevelsofbehaviour,anxietyanddepressionproblems.Ontheotherhand,theauthoritarian,indulgentandnegligentstylesseemtobere-latedtoahigherincidenceofnegativeresultsindevelopment,suchasbehaviourproblems,drugsabuse,schoolfailureandlowself-esteem.(Cecconello,2003).

Theauthoritativeparentalstylewouldfurthermorebemorestronglyrelatedto a seriesof aspectsof thedevelopment seen aspositivewhencompared totheotherstyles,suchaspsychosocialmaturity,schoolperformanceandseveralindicatorsofbehaviouraladequacy.Generally,itissuggestedthattherequire-mentdimensionwouldbeassociatedtotheadjustmentofthechild’sbehaviour,with consequent reduction of misguiding behaviour, whereas the dimensionofresponsivenesswouldfavourthedevelopmentofpositiveself-opinion,self-confidenceandpsychologicalwellbeing.However,manyotherissuesrelatedtotheinfluenceoftheparentalstyleinthedevelopmentofadolescentsneedtobefurtherinvestigated,suchasthepossibledifferentialeffectsoftheeducationalpracticesoffathersandmothersonthedevelopmentandalsothepossiblevari-ationsthatmayexistindifferentculturalgroups(Costa,2000).

2.2. The limits of generalisation: different types of parental styles

Itcanbesaidthat,ingeneral,thestudiesonparentalpracticesandstylesaredividedintwolargegroups:1. Studiesthattrytoexplainthedifferencesbetweentheparents’educational

practices;2. Studies that analyse the consequences of the different educating ways of

parentsuponthedevelopmentoftheirchildren.



These studies were carried out with the purpose of isolating factors thatinfluence the educational styles andpractices.Thereare a seriesofoutstand-ingstudiesthatattemptedtoexplaintheparents’practicesaccordingtofamilystructures(suchasthenumberofchildren,orderofbirthandgender)andwithother characteristics such as separations, widowhood, family reconciliation.Apartfromthese,alsoimportantareotherstudiesthataimtoexplaintheparen-talstylesaccordingtothesocialclassoforigin.

Theresearchescarriedoutwithemphasisinthediverseculturalandsocial-economiccontextsindicatethedangerofgeneralisingtheconclusionsofthesestudiestothedifferentsocietiesconfiguredintheworld–andevenwithinonesamesociety.Thisisduetothefactthatthereareseveralintermediatevariablesthatinfluencenotonlythewayinwhichtheparentsrelatetotheirchildrenbutalsotheconsequencesofthesocializingpracticesusedbythem.Theseinterme-diatevariablesrefertothesocioculturalcontext,thefamilycontext,theparents’lifehistoryandthechilditself.

Emphasizing the concernwith thegeneralisationof certain typologiesofparentalstylesuniversalizingitseffectsonthechilddevelopment,Montandon(2005)says:

“Very quickly (...) it was clear that working on global correlations between social surroundings and family upbringing practices resulted in interpretations that do not take into consideration inter-individual variations and nuances of atti-tudes and practices within the social surroundings. The rare studies that carefully examine these points nowadays, i.e. that carry out studies of cases in families, indicate the complexity of the problem: the multiplicity of factors that should be taken into account, apart from belonging to a social surrounding such as a family history, the type of family functioning, the integration of the family within the community etc.”(Montandon,2005,p.489).

Whilerevisingthedifferentstudiescarriedoutonthefactorsthatinfluencetheparentalstylesandpractices,theauthorhighlightstheimportanceoftakingintoaccountnotonlythesocialsurroundingstowhichthefamilybelongs,butalsothe familytype, thecultureandthe lifecycleof this family.Thiscanbedeterminedby several events such asunemployment, illness, accidents,birthofachildwithspecialneeds,whichoriginatechangesandrestructuringinthepersonal relationswithin this family, and thushaving an impactonparentalstyles.



Figure1showssomesocio-culturaldeterminantsinfamilyupbringing,whichindicatehowcomplexthestudyofthisthemecanbe.Therefore,oneshouldbealerttotherisksandlimitsofdiscussingthebehaviourofchildrenasbeingexclu-sivelyresultingoftheirrelationshipwithparentsand/ormaincarers.

(Source: Montandon (2005), p. 491.)

Besidesthesocialclass,theculturalcontextandthefamilylifecycleasfac-torsthathaveaninfluenceonparentalstylesandpractices,Montandon(2005)pointsoutaveryrelevantcomponentwhichhasadirectinfluenceinthesocial-izingpracticesusedbyparents:therepresentationstheyhaveaboutwhichisthebestupbringingtooffertheirchildren.Theserepresentationsaredirectlyrelatedtotheirviewsaboutchildhoodwhich,inturn,is insertedinaspecificsocial,culturalandeconomiccontext.

Figure 1

Somesocial-culturaldeterminantsoffamilyupbringing

Social-culturalContext

Cultural dimensions:

-values-rules-ethno-theories,etc.

Social dimensions:

-socialstructures-politicalsystem-educationalsystem-socialservicesetc.

FamilyContext

Family Structure

-Constitution(twoparental,mono-parental,reconciledetc)-numberofchildren

Family functioning

Cultural Belonging

Social Surrounding(levelofeducation,professionetc)

Country

Parents’ educational

practices

(objectives,methods,projectsetc.)

Other educational contexts:

-school-schoolmates-neighborhood-mediaetc

Children

Child’s characteristics

-age-gender-hierarchy-featuresetc.

Child’s Experience

Child’s turn out

-schoolcareer-personality-socialinsertionetc

ClassicrelationsSimple“intercultural”relationsComplex“intercultural”relationsRelationstakingintoaccountthechild’spointofview



ConsideringtheconcernspointedoutbyMontandon(2005),regardingtherisksandlimitsofgeneralizingthestudiesonparentalstylesforsociallyandcul-turallydistinctcontexts,wehaveevaluatedthattocarryoutananalysisonhowparentsrelatetotheirchildrenfromEuropeanandNorthAmericantheoreticalframeworks, putting intopractice aparticular framing in a specificparentalstyleandnotonanother,wouldweakentheunderstandingofthecomplexityrelatedtotheinteractionbetweenparents(orcarers)andtheirchildren.

WithinthedifferentcontextsofthesixcountriesstudiedinLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,thefamilydynamicspresentedthemselvesverydistinctivelyaccordingtocircumstances,situationsandlivedmoments.Thespeechesofthechildrenandparentsinallthecountriesledustounderstandthatthesefamiliesdonotfitintooneparentalstyleonly,butshowelementsofdifferentstylesintheparent-childrelationship.Therefore,weestimatedthatthestudyofthepa-rentalpracticeswouldleadustoabetterunderstandingastohowthefamiliesareorganizedinrelationtoeducatingtheirchildren,especiallyreferringtothecreationofspacesforthechildparticipation.


3. Context of the Study

3.1 General characteristics of family practices in the sociocultural context in Latin America and the Caribbean2

Generally,itcanbesaidthattheprocessofcolonisationhadastronginflu-enceinthefamilyhouseholdrelationsinallLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,andconsequentlyinthefamilypracticesandtheparentalstylesprevailingintheareas.Markedbyanextremelyviolentprocessofculturalassimilationonthenativepeople,thecolonisationseparatedevenmorethesocialclassesexistingintheXVcentury.Theslave-basedsocietiesprevailedinthebeginningofthecolo-nisation,butthroughouttheyearssufferedtheinfluenceoftheidealspertinenttotheindustrialrevolutionandtheFrenchrevolution.

2 For further explanation of the theme, please consult: MCCAA, R. (1997) Child Marriage and Complex Families (cemithualtin) among the Ancient Aztec (Nahua). ColonialHistoryWorkshop,UniversityofMinnesota.www.hist.umn.edu/~rmccaa/NAHUAEN3/nacolhst.PELLICER,L.F.(2005)Entre el Honor y la Pasión. Familia, matrimonio y sistema de valores en Venezuela durante la crisis del orden hispánico (1778-1820),FondoEditorialdeHumanidades,UniversidadCentraldeVenezuela,Caracas.EVANS,H.(1989)Perspectives on the socialization of the working class Jamaican Child,SocialandEconomicStudies,Volume38,no3,177-203.DELPRIORI,M.(2000).História das crianças no Brasil.SãoPaulo:Contexto,Brasil.MAJLUF,A.yOjeda,G.(2006)Relación entre tradicionalismo y prácticas de crianza, RevistaPsicológicaHerediana,I(1):28-38.


Family practices and child participation2�

ThecurrentpeoplefromLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,stronglybrand-edby crossbreeding, initially derived frommillenary Indian cultural featuresassociatedtotheEuropeanpeopleandtotheconversiontoChristianity,whichaimedessentiallyat“civilizing the savages”.Thisculturalassimilationprocessimposedanunprecedentedsituationofsymbolicviolencewithinthenativena-tions,butat the sametime,made itunacceptable tomaintain thenatives incaptivity.

ThebanningofslaveworkforthoseconvertedtoChristianitylinkedtothemassacre of the native nations, initiated the period that introduces the slaveworkoftheAfricanpeople.Then,predominantlyinsomecountries,asecondgroupofmixed race takesplace and, associated to theEuropeanand Indiancomponent, adds to the legacybroughtby theAfricanpeople.Thesepeoplewerebrought likeanimals,butpossessedstrongcultural identitiesand,whencrossed,theyproducedthestrongmixedracefeaturesoftheAmericas.

Thus, the children and the family configurations gradually changed andadaptedtothecolonialenterprise.Distinctivedifferences,i.e.,thosemarkedbythecolouroftheskin,profession,genderandsocialclass,definedthedistinctmeaningofchildhoodduringtheentirecolonisationprocess.Whilethechil-drenoftheupperclasseswereentitledtonannies,schoolingandculturallife,thechildrenoftheslaveswereperceivedaspropertyoftheirmasters,whowereentitledtotradethemfreely.

TherepublicangoalsoftheXIXcenturydeterminedtheproclamationofindependencefromthecolonialpowerintheentireregionandbroughtwithittheinfluenceoftheFrenchilluminism.Thisfact,whileinspiringtheabolition-istactivities,installedasenseofchildhoodthoughtofaswild,meaningless,un-protected,frailandignorant.Theentireconstructionofarepublicannationwasbasedonthepossibilityofraisingandmouldingthechildrensothat,withtheeducationacquiredfromthenuclearfamiliesandschools,theywouldbecomethe citizens (and workers) needed for the development of a nation that wasdemocraticandfreeofecclesiasticalcontrolorinfluence.

In the first half of the XX century families maintained the traditionalcharacter (patriarch, nuclear, natural and sacred), necessary to maintain therepublican order. However, the industrialization process, the fast urban de-velopment,thesexualrevolution,theincreaseofqualifiedfemalelabourforceandthepost-warhumanrightsmovements–intensifiedbythebubblysixtiesintheXXcentury–introducedradicalchangestothetraditionalfamilypat-ternsandconsequentlyintheideologicalconstructionofchildhood.Science


Context of the Study 27

anditsassumptionsbecomethemainreferentialpointfortheunderstandingofchildhood,offamilies,ofgenderandlabourrelationsandtheroleofsocialprotection.

Reflectingaboutthesocio-culturalcontextspreviouslydescribed,itcanbedeclaredthatthefamilypracticesstartedtheirdevelopmentassumingthatcer-tainsubjectshavemorerightsthanothersandthatthoselesscapablecanevenbephysicallypunished.Asahistoricallandmark,inLatinAmericaandtheCa-ribbeanthereisanumberofextremelyhierarchicalandmeritocraticalsocietiesthatconsideredthemale,adult,white(Caucasian)andbelongingtothedomi-nantclassesasnormalstandard.InononehandthedemocratizationprocesswhichtookplaceattheendoftheXXCenturyalloverthecontinenthasbeengeneratingamoreegalitarianlegalguaranteeofrights;theauthoritarianismandtheinequalityarestillpresentinsocialrelations.Thisauthoritarianismlogicisimpregnatedinthewaysofcoexistenceofbosseswiththeiremployees,ofmenwithwomen,ofyouthswiththeelderlyandveryfrequentlyofallthesegroupswithchildren.

Ifweaddtoallthisthecontextofextremepovertyinwhichaconsiderablenumberofthispopulationintheseareasliveinandtheeconomicfragilityofthemiddleclassintimesofproductiverestructuring,wewillhavelimit-situations,reproducing extremely authoritarian familypractices.As an example,we canmentionthedilemmaofthemotherwho,inordertostophersonfrombeingkilledinanarmedconfrontationbetweenpoliceofficersanddrugdealersinanurbansettingveryfrequentinBrazil,beatshimuptoforcehimtostayindoors.ThisistoldtousbyaBrazilianchild:

“The nickname of the boy who died was ‘Caveirinha’ (Little Skull), he was seven years old and was from the State of Paraiba (in the Northeast of Brazil). On the day of the funeral my mother told me that was the reason why she wouldn’t let me go to the streets. On children’s day the police couldn’t care less”.(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting).

Thesearetheeverydayeventsthatcontinuetoreinforceinthefamiliesandofcourse,inthechildren,basicsofpower,classandauthoritarianismconsid-ered“normal”,thisleadsustoaquestion:“whatdegreeofchildparticipationdoweimaginepossibleincontextswhereparticipationingeneralisaprivilegeforfew?”



3.2. Legal framework for the protection and promotion of chil-dren in the countries researched.

ThelegalframeworkofallthecountriesparticipatingintheresearchwasstronglyinfluencedbytheChildren’sRightsConvention(CRC)thatwasad-optedbytheGeneralAssemblyoftheUnitedNationson20November,1989andconfirmedatdifferentoccasionsby192membercountries.TheCRCin-auguratesanewwayofviewingchildrenandadolescents,givingthemadis-tinguishedandprioritytreatmentforbeingdevelopinghumanbeings.Thisishowthefullprotectiondoctrineappears.Childrenandteenagersarenolongerobjectswithrightsandbecomesubjectswithrights,withunrestrictedandprivi-legedaccesstoJustice.ProtectionisnolongersoleobligationofthefamilyandtheStateandthesocietyareequallyresponsiblefortheprotectionoftherightsofchildrenandteenagers.

TherighttochildparticipationisexplicitlydefinedinArticles12,13,14,15e17oftheCRCthatdealsrespectivelywiththerightofthechildtofreelyexpresshis/heropinions;freedomofexpression;freedomofthinking,ofcon-scienceandbelief;tofreedomofassociationandpeacefulmeetingsandtohaveaccesstoinformationanddatafromvariousnationalandinternationalsources,especiallythoseaimingatthepromotionoftheirsocial,spiritualandmoralwellbeingandphysicalandmentalhealth.

Withintheprotectionlawsforchildhoodineachcountryresearched,thefollowingcanbepointedout3:

BRAZIL:Createdon13July,1990,theChildandAdolescentStatute(CTS)wasinstitutedasFederalLawnumber.8.069(incompliancewitharticle227oftheFederalConstitution).TheConstitutionalAmendmentnumber20-of15December1998–confirmstheminimalageof14yearstowork,accordingtotheConvention138oftheInternationalOrganizationofLabour.

NICARÁGUA:In1998,theChildandAdolescentCodewasapprovedandin2001, theLaw forPromotion andFullDevelopmentofYouth came intoforce.

MÉXICO:In1999,article4thof theMexicanConstitution iscreatedtoincludetherightsofChildhoodandinApril2000,theLawforProtectionoftheRightsofBoysandGirlsisapproved.

VENEZUELA:InOctober1999theOrganicLawforChildandAdoles-centProtectionwaspublished,comingintoforceinApril2000.Theapprovalofthislawwasobtainedafteravastconsultationandsocialmobilisationwiththe


Context of the Study 29

participationofuniversities,politicalparties,privateinstitutions,governmentorganisms,thechurch,themediaandyoungpeople,throughthechildren’spar-liaments.

PERU:In1993,theNewChildrenandTeenagers’Codecameintoforce,andin2000itwasrevisedtoextendtheexistingprotectionintheformerlegisla-tiontocomplywiththeCRC.

JAMAICA:Afteranextensivepublicconsultationcarriedoutthroughoutseveralyearswithgovernmentorganismsandthecivilsociety,theLawforChildProtectionandCarewasapprovedinMarch2004.Thislawaimstopreservetherightsalreadyguaranteedbythepreviouslegislation,correctanomalies,andincorporatetheelementsrequiredtoservetherequirementsoftheCRC.



4. Methodology

4.1. Understanding the family practices in Latin America and the Caribbean: Methodological paths

Consideringthecomplexityoftheobjectofthisinvestigation,thechoicewastocarryoutaqualitativetypemulticentreexploratorystudy.Theaimwastodeveloparesearchproposalthatwouldenablethehearingofspeeches,especiallythosemadebychildren,tocreateasetofrecommendationsthatwouldsubsidisetheunderstandingoftherelationbetweenfamilypracticesandtheparticipationofchildren.Theoverallpurposeofthestudywastoidentifytheconceptionsoffamilypractices thatpromoteornot theparticipationofchildrenwithin thefamilyrange.

Thespecificobjectiveswere:(1)Toidentifyexistingfamilypracticesthoughasurveyandreflectionondif-

ferentattitudes,valuesandbehaviouroffathers,mothersandcarers(2)Toidentifythefactorsassociatedwiththepromotionornotofthepartici-

pationofchildreninthefamilyrangefromthespeechesofparents,moth-ers,carersandthechildrenthemselves.

Themainquestionofthestudywasdefinedas:whatarethefactorsassoci-atedtotheconceptionsofthefamilypracticesthatpromotetheparticipationofchildreninthecontextsresearched?Andtheanswertothisquestion,thefollow-ingfieldsofactionandbasisofanalysisweredefined:

The main objective of considering the territorial diversities and the classdifferencesexistingineachcountry,thecollectionofdatawouldbecarriedoutinthedifferentcontexts



Fields of action of the adult-child relationship

Basis of Analysis

• Child labour and domestic chores.• Formal education.• Family conflicts/disruptions.• Discipline/punishment.• Family interaction.• Interaction between the children.

• Children’s age/capacity of involve-ment.• Gender.• Family practice differences between the carers (what they think and what the other adults do).• Implied beliefs in speeches that can explicit the logic of behaviours and at-titudes of fathers, mothers, carers and children).

Withthepurposeofconsideringtheterritorialdiversitiesandtheclassdif-ferencesexistingineachcountry,thecollectionofdatawouldbecarriedoutinthreedifferentsettings:rurallowincome,urbanlowincomeandurbanmiddleclass.Two distinctive types of public were targeted in the study: (1) fathers,mothersandthecarerswithchildrenbetweenzeroandtwelveyearsofageand(2)childrenbetweensevenandtwelveyearsold.Foreachpublic,uniquedatacollectionmethodologieswerecreated.

Forthechildren,groupactivitieswerechosenwiththepurposeofunder-standingtheirperspectiveaboutthewaywithwhichtheirparentsorthecarerraise them, and the different participation spaces within their families. Eachcountrychosethemethodsfortheirwelcomeandhowtoleadtheconsultationwith the children.Children’s stories and songsperformedbypopular singersfromeachcountrywereusedtomakeiteasierforthechildrentoparticipateandtheywereabletoexpressthemselvesverballyandthroughdrawings.

Individual interviews were also carried out with two children from eachgroup, a boy and a girl.These childrenwere chosen froman analysis of thedatabankthattheybroughtalongtothemeetingsandthatindicatedthepossi-bilityofthesechildren’sparentsweremoreparticipatorythanthoseoftheotherchildren.

Theactivitieswith the childrenpreceded the focal groups and the inter-viewscarriedoutwiththeadults,sothattheopinionexpressedbythechildrencouldformatthequestionstobeusedwiththeparentsandcarers.Theresearchprotocoland the instrumentsused for thedatacollectionweredevelopedby


Methodology 33

Promundoandadaptedineachcountry.Insummary,thisprotocolproposedthefollowingactivities:

(1)Literaturereviewonthesubjectineachcountry.(2)Selectionofthecommunitiesandlogisticpreparationforthefieldresearch.(3)Consultationcarriedoutwithchildrenaged7to12yearsold.(4)Interviewswithchildren.

Age Rural setting

Urban ContextMiddle class

Urban ContextLow income class

7 to 9 years 1 group 1 group 1 group


(5)Carryingoutoffocalgroupswithfathers,mothersandcarers;

Age of children

Rural setting


Urban Context Low income class

0 to � years 1 group 1 group 1 group


0 to � / 7 to 12 / 0 to 12 years (optional)

1 group 1 group 1 group

(6)Realizationof individual interviewswithparents,mothers and carerswho showed themselves as being more and less participatory after the focalgrouptookplace.(seedefinitioninthechartbelow).

Interviewed Rural setting


Urban ContextLow income class

Fathers, mothers and carers

2 more involved

1 less involved

2 more involved

1 less involved

2 more involved

1 less involved

Those fathers,mothers and carerswho in their reports showed that theyconsider their children as subject of rights, were defined as more involved.Whentalkingtotheirchildren,theypresentpointsofnegotiationandconsult-ingtheiropinions,takingthemintoconsiderationwhenmakingimportantde-



cisions.Theseparentsalsouseconversationtosolveconflictsinsteadofviolenceor physical punishment and they choose non violent methods of discipline,whichstimulatereflectioninthechildren.

Thefathers,mothersandcarersdefinedaslessparticipatorywerethosewhoseetheirchildrenasobjectstobeshapedandcontrolled.Theyrarelyorneverusemethodsofnegotiationordialogueandtheyusephysicalpunishmenttoresolvedisagreements,choosingveryseverepunishmentmethods,inparticulartheuseofbluntobjects.

Asco-ordinatoroftheresearch,PromundowasalsoresponsibleformakingsurethatalltheethicalproceduresestablishedbythecodeofconductofSavetheChildrenSwedenwerefollowedduringthestudy.

Themethodofanalysiswasbasedonthefieldsofactionoftherelationshipadult-childwhichguidedthepreparationofthestudymethodology.Theareasoftheanalysispreviouslypresentedwereusedtoidentifythefactorsassociatedwiththepromotionornotoftheparticipationofchildreninthefamilysetting.Theanalysisprovidedthemappingoftheseveralexistingfamilypracticesinthestudiedcontexts,andalsodescribedthecharacteristicsandpossiblefactorsthatallowsomefamiliestobemoredemocraticandopentotheparticipationofthechildren.


5. Part I: Comparative Analysis

5.1. Results

Thissectionpresentsthemainresultsoftheinvestigation,whichwerecom-parativelyanalysedbetweenthesixcountriesresearched.Thefamilypracticesarerelatedwiththefollowingfieldsofaction:familyinteractionandphysicalpunishment,domestic chores andchild labour, formal educationandfinally,with interactionbetween thechildren.Thecomparativeanalysisbetween thecountriesprovidedawiderunderstandingoftherealityoffamiliesinthecon-textofLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean.

Among the families of adults studied, thewomenconfirmed thehighestnumber of informants of the study, standing for 80% of the participants inBrazil,60%inJamaica,80%inMexico,79%inNicaragua,70%inPeruand85%inVenezuela.Regardingethnicity,thecrossbred/colouredpredominated(49%inBrazil,73%inNicaragua,77%inPeru)overtheblackandwhiteraces,andthepredominantreligionwastheCatholicism(70%ofinterviewsinBrazil,77%inMexico,58%inNicaraguaand82%inPeru)followedbytheevangeli-calorprotestant.

Childrenandadultsreportedlivinginfamilieswithahistoryofdisruptionandmaritalreconstruction,post-divorceorseparation.Episodesofmaritaldis-ruptionappearednotonlyintheoneparentfamiliesbutalsointhosefamiliesofnuclearandextendedconfiguration,wherestepmothersandstepfathersweredescribedasmembersofthefamily.

Therewasasimilarityoffamilyconfigurationbetweenallthecountries(asshowninTable1),especiallyinthegroupsarisingfromthelowincome“set-



Cou

ntr

yC

onte

xtB

razi

lJa

mai

caM

éxic

oN

icar

água

Peru

Ven

ezue

la

Urb

an

low

in

com

e cl

ass

- Ext

ende

d fa

mili

es a

s re

fere

nce;

- St

orie

s of

m

arita

l di

srup

tions

and

rec

-on

cilia

tions

;-

Hea

ded

by w

omen

;-

Loss

of

rela

tives

in

viol

ent

confl

icts

- Fa

mili

es h

eade

d by

w

omen

;-

Fam

ily

mem

bers

liv

ing

abro

ad;

- D

ifficu

lties

to

gr

aphi

cally

rep

rese

nt

the

exte

nded

fam

ily.

- C

ombi

natio

n of

nu-

clea

r an

d ex

tend

ed

fam

ilies

he

aded

by

m

en;

- Fa

mily

m

embe

rs

livin

g ab

road

(m

igra

-tio

n).

- N

umer

ous

and

ex-

tend

ed

fam

ilies

as

re

fere

nce;

- Fa

mili

es h

eade

d by

w

omen

;-

Fam

ily

mem

bers

liv

ing

abro

ad.

(Mi-

grat

ion)

.

- St

orie

s of

m

arita

l di

srup

tions

an

d re

-co

ncili

atio

ns;

- N

umer

ous

and

ex-

tend

ed

fam

ilies

as

re

fere

nce;

- A

ctiv

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of g

rand

mot

hers

;-

Stor

ies

of

mar

ital

disr

uptio

ns

and

re-

conc

iliat

ions

;- v

iole

nce

in th

e co

m-

mun

ity

Urb

an m

ediu

m

clas

s- N

ucle

ar fa

mily

; - S

ingl

e m

othe

rs;

- St

orie

s of

m

arita

l di

srup

tions

an

d re

c-on

cilia

tions

;-

Part

icip

atio

n of

fa-

ther

s an

d st

epfa

ther

s.

- Fa

mily

m

embe

rs

livin

g ab

road

;- E

xten

ded

fam

ilies

as

refe

renc

e;-

Stor

ies

of

mar

ital

disr

uptio

ns a

nd r

ec-

onci

liatio

ns;

- A

ctiv

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of f

athe

rs a

nd s

tep-

fath

ers.

- N

ucle

ar

fam

ilies

he

aded

by

men

and

w

omen

.

- Pr

otec

tion

spac

e fo

r th

e ch

ildre

n, sp

ecia

lly

the

boys

.

- N

ucle

ar fa

mily

;-

Hig

h le

vel o

f edu

ca-

tion

of p

aren

ts.

- N

ucle

ar fa

mily

;-

Stor

ies

of

mar

ital

disr

uptio

ns

and

re-

conc

iliat

ions

;

Rur

al s

etti

ng

- Nuc

lear

fam

ily;

- Sto

ries

of m

arita

l dis-

rupt

ions

and

reco

ncili

-at

ions

;-

Activ

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

of f

athe

rs a

nd s

tepf

a-th

ers.

- N

umer

ous

and

ex-

tend

ed

fam

ilies

as

re

fere

nce;

- St

orie

s of

m

arita

l di

srup

tions

and

rec

-on

cilia

tions

;-

Fam

ilies

hea

ded

by

wom

en.

- N

umer

ous

fam

ily;

- C

ombi

natio

n of

nu-

clea

r an

d ex

tend

ed

fam

ilies

he

aded

by

m

en.

- N

umer

ous

and

ex-

tend

ed fa

mily

- N

umer

ous

and

ex-

tend

ed fa

mily

.-

Num

erou

s an

d ex

-te

nded

fam

ilies

;-

Exch

ange

of

ch

il-dr

en

betw

een

pa-

rent

s;-

Stor

ies

of

mar

ital

disr

uptio

ns

and

re-

conc

iliat

ions

.

Tabl

e 1

– D

ispl

ay o

f fam

ily c

onfig

urat

ions

by

cont

ext

and

coun

try

stud

ied


Part I: Comparative Analysis 37

tings”.These featuredextended families in theirmajorityheadedbywomen,andorganisedinawaythatenabledthemtofacesituationsassociatedwithun-employment,lowsalariesandviolencewithinthefamilysettingandtheneigh-bourhood.Intheseconfigurations,notonlythefigureofthegrandmother,butalsoanetworkoffamilymembers,distantrelativesandneighboursappearedtohelpinraisingthechildren.Whendescribingtheirfamilies,thechildrendidtrytorepresenttheminthetraditionalmanner,withthemother,fatherandsiblingfigureswelldefined.However,whendescribingtheirdailylife,thechildrenre-portedthecomplicatedsettingswhicharenecessarytoreproducethesociallifeintheircommunities.

5.1.1. Family practices, family interaction and physical punishment

Familyinteractionreferstotheexperiencethechildrenandadultsgothroughinthedailypatternsofrelationshipsintheirfamilies,especiallyregardingthedisplayofaffectioninfamilies(positiveandnegative),therulesandstrategiesandtheresourcestoresolvedisciplinaryconflicts.Therewasananalysiscarriedouttofindoutiffamiliesestablisheddifferencesintheupbringingoftheirchil-drenbasedontraditionalgenderroles.

Regardingthedisciplinaryrules,specialattentionwasgiventotheuseofphysicalandhumiliatingpunishment3.AccordingtotheCRC,article194,everychildmustbeprotectedineverywayfromphysicalandmentalviolence.Inthissense,theanalysisofthedatacollectedintheresearchaimedtounderstandthesituationswherephysicalandhumiliatingpunishmentoccurred,aswellasthepossibilitiesofdevelopingalternativefamilypractices,i.e.,resultingfrommoreauthoritativepractices5.

Generallyspeaking,thestudyshowedthatthefamilyinteractionconcernedthesocialspaceofthefamily,whichwasdiverselymentionedaslookingafter

4Understoodhereasawayofviolenceappliedbyanadultwiththeintentionofdisciplinetocorrectorchangeanunwantedbehaviour.It’stheuseofforcecausingphysicaloremotionalpaintothechildoradolescentinvolved.5http://www.ohchr.org/spanish/law/crc.htm.6Aspreviouslymentioned,modelsthataimtoincentivatethedialoguewhenmakingfamilydecisions,includingthosethatthechildrendislike.See:BAUMRIND,D.(1966).Effectsofauthoritativecontrolonchildbehavior.Child Development, 37,887-907,&DARLING,N.;STEINBERG,L.(1993).Parentingstyleascontext:Anintegrativemodel.Psychological Bulletin, 113,487-496.



(viewoftheparents)andtobelookedafter(viewofthechildren).Accordingtothechildren,parentsareresponsiblefortheupbringingoftheirchildrenandthis includes feeding,giving loveandaffectionand supervising their actions.Alsofortheparents,theword“responsibility”wasthemostusedtodefinetheirroleinthefamily.

However,theresponsibilityofthefatherandmotherintheupbringingoftheirchildrenwasdescribedfollowingagenderdistributionofwork,whereitistheman’sresponsibilitytosupportallthefamilyanddisciplinethechildrenwithauthorityandthewoman’sdutyisthedailycareofthehometheupbring-ingofthechildren.Womenwerepointedoutashavingamaternal“nature”,ca-pableofshowingaffectionandperceivingtheneedsofthechildren.Theabsenceofthemalefigureinthefamiliesmanagedbywomenwasseenasanoverburden,becauseinthosefamiliesthewomenalsohavetoestablishlimits,asifthiswasatypicallymaleactivity.

Thedatafoundinthestudycorroboratesotherresearches6thathavedem-onstratedthat,withregardtotheupbringingofchildreninlowincomecom-munities, there is a strong hierarchy between parents and children, and theupbringingisunderstoodasaunilateralpracticeofauthority.Therespectforgrown-ups,particularlyparents,isafundamentalvalue,basedonobedience,butmainlycharacterizedbynon-challengingtheparents’sauthority.Itisimportanttoemphasizethatthedomesticorganisationbasedonthetraditionaldivisionofroles,wherethemanisthefinancialproviderandthewomanthecarerforthehome,thechildrenandthehusband,appearsmuchmoreasanidealtobepur-suedthanthetruereality.Asitwaspossibletoverifyinthestudy,thenumberoffamiliesledbywomenisincreasinglyhigher.However,eventhoughthewomanappearsasacentralfigure, recentstudies inurban lowincomeenvironmentsshowthat,inthesefamilies,thetraditionalvaluesandpatriarchalstandardsstillprevail,reassertingthemaleauthority.

Itisworthemphasizingthatthemothersthathadtheopportunityofex-pandingtheirexperienceaswomeneitherbyquestioningthetraditionalstan-dardsofgenderorbytakingonamorebalancedpositionandpostureinthefamilyoratwork,alsodisplayamoreparticipatoryroleintheupbringingoftheirchildren.Theyregardthechildrenascompletebeings,withskillsandabili-

6BEM,L.A.;WAGNER,A.(2006)Reflexões sobre a construção da parentalidade e o uso de estratégiaseducativas em famílias de baixo nível socioeconômico.Psicologia em Estudo, Maringá,v.11,n.1,p.63-71,jan/abr..



ties;thedisciplinarystrategiesincludedialogue,negotiationandlisteningtothechild’sopinionwhenmakingdecisionswhichinvolvethemdirectlyandthataresuitablefortheirage.

Thepositivedisplaysofaffectionreportedbyadultsandchildrenregisteredwerehugsandkisses,receivinggiftsandperformingdomesticchores.Thegroupsofchildrenfromseventonineyearsofageandtheparentsofchildrenwithinthissameagebracketintheurbansettingreportedgreaterphysicalproximitywhendisplayingaffection.

“My father has a sponge and he keeps rubbing it on my foot and it tickles and I laugh” (Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting).“Hugging, kissing and praising when they deserve it” (Mexicanmother,ruralsetting).

Aninterestingfact is thatmanyofthedisplaysofaffection,accordingtothechildren’sperception,wererelatedtothefactthattheywerewellbehaved.Therewereveryfewreportsonspontaneousdisplaysofaffectionoraspartofaplayfulinteractionbetweenparentsandchildren.Urbanmiddleclassadultsandchildrenreportedmoreavailabilitynotonlyforadialoguebasedrelationshipbutalsoforspontaneousdisplaysofaffection.

Theviewofmaternityandpaternityinthemiddleclassesinallcountrieswasalsomorepositivethanthoseshownintheruralsettingandurbanlowincomesetting.Themiddleclassparentshaveanotherviewthatrelatesthesedutiestopersonalaccomplishmentandpleasure,meaningthatitisachoicemadecon-sciouslyandnot“naturally”.Financialsecurityandthepossibilityofhavingagreateraccesstothesocialnetofeducation,health,leisureandhousing,amongothers,seemstogivethesefamiliesthesecuritytocarryouttheirdutiesasfather,mother,grandmotheretc.Ontheotherhand,theoverburdenofworkandtheeconomicinstabilityseemtodirectlyharmthefamilyrelations.Relatedfactorssuchasalcoholism,domesticviolenceandunemployment,amongothers,causeparents,especiallythoseoftheurbanlowincomesetting,torefertopaternity/maternityasa“load”.Theoverburdenexperiencedbyadultsoftheurbanlowincomesettingleadstotheadoptionofoverprotectivefamilymeasuresandex-tremecontroloverthechildren.

“For a family, I believe the main reason for fighting is the shortage of money. If there is no money, there is nothing” (Brazilianfather,ruralsetting)



“Money, when things are going wrong and I am very irritable, any contradic-tion from my wife makes me feel upset and I notice that the same happens when money is short (…) and when there is no understanding of certain things related to the family, that is also upsetting. We solve the problems by talking and soon we are back to the same situation, but once in a while, it’s necessary to talk”(Mexicanfather,urbanlowincomesetting)

Manyofthereportsfromchildrenandadultsdescribedsituationsofcom-munityviolence, inwhich thesepopulationgroupsare included.Asa result,families,inmanycasesledbywomen,establishstrictfamilyinteractionrulestostoptheirchildrenfromdisobeyingthemandthusnotexposingthemselvestothedangersrelatedtothelackofpublicsecurityinthelowincomesettingneighbourhoodsofthelargeurbancentresresearched.Thesestrictrulesgenerate

The experience in Mexico:

In México there is a series of ways of denominating children: chamaco(a), ba’du (zapoteco), escuincle(la), paal (maya), chiquitín(a), chilpayate, ña lulu (mixteco), chavo(a), chiquillo(a) y batís (ñañú). And, within these, are the children that live in the city, those that study, those that work, live with their parents and those that live in the streets.

All this diversity contributes to the existence of several views about chil-dhood, which end up conditioning the lives of the children, as they fulfil pre-established expectations, often ambiguous, for the younger ones. Within the more recurrent social representations in the country, we can point out:1.The children as family property;2.The children as the future;3.The girls and the boy as victims or victimized;4.Childhood as incompetent or needy;5.Childhood as fiction

(See: Pérez, M., Martínez M., Duran M (2004). Representaciones Sociales sobre las infancias drogodependientes. VII Seminário de la RIOD y XXII World Congrell of Thera-peutic Communities Palma de Mayorca, Spain.



tensioninthedomestichouseholdwhichinturncreatesanenormousdifficultyinadoptingmoredemocraticandparticipatoryfamilymeasures.

As shown in table2which follows, themiddleclass inall countriespre-sentedamilderuseofphysicalpunishmentasadisciplinarystrategy,buttheyallreportedtousingthesemeasurestoacertaindegreeas”anecessaryevil”.TheBrazilianmiddleclasspointoutthatstressisastrongfactortoleadparentstophysicallypunishtheirchildren.

Parents and children in all countries researched find the use of physicalcoercionanacceptablepracticeespeciallywhentheotherresources,suchastalk-ing and temporary punishments are not working. Even stating that physicalandhumiliatingpunishmentdoesn’thavetheexpectedresultandisn’tthemosteffectivemethod(fewmentionitasbeingasuccessfulstrategy)manyparentsbelieve(explicitlyorimplicitly)thatchildrenlearnwiththreatsandfear.Itwasmentionedinafewofthereportsgivenbyadultsthattheywerebroughtupwiththeuseofphysicalandhumiliatingpunishmentaschildren.Inthesere-ports, parents relate to what they suffered and admit they are repeating thefamilymethodsthinkingthatthiswaytheyarekeepingtotraditions.Amongtheparents in theBrazilianmiddleclass, thereweredifferentopinionsabouttheeffectsofphysicalpunishmentonthechildren’smentalhealth;somebelievetherearetraumaticeffectsandothersdon’t.

Someeffectsoftheculturalchangesregardingchildren’srights inthe last15yearsinallthecountriesresearchedcouldalreadybenoticed.Intheparent’sreport, there was a contradiction between the “politically correct” speech onthe non-violent ways of discipline and the real use of physical punishment.Dialogueandcommunicationareconsideredasanothermethodofdiscipline,butonlyafewparentsputthemintopractice.Itisworthemphasizingthatthedialoguewassystematicallydemandedbythechildrenthroughouttheresearch,asthebestwayofeducatingthem.

Thetablebellow7summarizessomeoftheanswersofJamaicanparentsinalltheresearchedcontextsandillustratesthiscontradiction,i.e.,atthesametimethattheyagreethatchildrenshouldbeheard,theybelievethattheycan’tanswerbackorquestiontheirparentsandthattheydeserveaspanking.

7Besidestheoptions“totallyagree”,“partiallyagree”and“donotagree”,therewasalsotheoption“Idon’tknow”.Thus,somepercentagesdonotaddto100%.



Totally agree (%)

Partially agree (%)

Do not agree (%)

Items / Gender Nr of Mothers (M) = 25 and Nr of Fathers (F) = 16

M F M F M F

Children should not answer back to adults.

3� 50 48 44 8 �

It’s a waste of time to listen to children.

- - 8 - 84 94

Parents have a lot to learn from children.

92 94 4 � - -

There are times when children deserve a spanking.

40 �3 52 31 4 �

When parents make decisions, they should take the children’s feelings into consideration.

80 75 1� 25 4 -

Children should not question their parents’ decisions.

24 44 48 25 24 31

Source: Field report/Jamaica/2007.

ThecontradictionsreportedpreviouslyalsoappearinthereportsforMexico(17,5%totallyagreedand40%partiallyagreedwiththeuseofphysicalpun-ishment;35%totallyagreedand51%partiallyagreedwiththefactthatwhenparentsmakedecisions,theymustconsiderthechildren’sfeelings)andforNi-caragua(53,9%agreedand39,3%partiallyagreedwithapplyingphysicalpun-ishment;85,4agreedand67%partiallyagreedwiththefactthat,whenparentsmakedecisions,theymustconsiderthechildren’sfeelings).Thesesimilarstan-dardsofanswerssuggestthereisadoubtinthepracticeofpaternity/maternitywidelysharedbyparentsofdifferentcontexts.

Inthechildren’sreports,therewerefewercontradictions,astheyspokeinamuchmoreopenanddetailedwayaboutthepunishmentstheyaresubjectedtoandhowmuchtheyhatethem.Inthechildren’sreports,therewasanun-derstandingthatitwastheparents’roletoinflictpunishment,buttheyneveragreedwiththephysicalandpsychologicalaggressionstheysuffered.Amongthephysicalandhumiliatingpunishmentsaccountedbythechildren,thefollowingwereoutstanding:



• Callthemnames(swear)• Humiliatetheminfrontofotherpeople• Punchthem• Hitthemwiththeirhands• Pulltheirears• Hit them with objects such as belts, whips, pieces of wood and metal,

brushes,electricwires,cactus,shoes• Starvethem• Slapthemintheface• Makethemkneeloncorn• Makethem“smellthewalls”(faceturnedtothewall)• Force themtodomorehousework (domestic chores suchasmaking the

bed,washingup,cleaningthekitchen,cleaningthehouseetc.)

Boy 1: They hit me with a leather strap, hose and a clothes hanger.Girl 3: They hit me with cables.Girl 4: They put rice grains and metal sheets for me to kneel.Girl 8: They tie me up to my brother; they fasten us very tight by our tummies (Venezuelan children, urban low income setting)“I don’t like my father very much because he loves to beat me.”Does he beat you a lot?Very much. I was the favourite to be beaten by him.But why?I was, but not anymore. I don’t know why, he liked to hit me. If I took a long time to do something, he threw his slipper at me. I could even be about fifteen steps away from him and he threw the slipper at my back.” (ConversationwithBrazilianchild,ruralsetting)

TheuseofphysicalpunishmentwaspredominantandmuchmoreintenseintheruralsettinginallthecountriesresearchedwiththeexceptionofJamaica,thatshowedhighratesofthisdisciplinarystrategyinallcontexts

Somereportsofviolenceagainstwomenappeartoberelatedtothepresenceofviolenceagainstchildren,reinforcingtheideathatphysicalaggressionagainstcertainsocialsubjectsislegitimized.Childrenalsoreportedthatthereisadif-ferenceininflictingphysicalpunishmentsbetweenboysandgirls:boysreceivemoreharshpunishmentsbecausetheyareconsideredstronger;asforthegirls,consideredmorefragile,theyreceivemilderpunishments.



“Girls are beaten slowly and boys really get it.Is there a difference?Yes because boys are stronger and girls cry for nothing and boys don’t.” (Conver-sationwithBrazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting)

Thisdifferenceexplainstheprocessofsocializationconductedbytherulesofgenderinforce,thatestablishwhichbehavioursandattitudesaresuitableorexpectedforboysandgirls.Menaregenerallysocializedrightfromatenderagetorefraintheiremotionsandto liveuptosocialexpectations inapro-activemanner,withangerandevenphysicalviolencebeingsomeofsociallyacceptedinorderforthemtoexpresstheirfeelings8.Thus,rightfromchildhood,boysalreadyreceiveadifferenteducationfromgirlsinordertoassurethattheyef-fectively“become”thementhattheirsocietyvaluesandforthattheycan’tshowweaknessand/orsensitivity.Asforgirls,becausetheyareconsideredfragileandsensitive,theyneedmorecareandspecialattention(moreaffectionate)sothattheycancorrectlyperformtheirroleasfuturemothersandwives.

Violentenvironments,eitherfromthestructuralorgenderrelationspointofview,appeartofavourviolentattitudesagainstchildren

“(...) she used to get food and sell it to buy cachaça (a type of sugar cane brandy) and I told my father. And when my mother was drunk, she used to beat us, because we don’t like to wake up early, so she would beat us hard. She used to get the water for coffee and throw it in our faces.”(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting)

However, some families included in thesecontexts reportedverypositiveandnon-violentstylesofraisingtheirchildren,aswellasacertainnumberofmiddleclasschildrenreportedpunishmentsthatcausedthemtoreflectabouttheirattitudes:

Boy: “Well, they send me to my room so that I can think about what I did, and to write about it and give it to them and sometimes, when my sister is involved, they also tell her to go to her room and think about it.”(Venezuelanboy,urbanmiddleclass)

8PROMUNDO.(2002)Workingwithyoungmenseries.RiodeJaneiro.314p.



Anexampleof alternativepatternswasgivenby the Jamaicanmotherofurbanlowincomesettingthatwhenaskedaboutherstrategiestoraiseherchil-drenanswered:

“My children are my best friends. We have a good relationship, especially with my daughter. I sew a little and she is so interested in the sewing machine, in knowing what I am doing, in learning how to cut the material. I play the guitar and I have one at home; the boys are interested in other things. I play an active role in my church and they are always with me and are involved with the youths.”

Thesealternativestrategiesoffamilypracticeshavetwoimportantfactors:(1 the timededicated to the children.Timenotnecessarilymeasured in thesenseofquantity,butqualifiedbymomentsofdedicationtothechild’suniverse.And(2)listening:spaceswhereadialogueinterestedinthechildren’suniversewasestablishedandnotaonesidedmonologueofparentstochildren.Inthefamilypracticesthatcombinetimeandlistening,thelevelsofstressreportedaremuchlow.Whenaskedwhattheywouldliketorequirefromtheirparentsandcarers,manychildrenaskedtobelistenedtoandpointedoutthefrustrationsresultingfromfeelingignored.Theactivitiesthatchildrenmentionedasbeingtheonesthatpleasedthemthemostwere:playing,goingshopping,watchingtelevisionandtalking.

“We are their children and they are our parents, so they must listen to us and when they speak we must listen too.”(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomeset-ting) “He is very sociable, tells me everything that happens to him or if he has any problems, he calls me as if I was a friend and confides in me. In other words, he prefers to talk to me before talking to other people. This is so important.”(Vene-zuelanmother,urbanlowincomesetting)

Inallcountriesandallcontexts,theimportancegiventotimeandtothequalityoflisteningwasthesame.Thisfactseemstoemphasizethat,inspiteofthesingularityofeachcountry,ofurbanandruralenvironmentsandthediffer-encesinthesocialclasses,thetimedevotedtochildreninplayfulactivitiesestab-lishesthepossibilityofcreatingauthoritativefamilypracticeswhicharesensitivetochildren’sfeelingsandopinions,andatthesametimeallowthenegotiationofboundariesthatwillprotectthechildren’sphysicalandpsychologicalintegrity.



Inthesecircumstancesofeconomicalstressandfamilyrestructuring,therehavebeenseveralreportsofincidentsinvolvingviolenceoccurringamongadultsintimesofseparationandformationofnewcouples.Itshouldbesaidthatthesesubjectsarenotconsideredrelevanttobediscussedwiththechildren,whoarefrequentlytoldliesregardingtheextramaritalrelationsofadults.Childrenendupfacingthesituationasbestas theycan,asdemonstratedbythe followingconversation:

Girl: “When my father is drunk, I take his money.”Moderator: “When he is drunk you take his money?”Girl: “Of course, so that he won’t give the money to my stepmother and gives it to my mother. To my mother, he only gives 400 for the market and that is nothing” (Venezuelangirl,ruralsetting)

Apart from situations of intra-family violence, some countries presentedsignificantlevelsofcommunityviolence,influencingthefamilypracticesandtheeverydaylifeofchildren.Inparticular,familieslivinginurbanlowincomesettingsareexposedtostructuralviolence,whichmakesthemevenmorevulner-able.DrugdealinginRiodeJaneiro,thecrooksinCaracas,thegangsinKings-tonandthejuvenilegangsinLimaareafewofthecontemporaryphenomenatowhichsomeofthepopulationgroupshavebeenexposed.Families,frequentlyfrightened,canonlycountonthesupportofrelatives,afewcommunityservices(usually precarious) and informal support networks– or community basedsupports9-fortheupbringingofchildren.Besidestheabsenceofpublicpoliciesofeducation,employment,healthandleisure,thelowincomeclasshasalsotodealwiththelackofpublicsafety.Andthisabsenceofsecuritydemandsthateachcommunitybuilduptheirownlocalalternativestomediatetheirdomesticandcollectiveconflicts.

Finally, we can say that there are, among the children, strategies to face intra-family and community violence.TheaggressivenessoftheBrazilianboy,the tears of the Jamaicangirl, the act ofmockingparents of theVenezuelan

9 Since 1998 the expression “Community based support” is used to define “family andcommunityresourcesthatpromoteeducation,besidesofferingphysicalandemotionalse-curitytochildrenandyoungsters.Theseresourcescanbeformal,suchasdaycareschools,recreationalopportunitiesandhealthprograms,andinformal,asthenuclearandextendedfamiliesandaffinitybonds,availableinthecommunityitself ”(Promundo,CIESPI.–RiodeJaneiro,2006).



Coun

tryC

ontext

Brazil

Jamaica

Mexico

Nicarág

uaPeru

Venezuela

Urb

anLow

incom

e settin

g

- Dem

onstration of affection w

ith gifts and love;-D

iscipline with phy-

sical and humiliating

punishment;

- Accepted physical

punishment by pa-

rents and children.

-Dem


ith praises;-D

iscipline with phy-


punishment.

-Lack of dialogue.

-Presence of intense physical and hum

ilia-ting punishm

ent;- Little com

munica-

tion between parents

and children;- Little tim

e for the children.

-Abuse of pow

er and dom

ination from

adults;-Presence of intense physical and psycho-logical punishm

ent;- Little com

munica-



e for the children.

-Presence of physical punishm

ent percei-ved as a necessary pain-C

hildren with no

space to participate;-A

uthoritarian and chauvinist fam

ily setting.

- Little time for the

children;- Presence of m

oderate physical punishm

ent.

Urb

an

Mid

dle class

- Discipline w

ith phy-sical punishm

ent;-

Accepted

physical punishm

ent;- Parents’ double stan-dards w

hen using the dialogue as m

ain form

of discipline.

-Dem


ith money

and gifts;-D

iscipline with phy-


punishment;

-Lack of dialogue.

-Presence of mild

physical and/or tem-

porary punishments ;

-Physical contact as dem

onstration of affection;- Space for dialogue and support in m

o-m

ents of grief.

- More dem

ocratic fam

ily relationship;- Father participation;- Presence of verbal reprim

ands and tem-

porary punishments.a

- Presence of verbal reprim

ands and tem-

porary punishments;

-Dialogue ham

pered due to the use of in-ternet and electronic gam

es;-G

irls receive more di-

fferentiated affection from

boys.


children;- Presence of verbal reprim

ands and tem-

porary punishments.

Rural

setting

-Dem


ith gifts and food;-G

irls receive more

affection than boys;-C

hildren show affec-

tion performing their

chores;-Physical and hum

i-liating punishm

ent accepted by parents and children.

-Dem


ith love and care;-W

ork and domestic

chores as physical punishm

ent;-Lack of dialogue.

-Presence of intense physical and hum

ilia-ting punishm

ent;-Little physical con-tact to dem

onstrate affection;-Little com

munication

between parents and

children;-Little tim

e for the children.

--Presence of intense physical and psycho-logical punishm

ent;- Little com

munica-



e for the children;-A

uthoritarianism;

-Alcohol abuse related

to domestic violence.

-Physical and humilia-

ting punishment w

ith threats of w

ithdra-w

ing the children from

school;-C

hildren cannot ex-press their opinion in stressful situations;-M

ore demonstra-

tions of affection with

girls than with boys.


children;-Presence of intense physical punishm

ent.

Table 2: Dem

onstration of family practices, fam

ily interaction and physical punishment by context and country studied



children,thechangeofnameoftheNicaraguanchildareonlyafewexamplesthatarestilltobefurtherresearchedandunderstood.Children,however,haveprovedinthisstudythattheyareactive agents of their experiences;inparticu-larregardingthesubjectofphysicalpunishment,andforthisreason,theymustcontinuetobeencouragedtoexpresstheirthoughtsandfeelingsinthesearchforsolutionstochangeasocioculturaltraditionthatissounpleasanttothem.

“It is my opinion that parents must be patient with their children and not smack them straight away, and talking is better than smacking, this can be a way of teaching them the best instead of teaching them the path to cruelty(Mexicanchild,ruralsetting)

5.1.2. Family practices, domestic chores and child labour

Thesubjectsoftheresearchregardingtheconnectionbetweenthefamilypracticesandtheitemlabourweresubdividedintwodifferentactivities:1. Domesticchores:cleaning thehouseanddoing the laundry, feedingand

caringofsiblings2. Child labour: activities developed away from home to be paid wages or

subsistence.

Thissubdivisionisaimedatunderstandinganddifferentiatingthecoopera-tiontasksfromthefamilies’socialreproduction,i.e.,theperformingofdomes-ticchoresthatcontributetothedevelopmentofthechildren’ssurvivalcapacitiesandresponsibilities,fromtheactivitiesthatarecarriedouttoeconomicallyhelpthefamilies.

Ingeneral, inallcountries researched,child labourawayfromhomewaspositivelyvaluedbyadultsonlyintheruralsetting.Thisfactreflectsanimpor-tantchangeintheLatinandtheCaribbeancultureswithregardtochildlabour.Itisknownthatgreatefforthasbeencarriedoutbyinternationalorganizationssuch as the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNICEF, togeth-erwithgovernmentalbodiesandwiththecivilsocietyofthecountriesintheregionwiththepurposeofvalidatingthelegislationforprotectionofchildrenandadolescents’rightspreparedbyeachState.

Adults,whenpositioningthemselvesagainstchildlabour,highlightedtwoharmfulconsequencesofit:



(1) Prematureadulthoodandlackofcontrolovertheroutineofchildrenthatwork.Theactofworking,atypicalactivityofadulthood,exposesthemtoriskstheyarenotmatureenoughtotake.Inchildren’seyes,however,thisassumedautonomyachievedthroughthepowerofconsumptionthatadultshave,evenifminimal,iswhatjustifiestheirdesireorneedtowork.

“No… one shouldn’t let their children work… parents let go of them… then they start to lose control… they start to do wrong things with the money… become addicted to drugs… friends… electronic game houses… basic cocaine paste” (Peruvianfather,urbanlowincomeclasssetting)“It’s all right to have your own money and not have to ask your mother.” (Mexi-canchild,urbanlowincomesetting)

(2) Theimportanceofschool–andnotofwork–forsocialmobility.Manywerethevoicesthatstrengthenedschoolandnotworkastheplacefortheformationofchildren.Thisdiscoverymadecleartheexpectationofparentsabouttheirchildrenhavingamorequalifiedandbetterpaidprofessionallifethantheirs.

“While we are small we must only concentrate on studying, because they (adults) work so that we can study and when we are grown up then we can work.”(Ni-caraguanchild,ruralsetting)“It all depends, I believe that work educates, I believe that children are exploited with the working conditions in a town like ours, but I believe that work is a value… the problem is that, in our country children work because they need to and for this reason they do jobs that exclude them from many things that they should enjoy, such as leisure, studies and other things for their age.”(Mexicanmother,urbanlowincomesetting)

However,atthesametimethatchildlabourwascondemned,thereportsinmostcountriespointedouttoanotverydemocraticdistributionofdomesticchores.Thechildrenreportedlittleautonomytochoosewhichactivitiestheywould like to perform and complained of having very little space to protestaboutthetypeoramountofchores,whichinmanycases,meantsubstitutingtheentireworkdonebyadultsinthehouses.Theseaccountsunveiledthedeli-cateandcomplexmatterofwhatisthelimitbetweentheformativedomestic



choresandthereplacementofadultlabourforce,especiallywiththeadventofwomenjoiningtheworkforceandofthesingleparentedfamilies.

“At home when I go out I leave it up to my boys, I only have boys and the girl is very small so when I go out I take her with me. leave the chores for them, one makes the bed, the eldest prepares the food, another sweeps the house, the other sweeps the studio and I tell them that when I get back I want to find everything nice and tidy.”(Brazilianmother,ruralsetting)

Alsorecurringwerethereportsthatassociatedthenon-fulfilmentoftaskswith punishments and reprimands received by the children. Sometimes, theincreaseofdomesticchoreswasconfiguredasthepunishmentitself.Itcanbeinferredthatthelackofautonomyinthechoiceofchoresandtheassociation

The experience of Peru:

- The portion of study held in Peru had the unique opportunity to carry out its field research with two groups of Parents of Working Children and Adolescents (NATs). One of the groups lives in peripheral settlements (dis-tricts of Ventanilla and Puente Piedra in Lima) and the other works at the supply market of Lima (Lince, middle class district).- The study results highlighted the emphasis given by these parents to the education of their children. They stated that they prefer that the children perform their activities outside their homes during holidays and when the timing does not interfere with school. They also pointed out the need to not divide the work by gender when distributing the domestic chores.- Outstanding, also, was a couple from Puente Pedra who, overcoming material needs, is managing to offer to their children an example of com-munitarian commitment and personal honesty. They adopt a democratic upbringing style, do not use physical punishment and maintain constant dialogue with their children. The mother, besides being part of a commu-nity co-operative, has become a seamstress through a scholarship of the Sedes Sapientiae University. This example also suggests a connection be-tween the public life, the participation in democratic spaces and a more participatory configuration within the family.



ofworkwithpunishment results in inverting the social importanceofwork.Insteadofperceivingworkassomethingproductive,importantandrequiringspecificskills,childrenenduprelatingworktosituationsofhumiliationandpunishment.Thus, theeducational importanceof theactivity is lostand theideathatsome jobshave less social importancethanothers,especiallychoresperformedinthehousehold,isreinforced.

Theoverburdenofdomesticchoresbecameobvious,especiallyintheurbanlowincomeclassandintheruralsetting.Childrenofthemiddleclassonlygetinvolvedwiththestandarddefinitionofdomesticchore,whichcomprisesonlypersonalhygieneorfamilyinteractionactivitiessuchastakingtherubbishoutortidyingtheirtoys–choresthattheyperformwithoutregularityorobligation.Manyhavebeenusingtheservicesofmaidsinthehouseholds.Thisworker,infact,wassuggestedbyachildfromJamaicatosolvetheproblematherhouse.Accordingtoher:

“There should be a law assigning a helper to each family! Or robots!”

Ontheoccasionswhenchildlabourwasreported,itwasalwaysassociatedwithfinancialneedsbothintheurbanlowincomesettingandtheruralsetting.Eventhoughthemoneyearnedisusedforbuyingofpersonalitems,veryoftenwantedbythechildrenthemselves, thefinancialcompensationsarestillusedtocovertheexpenseswhichthepoorfamiliescannotaffordfortheirchildren.Theimportanceofworkintheformationofchildrenisalwaysmentioned,butthereasonsforusingchildlabourforcearedetermined,withrareexceptions,bytheirfinancialneeds.

“But also for children to buy things they need that sometimes we can’t afford.”(Mexicanmother,ruralsetting)

“I would like to work to have my own money and not depend on my father and mother. One wants to buy a top to go dancing at the club, things like that, and our mother can’t afford it at that time.”(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting)

“Poor little things because they work to earn money, live on the streets, don’t have enough money for a coat or something like that, there are days when it’s very cold”(Mexicanchild,urbanmiddleclass)

“Parents don’t have it. Others don’t have to because their parents have it. Some-times they want to buy biscuits and haven’t got it.” (Brazilianchild,urban lowincomesetting)



Thereportsfromchildrenintheurbanlowincomesettingsandruralset-tingtsinBrazil,VenezuelaandJamaicaandintheruralsettingsinNicaraguarevealednotonlyveryexhaustingworksituationswithagreatloadofresponsi-bility,butalsoasignificantnumberofworkactivitiesdescribedbythechildren,whichareconsideredasdangerous,unhealthyanddifficultforchildrenbetween7and12yearsold.Amongthese,wecanlistthefollowingactivities,accordingtothetypeofdangertheyincurin10:

Degree of danger Dangerous Unhealthy DifficultActivities - Cook.

- Take care ofyounger siblings.- Sew.- Dig holes.- Milk cows.- Treat horses.- Drive tractors.

- Wash clothes and kitchen utensils.- Clean windows.- Clean toilets.- Wax the floor.- Mix cement.- Plant and harvest sugarcane.- Cut the grass.

- Treat pigs and hens —slaughter them.

Lastly,itisimportanttoapproachaveryimportantmatterthatreferstothereproductionofgenderrolesinthedistributionofdomesticchoresforchildren.Asshownintable3,whichdisplaysthecharacteristicsoffamilypractices,do-mesticchoresandchildlabourinthedifferentcountriesofstudy,thereisalsoagenderdistributionoftheworkinthefamilypracticesofBrazil,PeruandVen-ezuelaconcerningdomesticchores.Inthesecontexts,thegirlsareresponsibleforthelighteractivitiesperformedindoors,orinthecompanyoftheirmoth-ersortheircarers.Theboysareresponsiblefortheheavier,moreriskychores,especiallythosethattakeplaceoutdoors,evenwhenitisafamilytask,suchascarryingtheshoppingbagsortakingtherubbishbagsoutside.

“I tell my mother I want to go out in the street but she won’t let me. But you let the boys go out! I tell her. And then she says you are a girl and not a boy. You can look after the things in the house. Then I get really angry!”(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting)

10These expressionswere taken from the182Conventionof ILO - InternationalLaborOrganization.



Intheruralsetting,thedistributionofchoresbygenderisevenmoreobvi-ousinboththedomesticfieldandinthefarmingactivities.Boysareconsideredstrongerandbraverforactivitiesthatincurinthehandlingoftools,machineryortechniques,regardlessoftheirageortheirbodybuildornutritionalcondi-tion.Asforthegirls,consideredmorefrailandscared,theymustremainclosertothehouseandtothedomesticchores.

“They can’t cut the grass or milk the cows because it makes calluses in their hands and they get… when they wash the pots, they perforate the calluses and then they bleed!” (Brazilianchild,ruralsetting)

ThestudydidnotclarifythereasonswhyadultsandchildreninJamaica,MexicoandNicaraguashareddomesticchoresinamoreequalmanner.How-ever,theinvestigationinNicaraguaappearstoshowapatternthat,whilepre-dominantlybelongingtofamiliesbasedonapatriarchalandauthoritariancode,withlittleroomfortheparticipationofitsmembers,indicatesthatthispatternisundergoingachangingprocess.FactorssuchastheinfluenceoftheSandinistarevolution,thatstrengthenedthedistributionofamoreegalitariangenderethos,theincreasingparticipationofwomeninthelabourmarketandtheeducational,politicalandsocialopportunities,theworkoforganizationsandsocialsupportsystemsforwomenandboys/girlsareafewofthepossiblefactorsresponsibleforsuchchanges,pointedoutinthestudy.Besides,therecognitionofwomenandboys/girls aspeoplewith rights in the familyand in society represents ameaningfulstepinthecultureofthecountry,foreventhoughthereisstillalongwaytogotoreachitseffectivepractice, itwillcertainlyhave importantresultsinamoreparticipatorytransformationofthefamilyandofthemethodsofupbringingchildren.

5.1.3. Family practices and formal education

In recent years, countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have de-veloped several strategies toqualify their educational systems11.Among thesestrategiesistheincreaseincompulsoryschoolyears,theincreaseofcoverage,

11UNESCO.QualityEducationforeveryone:asubjectofhumanrights,2007.http://www.unesco.cl/medios/biblioteca/documentos/documento_base_educacion_calidad_para_todos_asunto_derechos_humanos_ept_prelac_portugues.pdf.



Cou

ntr

yC

onte

xtB

razi

lJa

mai

caM

exic

oN

icar

agua

Peru

Ven

ezue

la

Urb

an

– lo

w

inco

me

sett

ing

- A

lot

of d

omes

tic w

ork

in s

ubst

itutio

n to

adu

lt w

ork;

- Pr

esen

ce o

f a c

lass

ic

divi

sion

by

gend

er o

f ch

ores

for

the

child

ren;

- In

tens

e ch

ild la

bour

.

- A

lot

of d

omes

tic w

ork

in s

ubst

itutio

n of

adu

lt la

bour

;-

Wor

king

in t

he s

tree

ts

to h

elp

the

mot

hers

in

the

stre

et v

endo

rs.

- Th

e ch

ildre

n ca

nnot

ch

oose

the

dom

estic

ch

ores

;-

Puni

shed

whe

n th

ey

do n

ot p

erfo

rm t

heir

chor

es;

- Pa

rent

s ag

ains

t ch

ild

labo

ur o

utsi

de t

heir

hom

es.

-Dis

tinct

ion

betw

een

“hel

p” (

dom

estic

se

ttin

g) a

nd “

wor

k”

(str

eet

sett

ing)

;-

Very

low

leve

ls o

f ch

ild la

bour

rep

orte

d;-

Ther

e is

no

divi

sion

by

gend

er o

f the

dom

estic

ch

ores

.

- Pa

rent

s co

ndem

ned

child

labo

ur b

efor

e th

e ag

e of

14

year

s ol

d;-

Chi

ldre

n re

port

ed

labo

ur a

s of

12

year

s ol

d;-

Pres

ence

of a

cla

ssic

di

visi

on b

y ge

nder

of

child

ren

labo

ur.

- A

lot

of d

omes

tic

wor

k in

sub

stitu

tion

to a

dult

wor

k.

Urb

an

– m

iddl

e se

ttin

g

-Cho

res

perf

orm

ed a

t ho

me

rela

ted

only

to

rule

s of

dai

ly r

outin

e an

d pe

rson

al h

ygie

ne;

-Pre

senc

e of

mai

ds.

--C

hore

s pe

rfor

med

at

hom

e re

late

d on

ly t

o ru

les

of d

aily

rou

tine

and

pers

onal

hyg

iene

;-W

ork

rela

ted

to fa

mily

bu

sine

ss;

- Pr

esen

ce o

f dom

estic

m

aid.

- C

hild

ren

cann

ot

choo

se t

he d

omes

tic

chor

es;

- C

hore

s re

late

d to

pe

rson

al h

ygie

ne;

-Pun

ishe

d w

hen

they

do

not

per

form

the

ir ch

ores

;-

Pare

nts

agai

nst

child

la

bour

out

side

the

ir ho

mes

.

-Wor

k re

late

d to

fam

ily

busi

ness

;-P

ositi

ve v

alue

in t

he

divi

sion

of d

omes

tic

chor

es w

ith a

dults

;-

Ther

e is

no

divi

sion

by

gen

der

of d

omes

tic

chor

es.

--C

hore

s pe

rfor

med

at

hom

e re

late

d on

ly t

o ru

les

of d

aily

rou

tine

and

pers

onal

hyg

iene

;-

Chi

ld w

ork

acce

pted

fo

r th

e lo

w in

com

e cl

ass.

--C

hore

s pe

rfor

med

at

hom

e re

late

d on

ly t

o ru

les

of d

aily

ro

utin

e an

d pe

rson

al

hygi

ene;

-Cho

res

perf

orm

ed

at h

ome

rela

ted

only

to

rule

s of

dai

ly

rout

ine

and

pers

onal

hy

gien

e;-P

rese

nce

of m

aids

Rura

l se

ttin

g-

A lo

t of

dom

estic

wor

k in

sub

stitu

tion

to a

dult

wor

k;-

Pres

ence

of a

cla

ssic

di

visi

on o

f wor

k by

ge

nder

for

child

ren;

-Inte

nse

child

labo

ur;

- Pu

nish

ed w

hen

they

do

not

per

form

the

ir ch

ores

.

- A

lot

of d

omes

tic

chor

es a

nd w

ork

outd

oors

rel

ated

to

subs

iste

nce;

-Chi

ldre

n se

emed

to

be

over

load

ed w

ith w

ork.

- C

hild

ren

cann

ot

choo

se d

omes

tic

chor

es;

- Pu

nish

ed w

hen

they

do

not

per

form

the

ir ch

ores

;-

Pare

nts

pro

child

la

bour

– s

ubsi

sten

ce.

- C

hild

ren

cann

ot

choo

se d

omes

tic c

hore

s or

wor

k ac

tiviti

es o

utsi

-de

hom

e;-

Chi

ldre

n re

port

tir

edne

ss a

nd p

rost

ra-

tion

rela

ted

to w

ork

over

load

.

- A

ge t

o st

art

wor

k de

term

ined

by

phys

ical

ch

arac

teris

tics;

- Pr

esen

ce o

f a c

lass

ic

divi

sion

by

gend

er o

f th

e w

ork

for

child

ren;

- A

ndes

cul

ture

uni

fies

wor

k, e

duca

tion

and

fun

- C

hild

ren

cann

ot

choo

se d

omes

tic c

hore

s no

r w

ork

activ

ities

ou

tsid

e ho

me

.

- A

lot

of d

omes

tic

chor

es a

nd o

utsi

de

wor

k re

late

d to

su

bsis

tenc

e;-

Pres

ence

of a

cla

ssic

di

visi

on b

y ge

nder

of

the

wor

k fo

r ch

ildre

n.

Tabl

e 3

– D

emon

stra

tion

of fa

mily

pra

ctic

es, d

omes

tic c

hore

s an

d ch

ild la

bour

by

cont

ext

and

coun

try

stud

ied



theimprovementofinfrastructure,thedevelopmentofnewcurriculaandthequalificationofteachingstaff

Theseinvestmentshaveaimedtoassuretherighttogoodqualityeducation,thefundamentalbasisofallthedemocraticstate.However,thedatacollectedinthestudyonfamilypracticesandformaleducationdemonstratedintable4,showtheprecariousnessoftheeducationalsystemoftheregion,especiallyintheruralsettingofthecountriesresearched.

Thedataof the studieswascollected startingwith theexpressionsof thechildrenabouttheautonomytheycouldexertatschoolandabouttheexpec-tations and evaluations of parents and carers of their children’s school.Bothchildrenandadultshadambivalentanswerswithregardstoschool,asschoolisnotonlyperceivedasaplaceofenlargementofthedomesticworld,butalsoitcontainsinitselfaseriesofrulesandconstraintspertainingtoitsownsystem.

Ingeneral,childrenfromdifferentcountriesandcontextsrepresentedschoolasacomplexworldthatcontainselementsthatpleasethem,butalsohaveex-tremelyunpleasant situations.Among thepleasing elements is the feelingofautonomy in relation towhat theyexperienceathome,and theopportunitytomakeandmeetfriends.Thereportsshowedschoolastheplacewheremoreopenrelationspredominate,thatisaplaceofinteractionwithotherchildren.Especiallyintheruralsetting,schoolwasfrequentlyquotedastheonlyoppor-tunityofsocialcontactwithotherchildrenduetotheisolationoffamiliesintheirproperties.

Among theunpleasant situations related to schooldescribedby thechil-drenwasthestrictnessofsometeachersandheadmasters.Theuseofaschooluniform and some subjects were also listed as unpleasant. Brazilian childrencomplainedofthelackofinfrastructureandleisureareasinschool,andchil-drenfromtheurbanlowincomeclassandruralenvironmentsinJamaicaandinBrazilreportedthatteachersphysicallyassaultthestudents.However,generallyspeaking,themostrecurrentcomplaintwastheteachers`lackofattentionwithregardstothestudents`needs.Similartotheattentionrequiredbyparents,inschooltooalotofthechildrendon’tfeeltheyareheard.

“(...) his teacher, when she was my teacher, everybody can prove it, even my mother because I’ve been all black and blue here. She used to throw keys, rulers and chalk at us.” (Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting)



“They want to teach those that want to learn, if you are restless (talk, answer back) the teacher doesn’t teach.”(Jamaicanchild,urbanlowincomeclasscon-text)

AnotherimportantmatterwasraisedbychildreninVenezuela,MexicoandJamaicawhoreportedsituationsofviolencewhichcanbedefinedasbullying12.However,althoughitwasn’tmentionedinotherreports,thatpossiblyoccursinallthecountries.

Girl:”What I don’t like is when the other children mess with me”Interviewer:”You don’t like the boys to mess with you? Why do they mess with you?Girl: “I don’t know why, because when I get there everyone starts saying I am ugly and they hit me.”Interviewer: “They hit you?”Girl; “I speak to the teachers.”Interviewer:”And what do they do?”Girl: “They talk to the boys, but they don’t take any notice.”

Thissecondcategoryincludestheschoolofurbanlowincomeclasscontextsinmostcountriesresearched.Besidesfacingthestructuralproblemstypicalofpubliceducationinthearea(teacher’slowsalaries,insufficientteachingmateri-als,reducedtechnologicalresourcesetc),theseschoolsarealsosituatedinareaswithahigh levelofcommunityviolence.Thissituationincreasesthetensionwithintheschoolenvironments,whichbecomeresponsibleforthesafetyofthechildrenwhiletheythemselvesarevulnerabletourbanviolence.

ItisworthpointingoutthatparentsintheurbanlowincomeclasscontextinVenezuelaandPerureferredtoschoolasa“secondhome”fortheirchildren,evidencingthesocialnetworkrolethatschoolcanhaveinsuburbancommuni-ties.InNicaragua,schoolisperceivedasamuchmoredemocraticvenuethanhomebecause it reflects the socio-political projectwhichhasbeenoccurringinthecountrysincethe80’s.Theschoolroleintheruralsettingofallcoun-trieswasalsoreferredtoasasocialsupport,orrather,asavenueformeeting

12BullyingisawordofBritishoriginusedtodescribeactsofphysicalorpsychologicalviolence,intentionalandrepeated,practicedbyanindividual(bully)orgroupofindividualswiththeob-jectiveofintimidatingorattackinganotherindividual(orgroupofindividuals)unabletodefendhimself.InVenezuelaitiscalledchalequeoandinBrazilzoação.



up,exchangesandcooperationbetweenfamiliesandthecommunities.Theseexamplessuggestthatthestrengtheningoftheeducationalinstitutionsandtheglobalizationof ahighqualitypublic education appears tobebasedon theconstructionofamoreegalitarianandparticipatorysociety.

Intheurbancontextandruralenvironments,inthemiddleandlowincomeclassesinallthecountriesthattookpartoftheresearch,therewasnonegotia-tionwiththechildrenastothechoiceoftheschool.Nochildwasabletoexpressanopinionastowhereand/orwithwhomtostudyfordifferentreasons.

Ononehand,forthefamiliesofurbanlowincomeclassandruralenviron-ments,therearenooptionsofpublicorlowcostschools,soneitherparentsnorchildrencanchoose.Schoolisthoughtofbyparentsasagreatopportunityforsocialmobility(quiteoftenanopportunitythattheparentsthemselvesdidn’thave)andthepressuretheyputontheirchildrentomakethemostofschoolisverystrong.

However, in theurbanmiddle class families, there aremoreoptionsandmorereports(undoubtedlyreduced)ofschoolasaplaceforeducationforlife,andotherattributesbesidesthestrictlyuseful.However,itistheparentswhodecidetowhichschooltheirchildrenwillgoto.Forthis,theyrelyonfamilytraditionsorontheneweducationaltechnologiespresentedbytheeducation

The Jamaican experience:

In Jamaica only 10% of the children are enrolled in private kindergartens and elementary schools, which provide very high quality education. The public education system, which serves the remaining 90% of students, does not offer homogeneity in terms of teaching quality, size of schools and students results in qualifying tests. However, the children’s academic per-formance in these first school years is fundamental to decide what type of secondary education they will have and, consequently, if they will be able to follow an academic or technical career, or4 if they will be expelled of the educational system. For example, only by studying at Traditional Academic High Schools is that a child will be approved for the Teachers Colleges, as well as, if the child attends technical/vocational schools, she will definitely be out of the educational system at the end of her adolescence.



Cou

ntr

yC

onte

xtB

razi

lJa

mai

caM

exic

oN

icar

agua

Peru

Ven

ezue

la

Urb

an

– lo

w

inco

me

sett

ing

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-C

hild

ren

unsa

tisfie

d w

ith t

he s

choo

l and

the

te

ache

rs.

-Phy

sica

l pun

ishm

ent

prac

ticed

by

teac

hers

.-D

iffer

ence

s be

twee

n th

e w

ishe

s of

par

ents

an

d ch

ildre

n as

to

the

futu

re.

-Exp

ecta

tions

of s

ocia

l m

obili

ty.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Situ

atio

ns o

f vio

lenc

e su

ffere

d at

sch

ool a

nd

surr

ound

ings

.-P

hysi

cal p

unis

hmen

t pr

actic

ed b

y te

ache

rs-C

hoic

e of

ele

men

tary

sc

hool

det

erm

ines

the

ch

ild’s

aca

dem

ic fu

ture

.-S

choo

ls w

ith li

ttle

in

fras

truc

ture

and

low

ed

ucat

ion

qual

ity.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-E

xpec

tatio

ns o

f im

me-

diat

e le

arni

ng.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Cho

ice

of s

choo

l has

ec

onom

ic im

plic

atio

ns.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Bul

lyin

g.-T

each

ers

with

litt

le

acad

emic

cap

acity

.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Cho

ice

of s

choo

l has

ec

onom

ic im

plic

atio

ns.

- Sc

hool

as

soci

al

supp

ort.

-Low

per

form

ance

at

sch

ool m

ust

be

puni

shed

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Bul

lyin

g-D

eman

ding

tea

cher

s.-P

aren

ts t

rust

the

sc

hool

a lo

t.-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Sch

ool a

s so

cial

su

ppor

t.

Urb

an

– m

iddl

e se

ttin

g

- C

hoic

e m

ade

by

pare

nts,

acc

ordi

ng t

o pe

dago

gic

prop

ositi

on

and

relig

ion.

-Exp

ecta

tions

of s

ocia

l m

obili

ty.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool.

-Priv

ate

educ

atio

n.-U

nive

rsity

exp

ecta

-tio

ns.

-Qua

lified

and

dem

o-cr

atic

tea

cher

s.

- Sc

hool

as

poss

ibili

ty

of a

bet

ter

life

in t

he

futu

re.

-Uni

vers

ity e

xpec

ta-

tions

.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-C

hild

ren

do n

ot

choo

se s

choo

l.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool

-Sch

ools

reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-S

choo

l cho

ice

base

d on

the

qua

lity

of e

du-

catio

n.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-

Low

per

form

ance

at

sch

ool m

ust

be

puni

shed

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Dem

andi

ng t

each

ers.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Sch

ool a

s fa

mily

tr

aditi

on.

Rura

l se

ttin

g-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Chi

ldre

n gi

ve p

ositi

ve

eval

uatio

n to

the

sc

hool

.-

Scho

ol a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-P

hysi

cal p

unis

hmen

t pr

actic

ed b

y te

ache

rs.

- Bu

llyin

g.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-L

ow a

cade

mic

exp

ec-

tatio

n.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d m

eetin

g w

ith fr

iend

s.-

Wor

k in

the

fiel

ds

inte

rfer

es w

ith s

choo

l.-L

ow e

xpec

tatio

ns fo

r th

e ch

ildre

n’s

acad

emic

fu

ture

.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

. -E

xpec

tatio

ns o

f pro

fes-

sion

al s

kills

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-S

choo

l as

poss

ibili

ty

of a

bet

ter

life

in t

he

futu

re.

Tabl

e 4

– D

emon

stra

tion

of fa

mily

pra

ctic

es a

nd fo

rmal

edu

catio

n by

con

text

and

res

earc

hed

coun

try



market.Inthisselectionprocess,thereseemstobeamotivationofsocialclassreproduction,determinedbythelevelofeducationandbytheuniversitycareer,wherethereisalsoverylittleparticipationfromthechildren.

Thedatacollectedinthestudysuggestthattherighttoexpressanopinionabouttheschoolchoicesaswellastherighttoahighleveleducationisstillfarfromrealityformostchildrenoftheurbanlowincomeclassandruralsetting.

5.1.4. Family practices and interaction among the children

Theinteractionwithfriendsrepresentedthesituationinwhichthechildrenreportedmorefreedomofchoiceinthedifferentcontextsofthesixcountriesre-searched.Itbecameveryclearthatfriendsrepresentedthepartoftheirlivesthattheyconqueredthemselves.Eveninthereportswherefriendsweremembersoftheextendedfamily(cousins,nephews/nieces,uncles/aunts)orbelongingtothefamilycircleoffriends,thenotionofpersonalchoiceemphasizedthechildren’sstatementsabouttheirfriendsandthewaysofinteractingwiththem.Similarly,thereasonswhytheychoseacertainfriendwererelatedtopersonaltastesandindividualneeds.

“Friend is the one who wants to play with you, the one you see everyday, when you need something he/she will help you.”(Brazilianchild,urbanlowincomesetting) “What are your friends like? They don’t tell our secrets to other people.” (Peru-vianchild,urbanmiddleclasscontext)

Thispracticeofautonomyisguaranteedevenwhentheparentsdon’tagreewiththeirchildren’schoice.Manyaccountsshowedthatthechildrenespeciallytheyoungerones, take intoaccount theopinionsof theirparents andcarersabout their friends, but that doesn’t necessarily keep them away from theirfriendsbasedontheseopinions.

“I don’t tell my parents, but I still meet them.”(Mexicanchild,ruralsetting)

Parentsadmittedbeingawareof this levelof interferencetheyhave.Thisinteractionwithfriendsinrealityhaspresenteditselfasafirstandimportantexerciseofwideningthefamilysetting,withrespecttoaffectionties.Friends,forparentsandcarersaswellasforchildren,appearedasoneofthefewspaces

Cou

ntr

yC

onte

xtB

razi

lJa

mai

caM

exic

oN

icar

agua

Peru

Ven

ezue

la

Urb

an

– lo

w

inco

me

sett

ing

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-C

hild

ren

unsa

tisfie

d w

ith t

he s

choo

l and

the

te

ache

rs.

-Phy

sica

l pun

ishm

ent

prac

ticed

by

teac

hers

.-D

iffer

ence

s be

twee

n th

e w

ishe

s of

par

ents

an

d ch

ildre

n as

to

the

futu

re.

-Exp

ecta

tions

of s

ocia

l m

obili

ty.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Situ

atio

ns o

f vio

lenc

e su

ffere

d at

sch

ool a

nd

surr

ound

ings

.-P

hysi

cal p

unis

hmen

t pr

actic

ed b

y te

ache

rs-C

hoic

e of

ele

men

tary

sc

hool

det

erm

ines

the

ch

ild’s

aca

dem

ic fu

ture

.-S

choo

ls w

ith li

ttle

in

fras

truc

ture

and

low

ed

ucat

ion

qual

ity.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-E

xpec

tatio

ns o

f im

me-

diat

e le

arni

ng.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Cho

ice

of s

choo

l has

ec

onom

ic im

plic

atio

ns.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Bul

lyin

g.-T

each

ers

with

litt

le

acad

emic

cap

acity

.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Cho

ice

of s

choo

l has

ec

onom

ic im

plic

atio

ns.

- Sc

hool

as

soci

al

supp

ort.

-Low

per

form

ance

at

sch

ool m

ust

be

puni

shed

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Bul

lyin

g-D

eman

ding

tea

cher

s.-P

aren

ts t

rust

the

sc

hool

a lo

t.-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Sch

ool a

s so

cial

su

ppor

t.

Urb

an

– m

iddl

e se

ttin

g

- C

hoic

e m

ade

by

pare

nts,

acc

ordi

ng t

o pe

dago

gic

prop

ositi

on

and

relig

ion.

-Exp

ecta

tions

of s

ocia

l m

obili

ty.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool.

-Priv

ate

educ

atio

n.-U

nive

rsity

exp

ecta

-tio

ns.

-Qua

lified

and

dem

o-cr

atic

tea

cher

s.

- Sc

hool

as

poss

ibili

ty

of a

bet

ter

life

in t

he

futu

re.

-Uni

vers

ity e

xpec

ta-

tions

.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-C

hild

ren

do n

ot

choo

se s

choo

l.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool

-Sch

ools

reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-S

choo

l cho

ice

base

d on

the

qua

lity

of e

du-

catio

n.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-

Low

per

form

ance

at

sch

ool m

ust

be

puni

shed

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Dem

andi

ng t

each

ers.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

the

sch

ool.

-Sch

ool a

s fa

mily

tr

aditi

on.

Rura

l se

ttin

g-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Chi

ldre

n gi

ve p

ositi

ve

eval

uatio

n to

the

sc

hool

.-

Scho

ol a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.

-Chi

ldre

n do

not

ch

oose

sch

ool.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-P

hysi

cal p

unis

hmen

t pr

actic

ed b

y te

ache

rs.

- Bu

llyin

g.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

.-L

ow a

cade

mic

exp

ec-

tatio

n.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d to

mee

t w

ith fr

iend

s.-L

ack

of o

ptio

n hi

nder

s sc

hool

cho

ice.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-S

choo

l reg

arde

d by

ch

ildre

n as

a p

lace

of

auto

nom

y an

d m

eetin

g w

ith fr

iend

s.-

Wor

k in

the

fiel

ds

inte

rfer

es w

ith s

choo

l.-L

ow e

xpec

tatio

ns fo

r th

e ch

ildre

n’s

acad

emic

fu

ture

.

-Sch

ool a

s po

ssib

ility

of

a b

ette

r lif

e in

the

fu

ture

. -E

xpec

tatio

ns o

f pro

fes-

sion

al s

kills

.

-Sch

ool r

egar

ded

by

child

ren

as a

pla

ce o

f au

tono

my

and

to m

eet

with

frie

nds.

-Lac

k of

opt

ion

hind

ers

scho

ol c

hoic

e.-S

choo

l as

poss

ibili

ty

of a

bet

ter

life

in t

he

futu

re.


Family practices and child participation�0

wherechildreneffectivelyhaveoptionsofchoiceandcanexerta relativeau-tonomy.Itcanbestatedthatamongthecountlesslimitsofchildparticipationaccountedsofar,theinteractionwithpairshasprovedtobevitallyimportantforthedevelopmentofchildren.

FriendsweredescribedassomethingnegativeandinferiortofamilybondsonlybychildrenoftheurbanlowincomeclasscontextinJamaica.Itwasnotpossibletodevelopaclearhypothesisonreasonsforthesestatements,butitcanbeassumedthattheyrepresentthereasonswhymostchildrenbreaksomeextrafamiliar affectionatebond,as they report situationsof envy, jealously, lossoftrustandaggressiveness.Possibly,thegroupinJamaicawasabletoexpressthesemoreclearlyandvehemently.

“Friends gossip about you”“A friend told my secret to another”“If you aren’t friends with one of them, the others won’t speak to you”“Friends are jealous and angry if we don’t speak to them”“Friends are cruel”“I only have friends at home”“Friends are bad”“I don’t play with them, they are too rough”(Jamaicanchildren,urbanlowincomeclasscontext)

Ingeneral,parentsalsorevealedtheirconcernswithsomefriendshipstheyconsiderharmfultotheirchildren.Theyhighlightedtheirconcernwith“badcompanies”interferingwiththeirchildren’sperformanceatschoolorteachingthemantisocialbehaviourssuchasstealingorlying.Intheurbanlowincomeclass context of the different countries, the groups of offending youngsters(Venezuelancrooks,Braziliandrugdealers,Peruvian“gangs”,etc)representedamajorthreat,notonlyofenticingaswellasbeingresponsibleforincreasingthelevelofviolenceinthestreetsofthecommunities.

Thelackofpublicsafetywasappointedasanembarrassmentfortheenlarge-mentof groupsof friends. In violent low incomeclass environments, streetsappearasaverydangerousplace,whereanarmedconflictmaytakeplaceatanyminute.Forthisreason,childrenarenotallowedtoattendtheseplaces,

Leavingthemonlytheschoolgroundspremisestomeettheirfriends.Thelackofothersocialequipmentandplacessuchasclubs,theatres,freecourses,cinemasetc.,determinesacrucialdifferenceinthelivesofthechildrenofthe



urbanlowincomeandmiddleclasses.Thelatterstandamuchbetterchanceofmeetingandinteractingwiththeirfriends,astheyliveinneighbourhoodsfullofleisureandculturaloptionsbesidestheschoolinstitution.

“Now it’s the football club, the “cascareta” and the recreation group that are the best friends. There is also a friend since nursery school.”(Mexicanmother,urbanmiddleclass)

The reports fromVenezuela and Peru point out the feeling of insecurityexperiencedbytheurbanmiddleclassfamilieswhich,becauseofthefactthattheyliveclosetoneighbourhoodsofextremepoverty,theyareforcedtocoexistwithcountlesssituationsofcityviolence.Thestreetsoflargecitiesareknowntoallsocialclassesasbeingdangerousandwherepeoplerisktheirlives.Theclasseswithpurchasingpowercanaffordtobuytheirsecurityininstitutionssuchassportclubsandinconsumptionspacessuchasshoppingcentres.Thelessfa-vouredclassesendupbeingconfinedandisolatedintheirsmallhomes.

“I say that, because I had an incident less than two months ago, my mother is going through a difficult time, things happened, my brother died so she doesn’t want the same to happen to us. (…) So this is how it is: - No, you don’t go out – I must obey because she’s my mother; I’ve got to be quiet.” (Venezuelangirl,urbanlowsetting)

Somereportspointedout that theparents`concernwithrespect to theirchildren’sgroupsoffriendsandbadcompaniesisbasedonthegenderprinciplesin forcewhichestablish rules andboundarieswith regards to the interactionamongchildren.Inaccordancetobehavioursandattitudesexpectedfromboysandgirls.Forexample,theoptiontorestrictthegirlsfromgoingoutandwalk-ingaroundonthestreetswasrecurrent,asthestreetsareseenasplaceswheresexualharassmentorviolencecanhappentothegirlsandtheyareperceivedasmorevulnerable. Intheparents`opinion,especially for theoldergirls in theurbanlowincomeclassandruralsetting,“badcompany”areconsideredthosewhoalreadyhaveboyfriends.Anotheraspectseenasimportanttoparentsistheinfluencethisfriendshipmighthaveonthesexualbehaviouroftheirdaughters,expressedbythefearofanunwantedpregnancy.

Asfortheboys,theconcerntheycausetotheirparentsiswithregardstousingtheinternettoomuch,accessingchatroomsandplayingvideo-games.In



addition,boysarealsoseenasmorevulnerabletobeingalluredbygangsofof-fendingyoungstersandtodrugconsumption.

Finally,itcanbestatedthattheinteractionwithfriendshasrepresentedthemostimportantspaceforchildrentoexerciseautonomyandchoice.Alsointhismatter,thereportsoffamiliesrevealedthattheyareattentiveandinfluencingthechoicesofchildrenwithouthowever,exertingthepowerofdecisiontheyhaveovertheirchildreninothersituationsinlife.

5.2. Final considerations

This study,when seeking the identificationof the factors associatedwithpromotingtheparticipationofchildreninthefamilyhouseholdinsixcountriesofLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,produceda setofdata that showsomeofthetrendsoffamilypracticesintheregion.Therepractices,somemoreandothers less participatory, were raised according to the perspective of parents,carers and children in the rural and urban environments and in the middleandlowincomeclasses.However,duetotheexploratorynatureofthestudy,

The experience in Brazil:

The field research in the rural setting in Brazil was carried out in the com-munity of Ribeirão de São Joaquim, located in the Southern region of the State of Rio de Janeiro, which population is distributed between villages and farms. The community has a municipal elementary school, one te-lephone station, one health centre, one sports court, two catholic and one evangelic churches, two cemeteries, one football field, a square and a bandstand, four bars, groceries, one public fountain, one club and one bus.This community was outstanding as the most friendly to the children’s needs to live with their pairs among the rural environments studied. Being a very small community, all the children know each other and play toge-ther in different occasions and spaces, i.e., in the streets, the sports court and the square bandstand.



Coun

tryC

ontext

Brazil

Jamaica

Mexico

Nicarag

uaPeru

Venezuela

Urban

– Low

income

setting

- Lack of safe spaces to m

eet friends;- C

hildren have the liberty to choose friends

- Am

biguous feelings in relation to friends.- C

hildren have the liberty to choose friends- Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

“bad com

panies”.- C

oncern with the

“bad companies” of

the comm

unity- M

ore concern with

girls than boys.

- Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

“bad com

panies”.-C

hildren make friends

in and out of school.-Parents do not know

their children’s friends w

ell.


“bad com

panies”;- School as the m

ost dem

ocratic space to m

ake friends;- Lack of safe spaces to m

eet friends.

- Lack of safe spaces to m

eet friends;- Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

bad com

panies.- C

oncern with juvenile

gangs and with drug

trafficking and con-sum

ption


bad com

panies.- Fear of the children being involved in situa-tions of violence- Lack of safe spaces to m

eet friends.

Urban

– middle

setting

- Children have the

liberty to choose friends- C

hildren go to shop-ping centres, parks and clubs.

- Children have the

liberty to choose friends- Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

“bad com

panies”.

-Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

bad com

panies.-C


in and out of school;-C

hildren go to sports clubs.


“bad com

panies”.- School as the m

ost dem

ocratic space to m

ake friends.


“bad com

panies”.-C

oncern with the

excessive use of chat room

s on the internet.

--Parents value frien-dships and distinguish the good friend from

“bad com

panies”.- C

oncern that children w

ill get involved in situations of violence perpetrated by crooks.

Rural setting

- Varied spaces and opportunities to m

eet friends;- C

hildren have the li-berty to choose friends.

- Children have the li-

berty to choose friends;-Parents value frien-dships and distinguish good friends from

bad com

panies.- C

oncern with bad

companies in the

comm

unity


“bad com

panies”.- C


in and out of school.

- School as the most

democratic space to

make friends;

-Children have the

liberty to choose friends


“bad com

panies”.- Fear of involvem

ent w

ith crooks.

Table 5- Dem

onstration of family practices and interaction am

ong the children



thisdataarenotintendedtocoveralltheexistingdiversities ineachcountrystudied.

Thesetrendsthatworkascluesfortheunderstandingoffamilypractices,arenowreducedtoafewconclusions.Inspiteofbeingdisplayedasagroup,theydon’t intendto ignoretheculturaldiversityofeachcountry,buttodrawtheintersectionlinesbetweenthediverseexperiencesreported.Thus,theycreateamosaicoftrendswiththepurposeofexchangingthedifferentstylesandestab-lishingconditionstoreflectandactonthesubject.1. Lowlevelofchildrenparticipation.Thedifferencesinfamilypracticesrefer-

ringtothechildren’s levelofparticipationwereconditionedtothesocialsetting,wheretheurbanmiddleclasscontexthadmoreparticipatory,demo-craticandauthoritativepractices.Factorsliketheparents`andcarer’seduca-tion,socioeconomicresourcesandtheavailableinstitutionscanexplainthisdifference.Ontheotherhand,theloweducationallevels,theprecarious-nessofsocialsupport,theurbanviolenceandthesocialexclusioncausetheruralandlowincomeclassenvironmentstobeinclinedtomaintainfamilypracticeconceptionsoftraditionalandauthoritariansocieties.However,asageneralrule,eveninthemostdemocraticcontexts,parentsandcarersholdthepowerinmostofthechildren’schoices,especiallytheyoungeronesthatarenotconsideredabletogiveopinionsinrulingtheirlives.

2. Configurationoffamilies.Thechildrenintheruralsettingandurbanlowincomeclass context interactwith extensive familynetworks, in contrastwiththefamiliesofurbanmiddleclasswhicharemorereduced.Membersofextendedfamiliesacquireaspecialroleintheupbringingofthechildrenin the rural setting. A meaningful number of children in the urban lowincomeclasscontextliveinfamiliesledbywomen.Storiesofbreak-upsandmarital reconstructionwere reported, highlighting the role of stepfathersandstepmothersinthechildren’slives.Inallthestudiedcontexts,grand-parents, especially thegrandmothers arepartof thedaily lifeof families.Thecommunitynetworkshaveafundamentalroleintheupbringingofthechildreninlowincomesettings.

3. Displaysofaffectiondeterminedbyageandgender.Smallerchildrengetmoredisplaysofaffectionthanolderones,aswellasgirlscomparedtoboys.Thereislessphysicalcontactinthedisplaysofaffectionintheruralsetting.Manychildrencanonlynoticetheirparents’affectioniftheycorrectlyfulfiltheirschoolanddomesticchores.Inthesecases,affectivesecurityiscondi-



tionedtotheperformancerelatedtogoodbehaviourandtounconditionalobediencetoparents.

4. Invariablepresenceofphysicalpunishment.Intheregion,someverydeeprootedtraditionsstillpersistthatjustifytheuseofphysicalpunishmentinfamiliesofallsocialclassesandcontexts.Theeradicationofthesepracticeshasbeendifficult, in spiteof theefforts to forgeand spreadanormativebodyandsystemof institutions thatbanviolenceandnegligenceagainstchildren in the family setting. Simultaneously, there are signs that pointouttothefactthatpeoplestarttocriticizetheepisodesofviolenceagainstchildren,toperceivethemascrimesandtoseekcompetentinstitutionstoreportthem.

5. Traditionalpatternsoffamilypracticesaremorecommoninthelowincomeclassandruralsetting.Thedisciplinaryresourcesarebasedmostlyintradi-tions.Parentstendtoraisetheirchildrenastheywereraised.Unconditionalobediencebychildrenisvehementlyappreciated.Theinteractionanddis-ciplinerulesarepassedoninmonologueswhereonlytheparentsexpresstheirmotives and reasons for their attitudes.Little information and lackoflearningopportunitiesperpetuateauthoritarianandviolentfamilyprac-tices.Whatoccursisagenerationtransmissionofviolence,wheretherearebreak-ups,ofcourse,butwhatprevails is therepetitionofexperiences towhichparentsweresubmitted.Theisolationoffamiliesintheruralsettingandtheprecariousnessofsocialequipmentintheurbanlowincomeclasscontextappeartoinfluencethemaintenanceofthesepractices,eveninthefamiliesthatseekalternativestylesofraisingtheirchildren.

6. Urban violence establishing family practices. Children in the urban lowincome setting described situations of extreme violence resulting fromthearmedconfrontationbetweengroupsofyouthsthatliveonthestreetsandinthecommunities.Childrenfromthelowincomesettingsdescribedthestreetsasbeingaplaceofimminentdangerousdeaths.Childrenfromurbanmiddleclassalsoperceivethestreetsasdangerousbecausetheycanbemuggedorattacked.Thefearofsexualviolenceembarrassesgirlsmorethanboys.However,thefearofbeinginvolvedwithgroupsofoffendingyouthsisgreaterinboys.Urbanviolencerulingfamilypractices.

7. Genderdivisionofwork–Thedistributionoflabouractivitiesinsidethehouseandoutsidefollowsatraditionalgenderdiversion.Withrareexcep-tions,thedomestictasksfallmoreonthegirlsandtheboysaregiventhetasksthataredangerousanddemandphysicaleffort.


Family practices and child participation��

8. Disapprovalofchildlabour.Childlabourwasdisapprovedofintheparents’statements,butitappearedinthereportsofchildren.Thereisatendencytocondemnchildlabourawayfromhome.However,theprecariouslivingandworkrealityofsomefamiliesstillestablishesaconsiderableamountofworkforchildrenintheruralandurbanlowincomeclasscontexts.

9. Overloadforchildreninthelowincomeclassandruralsetting.Olderchil-drenintheurbanlowincomeclassandruralenvironmentsareoverloadedwithdomesticworkbecausetheyreplacetheirparentsorotheradultsinthetaskofsocialreproduction.Theurbanmiddleclasschildrenareprotectedfromresponsibilitiesandtheylivetheirchildhoodasapromise,astimeforpreparingforfutureadulthood.

10.Impossibilityofachievinggoodqualityupbringingforurbanlowincomeclassandruralsetting.Thereisanimpossibilityofaschoolchoicebychil-drenforreasonsdistinguishedbycontext.Intheruralsettingthereistotalscarcityofgoodqualityschools.Intheurbanlowincomeclasscontextthereisalackofinvestinginpubliceducationandfinancialdifficultyinreachingtheprivatesector.Inthiscontext.Theideaofthechildren’sparticipationinthe“choices”fortheirformaleducationisnon-existent,asthereareoptionstochoose fromingeneral.Therearenoclearoptionsbetweenonschooloranother,aswellasintheseprecariousschoolstherearefewoptionsforcurriculum’s, subjects or courses. The middle class appeals to the privatesector and in thatwaybetterqualifies their children,howeverwith littleparticipationofthechildreninthesechoices,evenwhentherearemoreop-tions.

11.Formaleducationasasocialmobilityproject.Evenbeingclassifiedaspre-carious,theformaleducationisseenasapossibilityofsocialmobilitybyfamiliesinruralandurbanlowincomeclasscontexts.Familiesexpecttheirchildren canhave aprofession thatwill assure themamore comfortablelifewithoutexploitationoftheirlabour.Thisperceptionisalmostmythicalwhencomparedtothehighunemploymentratesorunderpaidjobsinforceintheresearchedcountries.

12.Possibilitiesof transition froma traditional toamoreparticipatorypat-tern.Thewishtomakeadjustmentstodevelopmoreparticipatoryfamilypracticeswaspresentinthestatementsofseveralfamilies.Asanexample,we have the tendency of matching physical punishment with emotionalsupport.Theuseofpunishmentshowsveryimportantculturalandreligioustraits,howevertheyarenolongerappliedinthesamewayasthetraditional



manner.Familiesinallthecontextsandcountriesreportedthatwhentheyapplyphysicalpunishment, they try to talk andexplain the reasonswhytheyaredoingittotheirchildren.Parentshighlightedtheireffortstoseeknewwaysofcoexistencethatarecompatiblewithtraditionsandatthesametimebeingabletosurpassthem.However,thechildrenreportedthattheycan’tparticipatebytalking.Ifontheonehandtheycanhaveexplanationsastowhytheyarepunished,ontheotherhanditisstillnotallowedthatthey should answer back or express their views on the punishment theyreceived.

13.Thechildrendemandattentivelisteningandtimefromadults.Forallthegroupsof children it is very important toparticipate inplayful activitieswiththeirparents.Theywishtoshareexperiencesthatgobeyondtheusualtasksofdomesticsocialreproduction(eat,havebaths,etc.).Oneelementthatwasoutstandingwastheimportancethatthechildrengivetotimede-votedtosharingplayfulactivitieswiththeirparents.Thefeelingofsatisfac-tionlinkedtotimespentwiththeirparentsisnotnecessarilyrelatedtotheamountoftime,buttothefactofthistimebeingcompletelydevotedtothechildren.Themoredemocraticfamilypracticesarepraisedbythechildreninaremarkablewayintheirstatements.Thesepracticesincludetheuseofreflexivedisciplinarystrategieswherethechildcanevaluatehis/herownac-tions.Theyalsoincludethecreationofplacesforplayfulexchangeswherethechildrenjoinintheplayfulactivitieswiththeirparentsandcarers,whichenablesthemtoconsiderthemselvesworthyofattentionandtime,wheretheycantaketheinitiativesandinfluencetheirparents’actions.

14.Thereisanoticeabledifferencebetweenthespeechandthepracticestated,mainlyinthemiddleclass.Duringthefocalgroupsyoucanoftenspotthedifferencebetweenthespeechofwhatmothersandfathersconsideredcor-rectorappropriatewithrespecttotheupbringingoftheirchildrenandthepracticestheyreportedintheireverydayliving.Itisworthhighlightingthatthisdifferenceappearedinanoppositeway,or:somestatedtheybelievedintheeffectivenessofpracticeslittleornotparticipatoryatall,howevertheydescribedafairlyparticipatoryrelationshipwiththeirchildren,whileothershadaveryparticipatory speechbutwasn’t coherentwith theeducationalpracticestheydescribed.

Finally,itwaspossibletoconcludethattheparticipationofchildreninthisstudyaswellastheclaritywithwhichtheywereabletodescribetheirexperi-



encesandfeelings,contributedsignificantlytothewideunderstandingoffamilydynamicsinthedifferentcountriesresearched.Thisfactleadsustobelievethat,when children are given the opportunity to participate of social life, havinginmindthatparticipationrefers to thecombinationofpractices thataimtoencourage,stimulateandallowchildrentoexpresstheirviewsonsubjectsthataffectthem(andthatthesearetakenintoaccount)areachieved,higherlevelsofcompetenceandconsequentlyincreasingthequalityoftheirownparticipa-tion.

Theinvolvementinactivitiessharedwithadultsandotherchildren,wherethereisbeliefinthechild’sskillstosuccessfullyfulfilagiventask,appearstoen-couragethedevelopmentofchildren.Childparticipationisnotameansthroughwhichcaneffectivelychangethings,butachancetodeveloptheirautonomy,self-esteem,independenceandsocialskills.Whenthechildrennoticethattheiropinionsareseriouslytakenintoaccount,theyassumeapostureinlifethatdif-fersalotfromaresignedandsubmissiveposition.Theirself-esteemispromotedandconsequently,thechilddevelopsthefeelingthathe/sheisimportant.Theyacknowledgethemselvesashumanbeings,equaltoadultsanddevelopagreaterrespecttowardstheirpeers.

Inspiteofwhatwasmentionedabove,thislisteningattitudefromtheadultsrequiresallowingthechildrensometimesothattheycanexpressthemselves.Childrenrequireunderstandingadults,willing to listen to themandhelpingthemtofeel safeandcomfortable inthesetting inwhichtheyare, toenablechildparticipationtohappeneffectively.

Ontheotherhand,whatweobservedinthestudyisthatadultsoverbur-denedbysocioeconomicpressureshardlyfeellistenedtoandconsequentlyhavedifficultyinlistening.Populationscorneredbyurbanviolenceorbytheruralexodusexperienceahugerestriction in their fundamental rights.The lackofdignifiedwork, housing, health, education, culture and leisure, public safetyamongothers,

Limits theabilityofadults toexpress themselvesandtoconquera socialspacetrulyvaluedHowcanadultsthenlistentochildreniftheythemselveshavenovoice?Thisstateofaffairsappearstomaketherightparticipationofsomechildrenevenmoredifficulttobecarriedout.

Itshouldbehighlighted,however,thatsomefamiliesimmersedintheabovementionedcontext,statedthewishtochangeandthewilltocreatefamilyprac-ticesthatcoverthedemandsofchildren.Somealreadyputthemintopractice



and act as incongruous voices of traditional patterns. Illustrated here in thespeechofaBrazilianmother:

“That is why now I prefer to talk to my daughters than raise my hand, than getting stressed. I prefer talking than hitting. Because I thought it was wrong, didn’t I? I couldn’t even understand! I wanted to play, I wanted to run. And many times he would say: “go and do that”! then I would see something else – “Let’s go there quickly” – and I would go. Child, let’s play hopscotch, lets skip. Many times I would do what I was told in tears, because I had already taken a beating, because he said something and I didn’t do it. But this is the problem, now I understand it. This is why I don’t do it: a child is not a computer. No, wait, you talk to the child once, twice, three times, it’s useless. The child goes. You have to say it, and repeat it, and repeat it until the child understands she has to do it. I don’t think this is right anymore, to just go and “pow, pow, pow”. Because it didn’t work very well with me, so... (laughs) He would hit me and I would do it again, so... You grow up and become respon-sible, and you understand. And I also believe that I grew up more because I saw his side of the situation, I began to understand. This is why I think that nowadays I won’t – sometimes I get stressed – but I don’t hit, there’s no such thing. “I really believe talking is best”.

Usually,inthesefamiliestispossibletonoticeatrendtoemploypracticesthatpromotetheequityofgenderandamorebalanceddistributionofdomesticchores,whichreflectsdirectlyontheupbringingofchildrenandseemstopro-videamorefavourablesettingtotheparticipationofchildren.Thesetunelessvoicesusuallybelongedtofathersandmotherswhofoundmoreparticipatoryspacesintheworkplace,and/orovercamethestricttraditionsrelatedtotradi-tionalrolesofgender,forexample.Inthisaspect,listeningplacesforfamiliesseemtofavourthedeflexionaboutpossibilitiesofchange.Thespeechesbelowillustratethistendency:

“I work and don’t accept to do things in the house on my own. Everything has to be shared, has to be thought and discussed, we both work so there has to be a consensus.”(motherofchild7-12yearsold)

“We both work so we both must be responsible for looking after the girls, for doing the housework.”(motherofchild7-12yearsold)



It is importanttoemphasizethattheconclusionsofthisstudywereonlypossibletoreachbycrossingthespeechesofchildrenwiththoseofadults,thuscreatingthecomplexmeaningsofthemostdiverseexistingfamilypractices.

5.3. Recommendations for action:

1) Cooperate towards the end of structural, institutional, family and inter-personalviolencetowhichchildrenlivingintheruralandurbanlowclasscontextsaresubjecttoineachregion.Therealizationofmoreindepthresearchandstudies,togetherwithcollec-

tivepoliticalincidencethatorganizesthedifferentlevelsofviolence,canhelpwiththenecessaryimpactinpublicpoliciesthatwillassurethewell-beingofchildrenandtheirfamilies.

2) Tocontributewiththeimmediatebanofphysicalandhumiliatingpunish-mentagainstchildren,aswellasagainstanyothercitizen,meaningwomenwhoarevictimsofdomesticviolence,prisoners,subordinateandenslavedworkers.Thedevelopmentofcampaignstobanallkindsofviolenceasadisciplinary

strategymust includecuttingsofgender, socialclassandethnicity,aswellasthedebatesofsocialmovementsthatfightagainsttorture,enslavedlabourandsexual exploitation.Traditionsdeep-rooted in the cultureof the area endupjustifyingtheuseofphysicalandhumiliatingpunishments.

3) Topromoteactionsthatquestionthetraditionalrolesofgenderrelatedtothesexualdivisionofdomesticchores.Theon-goinggenderdivisionofdomesticchoresco-operateswiththeup

keepingofgenderiniquitiesandcreates,fromanearlyageinchildren’slives,anunevenandunfairpatternofdistributionoflabouractivitiesforbothgirlsandboys.

4) Togivevisibilitytomoreparticipatoryfamilypracticesinallcontextsandsocialclasses.Forthecreationofprogramsandpublicpoliticsitisworthresortingtothe

strategiesinforceorbeingtransformedtoproducealternativesoffamilyprac-ticesthatarereallyfeasibleandintimewiththerealityofeachcontext.



5) Toincludethevoicesofchildreninthecreation,implementationandevalu-ationofactionspromotingauthoritativefamilypractices.Children,withalltheirlimitations,obviouslyknowwhattheywantandare

abletoexpresstheirdesirestoincludetheirvoicesisafundamentalconditionfortheimplementationofanhonestdiscussionbetweenchildrenandadults.Itisworthmentioningthatwhendoingthat,theadultswillhavetoacceptthewaychildrenexpressthemselvesandnotwanttochangethemintosmalladultsandonlythemlistentothem.

6) Encouragethedialoguebetweenchildrenandtheculturalandfamilytradi-tionsrememberedbyadultsfromtheirownchildhood.Theactionsthatseektore-evaluatethefamilypracticesneedtoallowthedi-

alogueofthetraditionalpatternsexistingineachcontextwiththeactualneedsofthechildren.Apossibilityofdialogueisthatonewhereadultsandchildrencantalkabouttheirownexperienceswhentheywerechildrenandthatwayana-lyzetheeffectivenessandpertinenceofthedifferentstrategiesofparticipation,careanddiscipline.

7) Developprogramsthatallowadultstobuildupstrategiestolistentochil-drenandatthesametime,maintaintheirauthorityandresponsibilitynotjust inthefamilybutalsoineducation,health,work,cultureandleisureinstitutions.Besides the families, other institutions in society don’t listen to children

either.Asocio-politicalprojectofeffectiveparticipationofchildrenshouldin-cludenotonlyparentsandcarersbutalsoalltheadultswhocarryoutactionsinorganizationsdedicatedtochildhood.



6. Part II: Summaries of Country Reports13

6.1. Summary Brazil

Team responsible for the study:

GaryBarker,MarcioSegundo,MarcosNascimento,TatianaAraújo,IsadoraGarcia,SimoneGomes,BrunoPizzi,JuanBlancoeHugoCorrea.

Organization:Promundo

Characteristics of the methodology applied in the country.

ForcollectingthedataactivitiesinthreedifferentcontextsintheStateofRiodeJaneirowerecarriedout.AsaruralcontextthecommunityofRibeiraodeSaoJoaquimwasselected.Thiscommunityislocatedinthesouthern“Fluminense”partoftheStateofRiodeJaneiroandsince1992istheseconddistrictofthemunicipalityofQuatis.Thedistricthasamunicipalschoolofbasiceducation,atelephonestation,ahealthcentre,asportsfield,twocatholicchurches,oneevangelicalchurch,twocemeteries,afootballfield,asquareandabandstand,fourbars,grocerystores,apublicwaterfountain,asocialclubandabus.

Thecommunityselectedfortheurbanlowclasscontextwas“ViladoJoao”whichispartoftheMareShantytownsComplex,situatedintheNorthernsideofthemunicipalityofRiodeJaneiro.MareComplexisconsideredoneofthe

13ThesummarieswerepreparedoutbyPromundobasedonthedatacollectedandreportssentbytheorganizationsofeachcountry.



largestgroupsofshantytownsinthecityofRiodeJaneiro,havingatotalareaofabout800thousandsquaremetressubdividedin16differentcommunities.Itspopulationaccountsforatotalof132.176inhabitantsandalmostonethirdofthesearecomposedofchildrenandpre-adolescents.ThispopulationcontingentcanalsobehighlightedbyitslargenumbersofNortheasternandafro-descen-dantmigrants(65%ofthepopulation).Thislocationhasthehighestconcen-trationoflowincomepopulationinthemunicipalityofRiodeJaneirowhichrepresents2,26%ofthetotalnumberofinhabitantsofthecity.Thispopulationisinvolvedmainlyintheinformallabourmarketandinautonomousactivities(theso-calledoddjobs)andaconsiderablepartoftheresidentfamiliesisledbywomen(about70%).

Thethirdcontextselectedwastheurbanmiddleclass,representedbymoth-ers,fathersandcarerslivingintheSouthernpartofthecityofRiodeJaneiro,acomplexofneighbourhoodstraditionallyinhabitedbythe“carioca”(aspeoplefromRiodeJaneiroareknown)middleclass.Besides.Thelocation,middleclasswasalsodefinedherebythefamilybudget(equalorhigherthanR$2,000.00)andschooleducation(universitylevel)oftheparticipants.

Fortheconsultationwiththechildren,groupsofthematicactivitieswerecarriedout.Duetothecomplexityofthedatacollectioninthisagerange,eachgroupofchildrenwerereunitedforfivemeetings.Attheendofthesemeetings,twochildren(aboyandagirl)wereselectedtoparticipateofin-depthinter-views.Onlythemiddleclassgroupwasnotsubjectedtotheconsultationswithchildren.

Children participating in the research

ChildrenRural Setting Low Income

Women Men Women Men

Group of activities

Group of 7 to 9 years 3 � 5 5

Group of 10 to 12 years 4 8 5 5

In depth interviews



Total of children 7 14 10 10

Source: Informe Final/Brazil/2007


Part II: Summaries of country reports 75

Forthedatacollectionwithfathers,mothersandcarers,thetechniquecar-riedoutwastheoneoffocalgroups.Intheruralandurbanlowclasscontexts,2focalgroupswerecreated:onefocalgroupforparentswhohavechildrenaged0to6yearsandanotherforthosewhohavechildrenorcareforchildrenagedbetween7and12yearstotalizing6.Inthemiddleclasscontextonlyonefocalgroupwascreatedwithparentsofchildrenagedbetween0and12years.Afterthefocalgroupswerecarriedout,3peopleoutofeachcontextwereselectedtoparticipate in the in-depth interviews inaccordancewith theprotocolof theresearch.

Fathers, mothers and carers participating in the research

Rural Setting

Low Income Middle Setting

Women Men Women Men Women Men

Adults

Parents of children from 0-� years

7 3 8 0 7 4

Parents of children from 7-12 years

8 2 8 2 3 1

In depth inter-views

More participatory

1 1 1 1 1 1

Less participatory

1 1 1 1 1 1

Total of parents 15 5 1� 2 10 5*Parents – are considered as the children’s fathers, mothers and carers.Source: Informe Final/Brazil/2007

General configuration of the families participating in the research

• The majority of the rural areas (85%), of the low income community(55.6%)andofmiddleclass(54%)areagedbetween30and40.

• In the rural areas over half the participants declared themselves as beingCaucasian(55%)aswellasinthemiddleclass(64.3%).Inthelowincome



communitytherewasa largerdivisionintheintervieweesregardingrace,themajoritybeingdark(44.4%)

• 80%(16)ofparticipantsintheruralareawereraisedinthecountryside.Amongthoseinthelowincomecommunity,onlyonepersonwasbroughtupinthecountryside.Theremainingwereraisedinthecapital(44.4%)andinthecity(50%).Inthemiddleclass,morethanhalfwerebroughtupinthecapital(73.3%).

• Morethanhalf intheruralarea(55%)weremarried.Inthe lowincomecommunity, 44.5% were single as well as the middle class interviewees(33.3%).

• Morethanhalfamongtheintervieweescarriesoutpaidwork:65%(13)intheruralareaand50%(9)inthelowincomecommunity.Inthemiddleclass93.3%carryoutpaidwork.

• Themajorityofintervieweesintheruralareaandinthelowincomecom-munity earn less than one minimum wage14. The average wage in themiddleclassisR$2.000,00Reais.

• Intheruralarea,45%(9)ofintervieweesaretheonlyonesworkingtosup-porttheirfamilies.Another45%(9)haveatleastonemorepersonworkingtosupportthefamily.Inthelowincomecommunity55,6%(10)arethesoleworkerstosupporttheirfamiliesanditwasthiscategorythatpresentedthehighestnumberofsinglepeople.Inthemiddleclasseveryoneworksand80%inthatcategoryhaveatleasttwoindividualsworkingtosupporttheirfamilies.

• The totalityofparticipants in the rural area and themajority in the lowincomecommunity(61.1%)iscatholic.Inthemiddleclassthispercentagefallsto40%.

• Regardingthegenderofthechildren,intheruralareaandinthemiddleclass,themajorityiscomposedofboys,(67.3%and84.5%respectively),asopposedtothelowincomecommunitywherethemajorityiscomposedbygirls.(53.3%).

• Alltheintervieweesintheruralareaandthemajorityinthelowincomeandmiddleclasscommunities,thechildrenbelongedtobiologicalmothers(77.8%and67%respectively).

14mid://00000045/%23_ftnref-1minimumwage(1SM=R$350=USD$175.00)



Main findings

1. Thechildrenverbaliseddifferentopinionstotheonesgivenbytheirparentsabouttheupbringingtheyreceive,theygivemorevaluetothepositiveedu-catingstrategiesthatdon’tapplyphysicalandhumiliatingpunishmentandarebasedondialoguing,patienceandunderstanding.

2. Communityviolencerelatedtodrugdealingcontributestonon-participa-toryattitudesfromparentsasfarastheybecomeconcernedwiththephysi-calintegrityoftheirchildren.

3. Streetoccupationismainlymarkedbymalesintheurbanlowclasscom-munityespeciallywhenitcomestooutdoorwork.

4. In the middle class parents give their children freedom to choose theirfriendsandtheyacknowledgethat,eventhoughrestricted,theyhavesecurevenuestomeet.Theseplacesareenclosed,suchasshoppingcentres,schoolsandparksthatrepresentthe“duplicationofthecity”-astheyofferevery-thingacitydoes,butprotectedfromthedangersoftheurbanviolence.

5. Themainexpectationsofchildrenregardingtheirparentsareintheaffectiveandemotionalfield.

6. Thedemandfromboysintheruralcontextisprimarilyformoreattentionandtendernessfromtheirparents.

7. Thedisplaysofaffectionfromfathersintheurbanlowclasscontextwereidentified,aswellastheimportanceofappreciatingthesebehaviours.

8. Thegenderdivisioninlabourwasdisplayedintheruralandurbanlowclasscontexts.Thisdivisionwasnotnoticedinthemiddleclass.Inthiscontext,children are spared from domestic tasks when families have maids: onlywhentherearenomaids,childrenareencouragedtoperformthosetasksre-latedtopersonalandorganizationalcare–maketheirbeds,tidytheirtoys,washtheirunderwearandmaketheirownbreakfast.

9. Recurringcomplaintsaboutdomesticviolencesufferedbytheirmotherswereconstantlyreportedbychildrenintheruralandurbanlowclasscontexts.

10.Thedisciplinarystrategiesareappliedaccordingtothegenderofthechil-dren,whereboysaremoreseverelypunishedthangirls.

11.Thegenerationtransmissionofviolencewasidentifiedasthechildreninter-nalizedtheirangerandhatredattheviolentupbringingstrategiesappliedbytheirparents,andhowtheywouldliketoapplythesamestrategytothem.

12.Themajorityofthechildrenreporteddifficultyinexpressingtheirfeelingsandopinions,andthereweremoremonologuesintherelationshipbetweenparentsandchildrenthandialogueseffectively.



13.Thesmallerthespacegiventothechildrentospeakopenlytotheirparents,themoretheyexpresstheirfeelingsnegatively,bypresentingdisorderlyandspitefulbehaviour.

14.Thespace for listeningandnegotiationbetweenparentsandchildren re-gardingchildlabourdependsontheage(morecontroloverolderchildren)and family arrangements, meaning that the space for child participationvariesaccording to thechild’sage,gender,personality,cultureandsocio-economiccontext,personalhistoryoftheparents,familyconfigurationandgendersocialisationofparentsandchildren.

15.Examplesofsituationswherethereischildparticipation,choiceoffriends,clothesandchildlabour.

16.Wecanonlyrecognisehowchildrenunderstandtheupbringingtheyhadfromtheirparentsandwhatusetheymakeoftheirupbringingaccordingtohowmuchparentslistenedtothem.Fromtheinterviewswiththechildren,wecanshowhowtheyplayactiverolesintheprocess,astheycanmaketheirparentsreviewtheirstrategiesandbehaviour.

Revised bibliography for the study:

Alves,PaolaBiasoli. (1997)A ecologiadodesenvolvimentohumano: experi-mentosnaturaiseplanejados.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica.PortoAlegre,v.10,n.2.

Araújo,A.F.(2002)Percepçãodosestiloseducativosparentaiseajustamentopsicológicodoadulto—comparaçãoentreindivíduoscomesemperturba-çõesdepressivas.RevistaPaidéia,vol.12,n.24,p.214—227.

Araújo,T.A.(2006)Acompreensãodascriançassobreasestratégiaseducativasdeseuspais.Relatóriodepesquisa.RiodeJaneiro,Promundo.

Araújo,TatianaTavares.(2005)Oconceitodeparticipaçãoinfantilesuarelaçãocomodesenvolvimento infantil.TrabalhoapresentadoparaconclusãodedisciplinadoCursodeEspecializaçãoemEducaçãoInfantildaPUC,RiodeJaneiro.

Bem,L.A.;Wagner,A.(2006)Reflexõessobreaconstruçãodaparentalidadeeousodeestratégiaseducativasemfamíliasdebaixonívelsocioeconômico.PsicologiaemEstudo.Maringá,v.11,n.1,p.63-71,jan./abr.

Biasoli-Alves,P.(1997)Aecologiadodesenvolvimentohumano:experimentosna-turaiseplanejados.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica,v.10(2),PortoAlegre.



Biasoli-Alves,Z.M.M.;Caldanha,R.H.L.(1992)Práticaseducativas:apar-ticipaçãodacriançanadeterminaçãodeseudia-a-dia.Psicologia:TeoriaePesquisa,vol.8,n.2,p.231-242.

Cecconello, A. M.; De Antoni, C.; Koller, S. H. (2003) Práticas educativas,estilosparentaiseabusofísiconocontextofamiliar.Psicol.Estud.,vol.8,n.Esp.,Maringá.

Costa,F.T.,Teixeira,M.A.P.&Gomes,W.B.(2000).Responsividadeeexi-gência:Duasescalasparaavaliarestilosparentais.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrí-tica,13,465-473.

Goldstein,D.M. (1998)“NothingBad Intended:ChildDiscipline,Punish-ment,andSurvivelinRiodeJaneiro,Brasil”.In:Sheper-Hughes,NancyeSargent,Carolyn.SmallWars.TheCulturalPoliticsofChildhood.Berkeley,LosAngeleseLondon,UniversityofCaliforniaPresss,1998.

DeAntoni,C.;Koller,S.H.(2000)Avisãodefamíliaentreasadolescentesquesofreramviolênciaintrafamiliar.EstudosdePsicologia,5(2),347-381.

Martins, C.S. (2005) A compreensão da família sob a ótica de pais e filhosenvolvidosnaviolênciadomésticacontracriançaseadolescentes.Disserta-çãodeMestrado—ProgramadePós-GraduaçãoemEnfermagem.RibeirãoPreto,136páginas.EscoladeEnfermagemdeRibeirãoPreto—Universi-dadedeSãoPaulo.

Martins,E.;Szymanski,H.(2004)Brincandodecasinha:significadodefamí-liaparacriançasinstitucionalizadas.EstudosdePsicologia,v.9(1),Natal,Jan/Abr.

Oliveira,E.A.;Marin,A.H.;Pires,F.B.et.al.(2002)Estilosparentaisautori-tárioedemocrático-recíprocointergeracionais,conflitoconjugalecompor-tamentosdeexternalizaçãoeinternalização.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica,vol.15,n.1,p.10-27.

Pinto,M.(1997)Ainfânciacomoconstruçãosocial.In:Pinto,M.;Sarmento,M.J. (Orgs.).Ascrianças: contextose identidades.CentrodeEstudosdaCriança.UniversidadedoMinho,Braga,Portugal.

SeidlDeMoura,M.L.;Lordelo,E.;Vieira,M.L.et.al.(2006)Investimentoecuidadoparentais:aspectosbiológicos,ecológicoseculturais.Projetodepesquisaemdesenvolvimento,partedepropostaaprovadapeloEditalIns-titutosdoMilênio.

Silva,LúciaIsabeldaConceiçãoetal.(2006)Diferençasdegênerosnosgruposdebrincadeiranarua:ahipótesedeaproximaçãounilateral.Psicol.Reflex.Crít.,PortoAlegre,v.19,n.1.



Souza,S.M.g;Peres,V.L.(2002)A.Famíliasdecamadaspopulares:umlugarlegítimoparaaeducação/formaçãodosfilhos.Em:Rizzini,I.;Barker,G.;Zamora,M.h.OSocialemQuestão:umarevistadoprogramademestradoemServiçoSocialdaPUC-Rio,vol.7(7).RiodeJaneiro:PUC,Departa-mentodoServiçoSocial.

Weber,L.N.D. et. al. (2004) Identificaçãode estilosparentais: opontodevistadospaisedosfilhos.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica,v.17,n.3,PortoAlegre.

On health hazards related to child labour refer to:

FassaAG.HealthBenefitsofEliminatingChildLabour.Geneva:InternationalLabourOrganization;2003.DisponívelemURL:

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/ipec/publ/policy/pol_healthcost-ben_2003.htm.

WHOStudyGroup.ChildrenatWork:SpecialHealthRisks.TechnicalReportSeries765:5-47;1987.

6.2 Jamaica


JanetBrowneSharonJohnson.Organization:ParentingPartnersCaribbean.


ThestudyinJamaicatriedtoexaminetheparentalstyleswiththeobjectiveofnotjustdescribingthem,butalsotoidentifythepotentialoffamilypracticesthathasbeenenablingmanyJamaicanchildrentogrowhealthily,eventhoughthey live in adverse economical conditions andcoexistingwithviolent socialpractices.

LowandmiddleclassneighborhoodsinKingstonandaruralcommunitysituated 110 Km from the capital were selected as places for data collectionforthestudy.Inordertocarryouttheinterviewswiththechildren,sixgroupactivitieswerecarriedoutinthemonthsofJuneandJuly2006.Inall,60chil-drentookpartoftheactivity,18fromtheruralsetting,28fromtheurbanlowincomesettingand14fromtheurbanmiddleclasssetting.Twentysevenwere



boysandthirtythreegirls.Allthegroupstookplaceinschoolswheretheheadmasters enabled the selectionof the childrenandobtainingpermission fromparentssothatthechildrencouldparticipateoftheinterview.Eachgroupmetforawholedayandtheactivitiesthatmotivatedthechildren’sparticipationinthediscussionsincludedstorytelling,drawing,playinggames&havingsnacks.Thechildrenwerehelpfulandevenexcitedwiththefactthattherewereadultsinterestedintheiropinionsforawholeday.

Tocollectdatawithfathers,mothersandcarers,eightfocalgroupswerecar-riedout,ofwhich17adultsfromtheruralsetting,17fromtheurbanlowincomesettingand10fromthemiddleclasssettingtookpartin.Outofthe44partici-pants,26werewomenand18weremen.Researchesalsocarriedout in-depthinterviewswith17adultsthathadtakenpartinthefocalgroups.

General configuration of the families taking part of the study

Group Rural (17) Urban Popular (17) Urban Middle setting (10)

ID A B C D E F G H

QuantityGender

3 Women

2 Women2 Men

8 Women 2 Men

� Women � Men 3 Women2 Men

4 Women

� Men

Ages 37 – 45 28 – 42 2� – 42 23 – 42 29 – 41 24 –33 35 – 44 28 – 39

Marital Status*

M, M, D

W: S, CRM: S, M

W: D 1, S 2, CR 2, M 3M: M 2

S 4, CR 4 � CR W: S 3M: S 2

M 3, WI 1

M 3, E 1

Quantity (age of children)

2 (9, 12)4 (10-15)2 (9, 19)

W: 5 (2-21)5 (0-17)M: (1, �)2 (8, 8)

W: 1 (4), 3(1-3), 3(3-12), 2(3, 8)3 (9-11), 2 (5-10) 2(�-9) 1 no data M: 2 (3,5), 1 (3)

� (2-2�)2 (12, 14)2 (4,12)� (4-22)3 (2-10)3 (5-10)

3 (8-13)5 (4-18)2 (10, 14)4 ( 3-9)2 (8, 11)11 (3 – 20’s, 3 adopted)

Number ofrooms/ domicile

1, 2, 3 2 (4) W: 1, 2(5), 5, 7M: 3, 2

2, 3, 5 (3), 7

1 (2)2 (4)

W: 1 (3) M: 2, 3

3(3), 4 2, 3(2), 4

* M = Married, S = Single, W = Widow, E = Engaged, D = Divorced, CR = Consensual Relationship



Main findings

1. Thechildrendescribedtheirfamilystructuresinvariouswaysandinnoneofthecontextsdidthenuclearfamilypredominate.

2. Inallthecontextstherewasapredominanceofmother-basedfamilies,withastrongpresenceofstepfathers.

3. Thechildrenintheurbanmiddleclasssettingmentionedthepositiveim-portanceoffamiliesintheirlives,butthechildrenfromurbanlowincomeclasssettingshowedmoreambivalenceregardingtheroleoffamiliesintheirlives.

4. Inallthecontexts,childrenreportedintensemannersofphysicalandhu-miliatingpunishmenthighlightingtheseastheleastappreciatedbehavioroftheirparents.

5. Onlythechildrenoftheurbanmiddleclasssettingmentionedtheirparentsorcarerslistenedtothem;intheotherenvironmentsparentsweredescribedaslovinganddevotedbutnotaspeoplewholistentochildren.

6. Allthechildrenreportedtheyhavedomestictasksandonlyonechildinthemiddleclassmentionedpaidworkoutofthehome.

7. Thereisagenderdifferentiationinthedistributionsofdomestictaskswheretheoutdoortasksareassignedtotheboysandindoortaskstothegirls.

8. A few childrenpointedout they are concerned andoverloadedwith theamount,thetypeandthelevelofresponsibilityofthedomestictasks.

9. Parentsareresponsibleforthechoiceofthechildren’s’schools.Intheurbanmiddle class setting the children expressed satisfaction with the parents’choice,intheruralsetting,thechildrenexpressedtheirwishtostudyandintheurbanlowincomeclasstheyreportedviolenceandilltreatmenttheyweresubjectedtointheschoolsetting(AMBITO).

10.The children in the urban low income setting reported the reflection ofurbanviolenceintheschoolsettingwhereareproductionofsituationsofviolenceoccursbetweenthestudentsandthebehavioroftheteachers.

11.Mostchildren,inthedifferentenvironmentsreportedtheycanchoosetheirfriends,buttheparametersemployedtothischoiceareveryrelatedtothevaluesoftheirparentsandtowhattheyconsidergoodorbadcompany.

12.Forthepoorerchildren,especiallythoseintheurbanlowincomesetting,thelevelofparticipationislimitedduetothefearparentshavetoexposetheirchildrentobadcompaniesandtosituationsofviolencepresentinthecommunity.Thissituation,addedtothelackofsocialsupportnet,imposes



considerablelimitationstotheparticipationofthechildreninthepracticeofchoosingleisureactivities,personalconsumptionandeventhechoiceoffood.

13.Thegreatmajority ifadultsdescribedadoptingphysicalpunishmentasacorrectwayofdiscipliningchildren.Adultsintheurbanlowincomeandruralenvironmentsdescribedtheyappliedintensephysicalpunishment.

14.Alltheadultsreferredtomaternity/paternityasastressfulactivity.However,some, although living in adverse conditions, expressed satisfaction whenreferringtofamilylife.

15.Themajorityofadultsgavegreatimportancetotheobedienceoftheirchil-drenandlistedstealing,lyingandinteractingwithbadcompaniesasbehav-iorsinchildrenthatmustbereprimandedbythem.

16.Theadultsdemonstratedtheyhadlittleunderstandingandsensitivityto-wardstheemotionalandsocialneedsoftheirchildren.

17.Alltheadultswereveryinterestedintheacademiclifeoftheirchildrenanddeclared that school is thepath fora futureofopportunitiesandprofes-sionalsuccess.

18.Inall theenvironments, theadultsexpressedthewishthattheirchildrenhadmoreopportunitiesinlife,lesspoverty,andalesspainfulgrowthup-bringing,obedienceandrespectwerehighlightedas thekey toachievingsuchgoals.

Revised bibliography for the study

Arnold,E. (1982)TheUseofCorporalPunishment inChildRearing intheWestIndies,inChildAbuseandNeglect,Vol.6.

Brown,J.Anderson,PandChevannes,B.(1993)TheContributionofCarib-beanMentotheFamily:AJamaicaPilotStudy.ReporttoIDRC,UNICEFandCUSO.

Brown,J.andChevannes,B.(1998)WhyManStaySo:TietheHeifer,LoosetheBull.AnExaminationofGenderSocialisationintheCaribbeanbytheUWI,UNICEF.

Brown, J. Parental Resistance to Child Rights, in Barrow, C. (ed.). (2003),Children’sRightsintheCaribbean,Kingston:IanRandlePublishers.

Brown, J. (2006) Responding to Child Abuse: A training resource to guideJamaica’shospitalsandsupportservicesinrespondingeffectivelytoabused



childrenandtheirfamilies,forBustamanteHospitalforChildrenandJa-maicaMinistryofHealth.

Caribbean,CaribbeanChildDevelopmentCentre,UWI.(unpublished)Children’sIssuesCoalition:CaribbeanChildhoods:DocumentingtheRealities

inJamaica.Aliteraturereviewofresearchonchildren:sectiononchildrenwithdisabilities.(Ramkissoon,M.)

Clarke,E.(1957)MyMotherWhoFatheredMe:AStudyoftheFamilyinThreeSelectedCommunitiesinJamaica,Boston:GeorgeAllenandUnwin.

Cohen,Y.(1955)CharacterformationandsocialstructureinaJamaicancom-munity.JournalfortheStudyofInterpersonalProcesses,#18.

Evans,H(1989)PerspectivesonthesocialisationoftheworkingclassJamaicanChild,SocialandEconomicStudies,Volume38,no3,177-203.

Fernald,L.C.andMeeks-Gardner,J.(2003)Jamaicanchildren’sreportsofvio-lenceatschoolandhome.SocialandEconomicStudies,52,4,121-140.

Grant,D.R.B.(1980)LifeStyleStudy:ChildrenoftheLesserWorldintheEnglishSpeakingCaribbean.TheBernardvanLeerFoundation,ProjectforEarlyChildhoodEducation.

Grantham-McGregor,S.,Landmann,J.andDesai,P.(1983)ChildrearinginpoorurbanJamaica,inChild:care,healthanddevelopment,1983,9,57-71,BlackwellScientificPublications.

Handwerker,W.Penn(1996)PowerandGender:ViolenceandAffectionEx-periencedbyChildreninBarbados,WestIndies,inMedicalAnthropology,Vol.17,pp.101-128.

Leo-Rhynie,E. (1993)TheJamaicanFamily:ContinuityandChange,GraceKennedyFoundationLecture.

McGarrity,GandBrown,J.(1997)GenderandtheYoungChild:AJamaicanCommunityExploration.InCoordinator’sNotebook:AnInternationalRe-sourceforEarlyChildhoodDevelopment.No.20.

Morrison,J.,Ispa,J.andMilner,V.(1998)IdeasaboutChildRearingamongJamaicanMothersandEarlyChildhoodEducationTeachers.JournalofRe-searchinChildhoodEducation,Vol.12,No.2,166-175.

Payne,M.(1989)UseandAbuseofCorporalPunishment:ACaribbeanView,inChildAbuseandNeglect,Vol.13,pp389-401.



Reproductive Health Survey 2002, conducted by National Family PlanningBoard.

Ricketts,H.andAnderson,P.(2005)ExecutiveSummaryofParentinginJa-maica:AStudyconductedonbehalfofthePlanningInstituteofJamaica.

Ricketts,HandAnderson,P.(2006)ParentinginJamaica,PlanningInstituteofJamaica.

Rohner,R,Kean,KandCournoyer,D.(1991)EffectsofCorporalPunishment,PerceivedCaretakerWarmth,andCulturalBeliefsonthePsychologicalAd-justmentofChildreninSt.Kitts,WestIndies.JournalofMarriageandtheFamily,53,August,681-693.

Roopnarine,J.(2006)CulturalBasesofChildrearingandSocialisationinAfri-canCaribbean and IndoCaribbeanFamilies, for theCaribbeanSupportInitiativeResearchSeminar,Dominica.

Samms-Vaughan,M.(2004)ProfilesProject,PlanningInstituteofJamaica,andtheUniversityof theWest Indies’CaribbeanChildDevelopmentCentreandDepartmentofChildHealth.

Samms-Vaughan,M.(2005)AComprehensiveAnalysisofJamaicanChildren’sExposuretoViolenceat11—12Years.PAHO.

TheJamaicanChild2002,AreportoftheSocialIndicatorsMonitoringSystem,PlanningInstituteofJamaica.

UNICEFJamaica(2001)SituationalAnalysisofWomenandChildren.UNICEFJamaicaCountryProgramme2002-2006.Williams,S.andBrown,J.(2006)Researchapproachesandfindingsonchil-

drearingandsocializationofyoungchildren(frombirthtoeightyearsofage)intheCaribbean.ForCaribbeanSupportInitiative/BernardvanLeerFoundation.

6.3 Mexico

Team responsible for the study.

NashieliRamírez,PatriciaUrbieta,AgustínRodríguez,MaríaEugeniaRo-dríguez,PatriciaRomero,EstelíMeza,AndreaFlores,ElsaCastillo.

Organization:RirikiIntervencíonSocial.




InagreementwiththeprotocolsentbyPromundoforthedevelopmentofthestudycommunitiesinthreecontextswereselected:rural,urban,urbanlowincomeclassandurbanmiddleclass.TheactivitieswerecarriedoutbetweenthemonthsofAugustandNovember2006.

Intheruralsetting,focalgroupsandsixin-depthinterviewswerecarriedoutwithfathers,mothersandcarersinthreeruralcommunitiesintheStateofSinaloaandtwoappointmentsandfourindividualinterviewswithchildrenintwocommunitiesintheStateofHidalgo.ThedatasurveyintheurbancontextwascarriedoutintheFederalDistrictwiththerealizationofthefocalgroupsandfourinterviewsinthelowincomeclasssetting(AlvaroObiegonmunici-pality) and two focal groups and three interviews in themiddle class setting(Coyocanmunicipality).Theconsultationwithchildrenwascarriedoutwithfourgroups, twobycontextandtwo interviewspergroup(lowincomeclassAlvaroObregonandTealpanmunicipalities.MiddleClasscontext,municipal-ityofCoyocan).Inall,60childrenand80adultsparticipatedinthefullprocessofcollectingdata.

Theconsultationwiththechildrenwascarriedoutwiththesupportofthefacilitatorswhoorganizedthegroupsessioninaccordancewiththeprotocolofthestudy.Thegroupswerecarriedoutindifferenturbancommunitieswhichenabledthechildrentohavenodirectcontactwiththeadultsthattookpartinthefocalgroupsoffathers,mothersandcarers.Giventhedimensionoftherural

Communitiesweretheconsultationwascarriedout,itwasimpossibleforthechildrennottoknowtheadults,butthenecessaryprecautionsweretakeninordernottoinvalidatethedata.

Eachconsultationlastedforeighthoursdividedintofourthemessessions.Toensuretheintegrityofthegroup,thesessionswerecarriedoutinacontinu-ousmanner.Withtheobjectiveofcomplementingtheinformationobtainedinthegroupprocess,twoindividualinterviewspergroupwerecarriedoutattheendofeachconsultation.

Thefocalgroupswithfathers,mothersandcarerswerecarriedoutbytwofacilitators,onecoordinatingandtheotheractingasanobserver.Inthegroupscarriedoutintheurbanlowincomeclassandthemiddleclasscontextitwasensuredthattheparticipantsdidn’tknoweachother.Intheruralcontext,giventhedimensionofthecommunity,itwasn’tpossibletoorganizethegroupwithpeoplewhohadn’thadanypreviouscontact.Inallthecontextstherewereprob-



lemswiththeincorporationofmeninthegroups,howevertheparticipationofatleastonefatherpergroupwasguaranteed.

Thefocalgroupactivitieswereorganizedinthreesessions,lastingtwohourseach.Asafirstactivitytheparticipantsansweredaquestionnaireofclosedques-tionsthatcontemplatedgeneralviewsofsocialcharacterizationandupbringingstyles.Attheendofthethirdsession,in-depthinterviewswerecarriedoutwithfathers,mothersandcarerswhoappearedtobemoreorlessparticipatoryinac-cordancewiththedefinitionproposedintheprotocolofthestudy.

General configuration of the families participating in the study

• Themajorityofadultparticipantsinthestudywerewomen(80%oftheparticipantsinthestudy).

• Thepredominantageoftheadultswasfrom30to40years,buttheurbanlowclasshad43%oftheparticipantsagedunder30.

• Onlytheparticipantsintheruralsetting(93%)declaredtheywerebroughtupinthecountryside(93%).Themajorityoftheparticipantsintheurbanlowclasssetting(90%)andintheurbanmiddleclasssetting(95%)wereraisedinthecity.

• 60%oftheadultparticipantsintheruralsettingonlyhadprimaryeduca-tionwhile100%oftheparticipantsintheurbanmiddleclassdeclaredtheyhadtechnicalorhigherleveleducation.

• Themajorityofparticipantssaidtheyweremarriedorlivingwithapartneratthetimeofthestudy(100%intheruralsetting,88%intheurbanlowclasssettingand90%intheurbanmiddleclasssetting).

• Thepredominantreligionwascatholic(77%intheruralsetting,83%intheurbanlowclasssettingand75%intheurbanmiddleclasssetting).

• 60%reportedthatonlyonememberofthefamilysupportsthehouseholdandthepredominantmonthlyincomeintheruralsettingwas100to300USdollars(74%),intheurbanlowclasssettingitwas100to500USdollars(64%)andintheurbanmiddleclasssettingitwas1000to3000USdollars(70%).

Main findings

1. Theadultparticipantsreferredtomeaningsaboutmaternityandpaternityusingthetraditionalimagesofgender.Thespeechesofthewomenonma-



ternity showed that it constitutes a fundamental element in thebuildingupofthefemaleidentity.Thespeechesofthemensupportthevaluewhichidentifieswomenwithmaternityandtheirdeterminationplayingthecen-tralroleinupbringingtheirchildren,excludingmenfromexercisingtheirpaternityroleorlimitingthemtotheroleofproviders.

2. Inallthreecontextstheculturalrepresentationsofmaternityactasabaseandjustificationfortheabsenceofthefatherintheupbringingofchildren.Intheruralsettingthisabsencewasmoreoutstanding.Intheconsultationwiththechildrenthestrongparentfigurewasthemother.

3. Themajorityofadults reportedthat thedifferentupbringingfromtradi-tionalstereotypesoffemininityandmasculinity,wheregirlsareseenasdeli-cate,sweet,fragile,attachedandtolerable,andboysareseenasfreer,strong,brutal,hastyandoutgoing

4. Onlyasmallnumberoftheparticipants(20)inthefocalgroupsdeclaredtherewasnodifferentiationingenderintheupbringingoftheirsonsanddaughters.

5. Intheruralandurbanlowclassfields,therewasanoutstandingrelevancegiven to theupbringingpractices to inculcate in their sons the responsi-bility anddiscipline values, toprepare their future asheadof the familyandproviders,andintheirdaughtersthesenseoflookingafterthemselvesandmaking themselves respectedwith regard to their sexualityand theirbodies.

6. Inallthethreesociallayers,theadultsadmitteddifferentiatingtheupbring-ingoftheirchildrenaccordingtotheirages.Inmostcases,thesevariationswerelinkedtothelevelofdependenceofthechildren.Thedatahighlightedthat, in spiteof all the scientificprogresson childdevelopment, theup-bringingpracticesstillpersistbasedontheviewthatchildrendon’treach“reason”untiltheyareoldenoughforschool,orwhentheybeginto“under-stand”andthenitbecomespossibletodisciplinethem.

7. Thehouserulesareimposedbytheparentsandthechildrendon’tpartici-pateinthenegotiationoftheserules.

8. Thechildrenintheruralsettingpointedoutthatitistheirmotherswhoreprimandthemmore,whiletheurbanchildrenpointedoutbothmothersandfathers.

9. The most utilised method of disciplining in all three environments wasphysicalpunishment: onlyonequarter of adultsdon’thit their children.



Parentsusuallycombinespankingwithreprimandsandothertypesofpun-ishmentwhich,inmanycasesinvolveemotionalabuse.

10.Nodifferentiationinmethodsofpunishmentbygenderwasreportedandonlytheagevariableestablishedtheuseofpunishment.Theuseofphysicalpunishmentisreducedinadolescence.

11.Allthechildrenintheruralsetting,17intheurbanlowclasssettingand10intheurbanmiddleclasssettingdeclaredtheyreceivedphysicalpunish-ment.Mostparentsintheurbanmiddleclassusetheirhandstohit;intheotherenvironmentsthechildrendeclaredtheywerehitwithobjects,espe-ciallybelts..

12.Themajorityofadultsinallthreecontextsconsiderphysicalpunishmentnecessaryandthatitdoesnoharm.Ontheotherhand,theadultsthatdon’tspankdeclaredtheydon’tapplyphysicalpunishmentbecausetheyfinditdoesn’tworkandbecausetheydon’twanttorepeatthemechanismstheywere subjected to in their childhood.Theydeclared thathittingchildrenreflectstheincapacityofadultsofcontrollingthemselves.

13. Although physical punishment is widely used, few adults consider thismethodasasuccessfuloneandinmanyaccountsitappearedashavingjustanimmediateandmomentaryresult.

14.Although themajorityof adultsdeclared that the interlocution and thecommunicationwithchildrenareothermethodstoeducateanddisciplinethem, only those who didn’t apply physical punishment practised thesemethodsfrequently.

15. All the children declared that the unhappy moments in the householdoccurwhentheparentsreprimandthem,thatiswhentheygetsomekindofpunishmentorarespanked.

16.Themajorityofthechildrenintheruralandurbanlowclassenvironmentsdeclaredthattheycan’ttelltheirparentsthethingstheylikeaboutthem;astotheurbanmiddleclassstatedthattheycantellthem.

17.Inalltheenvironmentstheparentsdeclaredthattheyvaluetheformalup-bringingandtheyregarditasalegacytheyareleavingfortheirchildren.

18.Themajorityofthechildrenconsulteddeclaredthatwhattheymostlikeinschoolisthefactofitbeingtheplacewheretheirfriendsare.Andamongthethingstheyliketheleastwastheamountofhomework,thereprimandsfromteachersandbullying.



19.Thechildrendonotparticipateinthechoiceoftheschooltheyattend.20.Theresultsofthefocalgroupsandtheconsultationswiththechildrenin-

dicatethatinallthelevelsthedistributionofdomestictasksisanexclusivedecisionofadults,inmostcasesofthemother,whodecidesinwhichactivi-tiesthechildrenshouldengagein.

21.Themajorityofadultsdeclaredthatthechildrenarereprimandediftheydon’tcarryouttheirdomestictasks.

22.Themajorityofchildrenintheruralandurbanmiddleclassenvironmentsindicatedtheyliketocarryoutthedomestictasks,butthereareactivitiestheydon’tlike.Astothechildrenintheurbanlowclasssetting,theysaidtheydon’tliketocarryoutanydomestictasks.

23.Adultsintheurbanmiddleclassplacedthemselvesmostly(70%)againstchildlabourawayfromhomebecausetheythinkthatchildhoodisaperiodoflifewhereonemustplayandstudy.Theadultsintheurbanlowclasswhopositionedthemselvesinfavourofchildlabour(36.6%)declaredthatsomefamilieshavefinancialneedsthatjustifythechildrenworking.Themajor-ityofadultsintheruralsetting(64.4%)relatedfinancialneedstoculturalaspectstojustifychildlabour.

24.Thechildrendeclared that school is theprivilegedplace tomake friendsandthattheyarefreetochoosetheirfriends.Theadultsdeclaredthattheytrytomeettheirchildren’sfriendsbuthavenocompletecontrolovertheirchildren’s choices. When the adults comment on the friends, they do ithighlightingthenegativeaspectofthefriendstheyconsidermighthaveabadinfluenceovertheirchildren.


Acosta,F. (2003)Lafamiliaen losestudiosdepoblaciónenAméricaLatina.EstadodelconocimientoynecesidadesdeInvestigación.PapelesdePoblaciónNo.37.UniversidadAutónomadelEstadodeMéxico. Julio-Septiembre.México.

Bache,X.(2006)LaviolenciaenJuárez,unamiradadesdelosniños.Resulta-dosdeunainvestigacióncongruposfocales.IncideSocialA.C/Ipos-BimsaPonenciapresentadaenelPrimerForoInternacionaldelaInfancia.CiudadJuárez,México.



Colin,A.(2003)LaCrianzadelniñoenlacosmovisiónnahua.RevistaVocesUniversitarias.NuevaGeneración.Año1,Num.2.Primavera.UniversidadAutónomadeQuerétaro.México.

DIF.(2005)DiagnósticodelaFamiliaMexicana,InformePreliminar.Diciem-bre.México.

Fuentes,M.L.(1998)LaAsistenciaSocialenMéxico.Historiayperspectivas.EdicionesdelMilenio.México.

García,B yOliveira,O. (2005)Mujeres jefas dehogar y sudinámica fami-liar.PapelesdePoblación.No.43.UniversidadAutónomadelEstadodeMéxico.Enero-marzo.México.

Gonzalbo,P.(2003)LafamiliaeducadoraenlaNuevaEspaña:unespacioparalascontradicciones.EnFamiliayeducaciónenIberoamerica,PilarGonzal-bo(Coord).ColegiodeMéxico.México.

López,A. (2001)Elperfil sociodemográficode loshogaresenMéxico1976-1997.ConsejoNacionaldePoblación.México.

MartínezL.E.,VeraJ.A.yTánoriJ.(2005)Interacciónpadresehijos,laesti-mulaciónenelhogaryeldesarrollodelniñoenunazonaruralenpobrezaextrema.VIIICongresoNacionaldeInvestigaciónEducativa.UniversidaddeSonora.Noviembre.México.

Matute,A.(Editor)(1986)EstudiosdeHistoriaModernayContemporáneadeMéxico,UniversidadNacionalAutónomadeMéxico,InstitutodeInvesti-gacionesHistóricas,v.10,México.

Ramos,M.,AguilarS.yVeraJ.A.(2005)EstimulaciónyDesarrollodelInfanteen Zona Rural en Pobreza Extrema. RMIE,Vol. 10, Num. 25 Abr-jun.México.

RedporlosDerechosdelaInfanciaenMéxico.(2005)Infanciasmexicanas,ros-trosdeladesigualdad.InformeAlternativoparaelComitédelosDerechosdelNiñosdelaONU1999-2004.REDIM.México.

Ribero,R.(2005)Unahistorizaciónde lossignificadosde lacrianza.Sapere,RevistadeInvestigaciónyCiencia,Enero-junio.UniversidadAutónomadeQuerétaro.México.

Robichaux,D.(2002)Elsistemafamiliarmesoamericanoysusconsecuenciasdemográficas.PapelesdePoblación32.UniversidadAutónomadelEstadodeMéxico.Abril-junio.México.



Rodríguez,O.yMurilloG.(2001)Tevoyaplaticarmimundo.Muestradehabladeniñosmexicanosde6y7años.ColegiodeMéxico/SEP.México.

Sauri,G. (2000)Las contradiccionesde la reformadel artículo4ºConstitu-cional,frentealaConvencióndelosDerechosdelaNiñez.EdnicaI.A.P.México,Abril.

Sauri,G.(2003)Legisladoresaunqueseas“dementiritas”.Parlamentoinfantil:loquehayyloquefalta.RedporlosDerechosdelaInfanciaenMéxico.Marzo.

Sierra,J.(1985)Reformaslegalesalaeducaciónprimaria.EnDebatePedagó-gicoduranteelPorfiriato.AntologíaporMilandaBalzat.SEP/EdicionesCaballito.BibliotecaPedagógica.México.

Turian,R.(1993)Vivirenfamilias:hogaresestructurafamiliarenMéxico1976-1987.RevistadeComerciosExterior.México.

VallejoA,AguilarJyValenciaA.(2002)Estilosdepaternidadenpadrestoto-nacasypromocióndeautonomíapsicológicahacialoshijosadolescentes.PsicologíaySalud.Vol.12.No.1.México.

Vargas,A.LaLeydeAsistenciaSocialdesdelaperspectivadelosDerechosdelasNiñasylosNiños.PonenciapresentadaanombredelaRedporlosDe-rechosdelaInfanciaenMimeo.

Vargas,A;Díaz,RySánchez,R.(2000)Patronesdeapegoinfantil:efectosdife-rencialesenniñosyniñas.RevistadelaAsociaciónMexicanadePsicologíaSocial.No.9.México.

Velásquez,M.A.(2004)LapaternidadenelproyectodevidadealgunosvaronesdelaCiudaddeMéxico.RevistaVirtualdeHumanidades.No.11Vol.5.Julio-septiembre.México.

Vera, J.A. y Domínguez, S.E. (1997) Aspectos psicosociales del cuidado delniñoenlazonaruraldelestadodeSonora.EnseñanzaeInvestigaciónenPsicología.RevistadeCNEIP.Ed.Época.Juliodiciembre2:2.México.

Vera,J.A,Morales,D.KyVeraC.(2005)Relacióndeldesarrollocognitivoconelclimafamiliaryelestrésdelacrianza.Psico-USF,Vol.10,N.2,Julio-diciembre.



Vergara,C.B.(2002)Creenciasrelacionadasconlasprácticasdecrianzadeloshijos/as.TesisparaobtenerelgradodeMaestríaenCienciasenelÁreadePsicologíaAplicadadelaUniversidadAutónomadeColima.México.

6.4. Nicaragua

Team responsible for the study

ManuelOrtegaHegg,LuisSerraVasquezeNancyArósteguiSanchesOrganization: Centro de Análisis Sociocultural de la Universidad Cen-

troamericanacomoapoiodoCentrodeApoioaProgramasyProyectos.Cooperated with the study: Marcelina Castillo, Hloreley Osório, Ana

MatildeLezema,ArmandoMaltés,EvelyngMorales,XiomaraIrias,NoraMejía,BlancaFuenteseZoilaLobo.

Characteristics of the methodology applied in the country

Theprocessofdatacollectionwithchildrenwascarriedoutthrough2groupactivitysessionsintheruralsettingandeightsessionsintheurbansetting.Inthe rural setting the groups tookplace in communities ofCondega, one foreveryagegroup(7-9yearse10-12years).Bothgroupswerejoinedby10chil-dren,addingtoatotalof20children,ofwhich8wereboysand12girls.

Intheurbansettingthegroupswerecarriedoutwithchildrenfromthecom-munitiesoftheVIDistrictofManágua.Fortheselectionoftheurbangroups,inaccordancewiththethesocioeconomicbalance,thegroupofchildrenfromprivateschools(MadreDelDivinoPastorSchool)werechosenasthegrouprep-resentingthemiddleclassandthechildrenfrompublicschools(AutonomousInstituteBenjaminZeledon)thegrouprepresentingthelowincomecommuni-ties.Thirtyfourchildrentookpartintheconsultation,15fromtheurbanlowincomesettingand19fromthemiddleclass,adding13boysand21girls.

TheCAPRIteamdevelopedtwosessionswitheachofthesixgroupsofchil-dren.ThesessionstookplaceonSaturdaysandlastedforapproximately4hourseach.Thecontentsoftheproposedactivitiesandtheinstrumentsassongs,sto-riesandotherswereadaptedbytheteamforeachsettingstudied.

Tocollectdatawithfathers,mothersandcarersofchildrenfrom0to12yearsofage,focalgroupsandin-depthinterviewswerecarriedout.Forthese-



lectionoftheparticipantsoffocalgroups,asmallquestionnairewasemployedforatotalof89adults.Inall,9focalgroupswerecarriedout,threeineachset-ting,with10participantseachand9in-depthinterviews.

General configuration of the families that took part in the study

• Themajorityofparticipants lived intheurbanarea(57.3%),but47.2%declaredtheywerebroughtupinthecountryside.

• Themajorityof theparticipantswerewomen (79.8%), agedbetween26and35(47.2%)andofmixedrace(73.5%);61.8%weremothers,16.9%fathersand10.1%grandmothers.

• Themajorityoftheparticipantshadprimaryeducation(39.3%)andsec-ondary(36%);13.5%declaredtheywereilliterateand10.1%hadbeentouniversity.

• 68.5%weremarriedorhadpartners,14.6%weresingleand13.5%wereseparated.

• Themainreligionamongtheparticipantswascatholic(58.4%),thesecond,evangelicalorprotestant(31.5%).

• 48.3%oftheparticipantsdeclaredtheylivedinhouseswithanother4to5people.38.2%declaredtheylivedinhouseswith2bedroomsfollowedby31.5%,whoreportedtheylivedinhouseswith3to4rooms.

• The family incomewas generated in itsmajorityby justonememberofthe family (49.4%) and 29.2% had two people in charge of generatingincome.

• Theaverage family incomevariedbetween100 and150USdollars (22.5%).43.8%declaredanincomelowthanthatoneandonly33.6%withanincomehigherthantheaverage.

Main findings

1. Thedatafromthedifferentinstrumentsrevealedthatthereareimportantdifferencesintheupbringingstyles,particularlywhencomparingtheruralsettingwiththeurbancontext.Generallyspeaking,theurbanrangetendstomaintainmoreauthoritarianupbringingstylesthantheurbanarea.

2. Thedifferencesinthemoreorlessparticipatoryupbringingstylesaccordingtothesocialspherehighlightedthesectorofurbanmiddleclassaspresent-ingthemoreparticipatoryandmoredemocraticstyles.Factorssuchastheeducationofthecarer,theeconomicalresources,thepossibilitiesofhavingeducationoptionsandotherscanexplainthisdifference.



3. Thedifferencesintheupbringingstyleaccordingtocarersrevealedthatingeneralthegrandmothersandthefatherstendtohaveamoreauthoritarianstylethanmothersandothercarers.However,therearevariablesastheonethatpointsoutthatmothersandgrandmothersexpressmoreaffectionthantheothercarersandthefathersexpresstheiraffectionwithgiftsandothermanifestations.

4. Only40%oftheadultparticipantsrecognisedthechildrenasindividualswithrights(usingthedefinitioninthequestionnaireappliedandpreviouslymentionedinthemaintext).Thegrandmothersandthefathersweretheoneswholeastrecognisedtherightsofthechildren.

5. Thedifferencesshownbetweenthecountrysideandthecity,betweenthesocial spheres and the type of carer did not invalidate the occurrence ofsomecommonconceptions.Physicalpunishmentstoodoutasacommoneducationalfactor;howeverthemostobviousmistreatmentseemstocomefromtheruralsettingandfromtheurbanlowincomesetting.Ontheotherhand,thereisrewarding,praisingorencouragementaseducationalfactor,theuseofdialoguestosolveconflictsortheimportanceofformaleducationforthechildrenandtheprioritisingschooloverwork,includingdomestic,andrecreation.

6. Therewas a cleardifferentiationof theupbringingpracticesbetween theexpressedbythechildrenandthedeclaredbyadults.Thechildreningen-eral expressed more physical and psychological mistreatments than whatwasadmittedbythecarers,butbesidesthatthelackofattentionfromtheirparents,thelittlecommunicationwiththem,thepredominanceofphysi-calpunishmentinsteadofothermethodsofdiscipline,mainlyintheruralsettingandtheurbanlowincomesetting.Withtheexceptionoftheurbanmiddleclasscontext,thechildrenexpressedtheycouldn’tchoosetheschoolstheyattend,but theperceptionwas that the lackof choicewas imposedmorebythestructuralcircumstancesthanbytheinterferenceofthepar-ents;thechildrenalsoexpressedthatthechoiceoffriendsiscarriedoutbythem,buttheyusetheparents’criteriaforthesechoices.

7. ThedataobtainedinthisexploratorystudypermittedtheidentificationofatleasttwobasicinterpretationsabouttheupbringingconceptsinNicara-gua:onetraditionalandauthoritariankindof typeandanotherwhich isparticipatoryanddemocratic.Thisclassificationdoesn’tmeanthatinallthecontextsatotaldifferentiationismaintained,as insomecasesthegroupsoffathers,mothersandcarersheldthesameconcept;howevertherewerecontextswherethedifferentiationswereclearer.



Revided bibliography for the study

Agudelo,I.,Montenegro,S.,Obregón,R.(2000)Lasrepresentacionesfilialesyparentalessobrelasrelacionasenlafamilia.Managua,CentroCINCO,RedBarnaNoruega,74p.,nopublicado.

Cantera.(1995)Laincidenciadelafamiliaenlaformacióndelainfancia.Ma-nagua,40p.,nopublicado.

Castillo,M.ySerra,L.(2003)DiagnosticosobreniñezyadolescenciaenNica-ragua,Managua,UCA-PLAN-PlanInternacional.

Faune,M.A.(1995)Lasfamilias,lasmujeres:quédicelarealidad.ENVIO160Junio.

__________.(1995)HogaresampliadosyenmanosdelasMujeres”.ENVIO161Julio.

__________. (1995) Familias: violencia y sobrevivencia”. ENVIO 162,Agosto.

Gordillo,A.yotros.(2004)Violenciacontralaniñezylaadolescencia.Mana-gua,PlanInternacional.

Houtart,F.,Ortega,M.,Castillo,M.,Bartra,C.(2000)Elembarazoenado-lescentesenNicaragua:unaaproximaciónsociocultural.CASC-UCA,Ma-nagua.

INEC-ENDESA.(2001)IndicadoresSocialesdelaNiñezNicaragüense.Ma-nagua.

Ortega,M.,Castillo,M.,Centeno,R.(2005)Masculinidadyfactoressociocul-turalesasociadosalapaternidadenNicaragua.CASC/CEPAL,Managua.

Pineda,G.yGuerra,B.R. (1997)ComolosNiñosyNiñasvensuMundo.Managua,158p.,nopublicado.

PDDH.(2002)Asívemos,asíqueremosNicaragua.Lapercepciónquetienelaniñezylaadolescenciadesuentornosocial,político,económicoypersonal.Managua,110p.

__________. (2004)Distancia sinOlvido. Investigación socio-jurídica sobrelaemigracióndemadresypadres/madres,ylosefectosensushijasehijos.Managua.nopublicado.

PNUD.(2000)InformedeDesarrolloHumanodeNicaragua.Managua.Torrez,N.,Coreayotros.(2000)Estudiosobrelaspracticasdecrianzadelaniñez

nicaragüense.PAININ-CONAPINA,Managua.40p.,nopublicado.



Zuñiga,S.yPineda,G.(1997)EstudiosobrepracticasdecrianzaenelbarrioB-15delDistrito6deManagua.CAPRI,50p.,nopublicado.

6.5. Peru


JorgeCastroMorales;AlejandroSamaniero,SofiaTheryeNadiaOrrilo.Organization:InstitutodeFormaciónparaEducadoresdeJóvenes,Niñosy

AdolescentesTrabajadoresdeAméricaLatinayelCaribe—IFEJANT.

Characteristics of methodology applied in the country

ThestudymethodologyfollowedtheforeseenprotocolsandwascarriedoutbetweenthemonthsofJuneandOctoberof2006intwourbancontextsinthecapitalofPeru,Lima,andinaruralsettingofthedepartmentofAncash,locatedinthesurroundingsofoneoftheAndeanmountains(Conchucos).

Fortheselectionoftheresearchedcontexts,specificcriteriawerefollowedwhichelected4urbandistrictsofLima:IndependênciaandBarrancoasmiddleclass;VentanillaandPuentePiedra,aslowincomeclassandWorkingChildrenandAdolescentsgroups.ThecommunityofRagashwasselectedasrepresenta-tiveoftheruralsetting.Toorganizetheactivitiesgroupswiththechildrenandthefocalgroupswiththefathers,mothersandcarers,fourschoolswereselected(Ruralsetting:EscolaSantaCruzofRegash;UrbanLowIncomeContext:EscolaManuelSeoreneCorrales;UrbanMiddleClassContext:EscolaNicanorRiveraCáceresandEscolaJesusMaestro),twoNonSchoolingProgrammesofPrimaryEducation(PRONOEIMisTrêsOsitosandLaDunas)andafreemarket(LinceMarket).ThestudyinPeruhadtheparticipationoflowincomeclassandurbanmiddleclassfamilieswhohaveworkingchildren.

Theconsultationwiththechildrenhappenedthroughamodulewithseveralsessionsthat includedasetofplayingactivitiesandparticipatorytechniques.Thenumberofsessionsvariedaccordingwiththechildren’sages,with5sessionsbeenheldforthegroupofchildrenwithagesbetween7and9yearsand4ses-sionsforthegroupwithagesbetween10and12years.

The focalgroupsand indepth interviewswith fathers,mothersandcarersaddressedsixthemesagreedinthestudyprotocol:domesticchoresandexternalwork,education,ruptureandfamilyconflicts,disciplineandpunishment,family



interactionandlivingwithpartnersMotivatingquestionswereincludedwhichallowedtheopeningofdialogues,aswellastransversalsubjectswerepresentedtothediscussions,suchasagedifferences,genderandchildparticipation.

The number of participants in the study presented the following distribution:

Rural setting

Urban Context

Middle setting

Low income setting

Adults with children from 0-0� 10 11 8

Adults with children from 07-12 5 4 4

Parents of working children 7 2 �

Children from 07-09 years 12 11 11

Children from 10-12 years 12 10 10

Total 4� 38 39

Source: Informe Final Peru, 2007.

General configuration of the participant families in the study:

• Theageofadultsvariedbetween21and74years100%oftheparticipantsoftheurbanmiddleclasswereagedbetween30and45years,61%oftheparticipantsoftheurbanlowincomeclasshadbetween21and29yearsand54%oftheruralsettinghadbetween45and59years.

• 59.1%oftheadultsoftheruralsettingwereoftheprimaryleveleducation(uptosixyearsofstudy),70.6%oftheurbanmiddleclasshadcollegeedu-cation(upto16yearsofstudy)and88.8%oftheurbanpopularcontextwasequallydividedinprimaryandsecondarylevel(upto11yearsofeduca-tion.

• A significant portion of the adult participants was composed by mother(88.9%oftheurbanlowincomeclassadults,70.6%oftheurbanmiddleclassand54%oftheruralsetting).

• Themajorityoftheparticipantsofthestudywereofmixedrace(53%oftheurbanlowincomeclassadults,72%oftheurbanmiddleclassadultsand100%oftheruralsetting).

• Approximately50%ofallparticipantshadbeenraisedinthecountry.• A largepartof the families livewith theparents athome (88.9%of the

urban low incomeclass,87.5%of theurbanmiddle class and86.4%of



theruralsetting).However,thereisarepresentativepercentage(12.5%)ofhomeswhereonlyoneoftheparentstakesovertherainingofthechildren.

• Intheruralsetting54.5%oftheadultparticipantstakingpartinthestudydeclarednothavingreceivedincomeinthemonthoftheresearch,survivingfromtheproductsoftheiractivities.100%oftheparticipantsoftheurbanpopularcontextdeclaredamonthlyincomebetween60and250dollarspermonth.

• The majority of the participants in the research declared to practice thecatholicreligion(82.5%).

Main findings

1. Thefamilyorganisationandtheprevailingupbringingstylesfavouredmoreoftheexerciseofverticalandpunishingauthoritythanadynamicdemoc-racy,ofexchangingopinions,negotiationsanddialogue,thatallowsthepar-ticipationofthechildreninfamilydecisions,aswellastheirsocialrespon-sibilityinothercommunityspaces.

2. Thegreatmajoritywithintheruralsettingandurbanlowincomecontextweredescribedastypologiesofauthoritarianparentalstyle,withanomni-presentcontrolfromparents,exceptincaseswherethereisachaoticadapt-abilityoflowincomefamily.

3. Theauthoritarianparentalstylewasdescribedasthatwheretheparentsaredemanding,littleresponsiveandwithlittleexpressionofpositiveaffection,especiallyinrelationtotheboys.

4. Thepsychologicalresourcesof themiddleclassparentswere identifiedaspositivetothechildren’sdevelopmentandarereflectedinpracticesthatseektodisruptthetraditionalstandardsofdistributingthedomesticchoresbygenderstereotypes.Inthewaythatacoupleofworkingteenagersparents’fromLaDunaswhodisplayedsuchpositiveattitudes,evenatthecostofhavingtoovercomematerialshortages.Theybecametheexampleofparentsthat show to their children a communitarian commitment and personalhonesty, in spite of the generalized individualism and corruption in themarginalizedurbansocieties.

5. Therewerereportsinwhichthemothers’overprotectiveattitudes,fearingtheirdaughters’precociousness,donotallowthemtodeveloptheirpoten-tialities,transformingtheminshygirls.



6. Ingeneral,thefathersthatgiveuptheirauthorityinthedysfunctionfami-liesorinthelowincomefamiliesofchaoticadaptationendupbecomingnegligent,inthesensethattheyarenorresponsivenordemanding.

7. Someparentsmixupauthoritywithauthoritarianismandothersdenywhattheirownrealitypresentsandmakeuseofcommonsenseeducationalprac-tices,whichignoretheobjectiveconditionsinwhichtheylive.

8. Theupbringingstylesreportedweremodeledbycontextualsourcesofstressandofsupport.Amongthesepractices,thefollowinghighlightedthequal-ityofthemaritalrelationship(maritaldisputes,experienceinparents’sepa-ration,dysfunctionalfamiliesetc);thesocialsupportsystems(theexistenceornotofcommunitarianorganizations,validityoftheextendedfamily)andtheparents’occupationalexperiences.

9. Theparents,especiallythoseintheneediercontext,conferredtotheschoolapowerofsocialmobility.

10.Many families reportedhaving adirect correlationbetween a good stu-dentandagoodson.Thus,notdoingschoolhomeworkandnotgettinggoodmarkswas subject to receiving reprehensions. Independentlyof thechildren’sotherattributes,schoolperformancewasthemostvalued.

11. The macro-social factors derived from the market consecration and theglobalisation of the production capitalist system, with its after-effects ofevident inequalityandunconcern in interpersonal relationships, thepov-ertyandexclusionconditionsthatgenerateanomyandmaterialandmoralprivationwhichproduce suspicions in interpersonal relationships explainthemoreconservativeupbringingstyles,withlittleopeningtoparticipationspacesandautonomousdevelopmentofchildren.

12.Theuseoftraditionalupbringingmethodsismoreaccentuatedwithintheruralsettingandurbanlowincomeclasscontext,efazemusoindiscrimi-nadodecastigofísicocomoformadeeducaçãocorretivaoucomoexpressãodesentimentosnegativosdospais(cólera).

13.Thedemocraticandpro-participatorystylesarepracticallytheexceptionstotherule,whereas(inthesensethat)theyappearedtohaveaneffectivenessshowninthebeliefsystemsofmanyparents,includingsomeoftheurbanmiddleclasscontext.

14.SomeparentsofWorkingChildrenandAdolescents,notallofthem,showedanattitudeoffavorablechangetotheparticipationofchildrenincrucialde-cisionsoftheirlives.




Anicama,J.;Vizcardo,S.;Carrasco,J.YMayorga,E.(1999)Estudioepidemio-lógicosobrelaviolenciaycomportamientosasociadosenLimaMetropoli-tanayCallao,Lima,OficinaGeneraldeEpidemiologíaMINSA.

Belsky,J.(1984)TheDeterminantsofParenting.AProcessModel.ChildDe-velopment,55:83-96.

Campos,G.yMárquez,S.(2006)RelationshipbetweensomeparentalrearingstylesinchildhoodandAnxietyDisordersinMetropolitanLimaandCallaoin2002,PAHOmeeting,México.Posterpresentation.

CastrodelaMata,R.(1972)Unintentodeclasificacióndelafamiliaperuana.Elimpactodelaincapacitacióndelpadresobreladinámicafamiliar.Lima,UniversidadPeruanaCayetanoHeredia.

Castro, J. (2001) El Maltrato infantil, en: J. Castro (editor) Niñas, Niños yAdolescentes.Exclusiónydesarrollopsicosocial,T.II:655-680,Lima,IFE-JANT.

Darling,N.&Steinberg,L.(1993)ParentingStyleasContext.AnIntegrativeModel.PsychologicalBulletin,113:487-496.

Hart,R.A.(1992)Children’sparticipation:fromTokenismtoCitizenship,In-nocenti essays #4, Florencia, Centro Internacional para el desarrollo delniño.

Leñero,L.(1975)Estereotipos,tiposyneotiposdefamiliaenMéxico,en:E.Dulanto(editor)LaFamilia.Mediopropiciadoroinhibidordeldesarrollohumano,EdicionesMédicasdelHospitalInfantildeMéxico.

Maccoby,E.E.&Martin,J.A.(1983)SocializationinthecontextoftheFamily:Parent-Childinteraction.En:E.M.Hetherington(org.)MussenManualofChildPsychology,Vol.4,4a.ed.,NewYork,Wiley,1-102.

Majluf,A.YOjeda,G. (2006)Relaciónentre tradicionalismoyprácticasdecrianza,RevistaPsicológicaHerediana,I(1):28-38.

Mansilla, M.E. (1996) La socialización diferenciada por sexo, Lima,CONCYTEC.

Matayoshi,N.(2001)Niño,familiaycomunidadenlosAndes.En:J.Castro(editor)Niñas,niñosyadolescentes:exclusiónydesarrollopsicosocial,T.I:31-55,Lima,IFEJANT.



Olson,D.H.,Rusell,C.,Sprinkle,D.H.(1985)CifrcumplexModelofMaritalandFamilySystemsII:EmpiricalStudiesandClinicalInterventions,Ad-vancesinFamilyIntervention,AssessmentandTheory,Vol1:129-179.

Ponce,S.(1995)EstudioepidemiológicosobremaltratoinfantilenlapoblaciónescolarizadadeLimaMetropolitanayCallao,Lima,CEDRO.

Sameroff,A.(1997)UnderstandingtheSocialContextofEarlyPsychopatho-logy.En:J.Noshpitz(ed.)HandbookofChildandAdolescentPsychiatry,Vol.I:224-236,NewYork,JohnWileyandSons.

6.6. Venezuela


VerônicaZubillagaOrganization:UniversidadSimónBolívar.

Characteristics of the methodology applied in the country:

TocarryoutthestudyinVenezuela,theteachinginstitutionswerechosenasthemeetingpointofchildrenandrelatives.TheschoolselectedtorepresenttheruralsettingbelongstotheStateofMiranda,distantonehourandahalffromthecapitalCaracas.IntheareaofBarriosPopular15knownasPetare,inCa-racas,waslocatedtheschoolrepresentingtheurbanlowincomeclasscontext.Andaschoollocatedinoneoftheurbanizaciones16ofCaracasrepresentedthecontextofurbanmiddleclass.

ThecollectionofdatawascarriedoutbetweenthemonthsofMayandNo-vember2006.Sixfocalgroupswithfathers,mothersandcarerswereformedinthethreechosencontexts.Atotalof74peopletookpartofthefocalgroups:27intheruralsetting,29intheurbanpopularand18intheurbanmiddleclass.Themothersrepresented75%oftheparticipantsinthestudy.Sixindepthin-terviewswerealsocarriedout.

15Barrio popularinVenezueladesignatesageographicalareawithinthecitycharacterisedbydisorderedgrowth,deficientsocioeconomicconditionsandasituationofrelativeprivation.16Urbanizacionesdesignatestheurbanspacethatisplannedandoccupiedbythemediumandhighsectors.



Theworkwiththechildrenwasdevelopedfromtwosteps:(1)15sessionsoffocalgroups,withtheparticipationof12to15children,and(2)11indepthinterviews.Takingpartof the researchwere childrencoming from the rural,urbanmiddleclassandlowincomeclasscontexts.Thefocalgroupswereorga-nizedtakingintoaccounttheagebracketofthechildren,whichweregatheredingroupsageingbetween07to09yearsand10to12years.Eachgroupofchil-drentookpartof05sessionsoffocalgroupwhichhadthefollowingthemes:

1. Introductionoftheresearchandchildren’sconsent;2. Education,school,autonomyandinteractionwithpiers;3. Domesticchoresandworkingout;4. Familyinteractionanddiscipline;5. Listeningspacesinthefamily.

Asdiscussionmotivationstrategy,theresearchersusedsongsandtalestakenfromtheVenezuelanchildren’sliterature.Toanswerthequestions,thechildrenweremotivatedtonotonlyexpressthemselvesverbally,butalsotodesignandwrite.Toparticipate,thechildneededonlytovoluntarilyliftupahand.Thefocalgroups’reportsindicatedawideparticipationofchildrenatalltimes,in-dependentlyofageandthesocialcontextoforigin.

Theindepthinterviewswereperformedinthedaysfollowingthelastfocalgroupsession,whichenabledthechildrentofeelsafeandconfidentstoanswerthequestionsoftheinterviewers.Themethodologyappliedenabledarichanddetailed collection of data. The only limitation was the dimension of somegroups,whichgeneratedacertainlevelofdispersionamongthechildren.How-ever,inageneralway,theparticipantsexpressedtheirexperiences,preferences,andalsotheirsorrowsquitefrankly.

General configuration of the families taking part of the study

• Themorenumerousfamiliesinterviewedliveintheurbanlowincomeclasscontext(45%ofthedomicileshavemorethansixpeople).Intheruralandurbanmiddleclass,78%ofthedomicileshavefivepeopleofless.

• 62%oftheinterviewedfamiliesintheurbanlowincomeclasscontextand51%intheurbancontextliveinahousewithtworoomsorless.56%oftheinterviewedfamiliesoftheurbanmiddleclasscontextliveinhouseswithfourroomsormore.



• Storiesofmaritaldisruptionandreconciliationwerementionedinthere-portsofinteractionwithstepfathersandstepmothers.

• Thefamiliesheadedbywomenprevailintheurbanlowincomeclasscon-text(28%).

• Therewasasignificantpresenceofgrandmothersinthefamiliesofallcon-texts.

Main findings

1. Thechildrenoftheruralandurbanpopularlivewithinextensivefamilysys-tems,incontrastwiththefamiliesofurbanmiddleclass,whicharesmaller.Themembersoftheextendedfamilyachieveaspecialroleintheupbring-ingofthechildrenintheruralsetting.Withinallthestudiedcontexts,thegrandparents,especiallythegrandmother,takepartoftheday-to-daylivingoftheinterviewedchildren.

2. Most parents, within the three contexts studied, hold on to traditionalgenderdistinctionsandconsequentlyhighlighttheconvenienceofraisingtheirdaughtersandsonsaccordingtotheseprinciples.Intheurbanpopu-larandtheruralenvironments,thedifferencesofgenderareassociatedtothechild’stypeofcharacter,andintheurbanmiddleclass,tothedifferentchoresandtaskswithinthehomes.However,itispossibletoperceivemorealikevisionsbetweenthegirlsandboysfromtalkingwithsomeofthefa-thersandmothers.

3. Forallthegroupsofchildreninterviewed,itisveryimportanttotakepartinplayingactivitieswiththeirparents.Theyseektoshareexperiencesthatgobeyondtheroutinetasksofsocialdomesticreproduction(eat,takeabathetc.).Oneelementthatwashighlightedwastheimportancethatchildrenassign to sharingplayingactivitieswith theirparents.According to somereports,thefeelingofsatisfactionlinkedtothetimespentwiththeirparentsisnotnecessarilyrelatedtothequantityoftime,buttothefactthatthistimeistotallydedicatedtothechildren.Themomentsinwhichthechildbecomestheirparent’scentreofattentionwerehighlyvalued.

4. Thefrustrationsfornotreceivingattentionfromtheirparentswereconsid-erablewithintheseveralreportsoftheurbanmiddleclasschildren.Insomecases,thisprivationwasassociatedtotheparents’periodsofpersonalcon-flict;inothers,itwasexplainedbytheabsenceduetolongworkinghours;



andinotherstheyshowedsituationswheretheirparentsaredistracted,donotlistentotheirkidsandgivethemanswersthatdon’tmakesense.

5. Verydeeptraditionsofphysicalpunishmentstillpersistinthefamilies,es-pecially inthoseof theruralandurbanpopularcontext.Theeradicationofthesepracticeshasbeendifficultinspiteoftheeffortstoforgeanddis-seminateanormativestructureandasystemofinstitutionsthatprohibittheviolenceandnegligenceagainstchildrenwithinthefamilycontext.

6. Atthesametime,itisnecessarytopointoutthatinboththeruralandtheurbanlowincomeclasscontexts,thechildrenmentionedthatotheradults(aneighbor,astepfather)reportedorthreatenedtoreportthesituationtothepoliceandotherauthorities.Inthissense,itcanbethoughtthattherearesignsthatindicatethefactthatpeoplearestartingtocondemntheeventsofviolenceagainstchildren,tounderstandthemasfeloniesandtoseekcom-petentinstitutionstoreportthem.Thissituationshowstheimportanceandthepossibilitiescreatedwhenthecommunitychainsgrowstrongerforthepeacefulmanagementofconflicts.

7. Onlytwochildrenoftheurbanmiddleclassreporteddisciplinarystrategiesthatincludedwrittenexercisesanddialogue,favouringintrospection.Thechildrenshowedtheiragreeancewiththisdisciplinarystrategyandexpressedtheimpor-tanceofbeingabletoevaluatetheirownbehaviorthroughouttime.

8. Thechildrenoftheurbanlowincomeclasscontextreportedthesituationofextremeviolenceresultingfromthearmedconfrontingbetweengroupsofyoungstersthatliveinthestreetsandthecommunities.Thechildrende-scribedthestreetsasaplaceofimpendingdangerofdeath.Thissituationofarmedviolenceissopresentinthesechildren’sday-to-daylifethateventhedeathofabrotherwasmentionedinoneofthegroups.

9. Thechildrenoftheurbanmiddleclassalsoperceivethestreetsasdangerous,astheycanbemuggedthere.Therefore,theycan’tbealoneinthestreets;theycan’tgodowntoplayintheplaygroundsofthebuildingswheretheylive.

10.Thedomesticchoresoccupyquitealotoftheday-to-daylifeofthechildrenoftheurbanlowincomeclassandruralenvironmentsindifferentsenses.Thechildrenoftheurbanlowincomeclasscontexthavemanyresponsibili-tiesinthedomesticchores.Intheruralsetting,thedistributionofchoresfollowsadivisionbygender:thegirlsdothedomesticchoresandtheboysdotheworkoutside.

11.Itcanbesaidthatolderchildrenintheurbanpopularandruralenvironmentsare sooverloadedwithdomestic chores that theybecome little adults; the



urbanmiddleclasschildrenarepreservedfromresponsibilitiesandlivetheirchildhoodasapromise,atimeofpreparationforthefutureasanadult.

12.Themoredemocraticupbringingsarepraisedbythechildrenintheirreports.Thesestylesunderstandtheuseofreflexivestrategiesofdiscipline,wherethechildiscapableofevaluatinghis/herownacts.Theyalsounderstandthecre-ationofplayingspaceswherethechildrenplaywiththeirparentsandcarers,and thus allowing them to be perceived as worthy of attention and time,wheretheycantaketheinitiativeandinfluencetheirparents’actions.


Bolivar,Teolinda.(1995)Urbanizadores,constructoresyciudadanosen:RevistaMexicanadeSociología,Enero-Marzo,AñoLVII,Nº1.México,D.F.

Briceño-león,Roberto, et al. (1997)La cultura emergentede la violencia enCaracas,en:RevistaVenezolanadeEconomíayCienciasSociales(Caracas)Vol.3,Nº2-3.

DelOlmo,Rosa.(2000)Ciudadesdurasyviolenciaurbanaen:NuevaSocie-dad,167,Mayo-Junio,Caracas.

Huisinga,Johan.(1955)HomoLudens.AStudyofthePlay-ElementinCultu-re.TheBeaconPress.Boston.

García,BrígidayOrlandinadeOliveira.(2004)Trabajoextradomésticofeme-ninoyrelacionesdegénero:unanuevamirada,en:Estudiosdemográficosyurbanos,enero-abril,N°55,ColegiodeMéxico,DistritoFederal,México.

Giddens,Anthony.(1995)Modernidadeidentidaddelyo.EditorialPenínsula,Barcelona.

GonzálezArvelaez,Maykert.(2003)Lapromociónsocialdelbuentrato.Unaresponsabilidadcotidiana.ResumendeponenciaapresentarenelSemina-rio¿Cómoentenderalniñoyaladolescente?EscueladelaJudicatura.Julio2003.ConsultadoenInternet:http://www.cecodap.org.ve/texto/situacion/ponencia%20escuela%20judicatura.htm.

SanJuan,AnaMaría.(1999)EstudiosobrelosindicadoresdelacriminalidadyladelincuenciaenVenezuela,ProgramaSeguridadyConvivenciaCiudada-na,BID(Mimeografiado),Caracas.

Scott,James.(1985)WeaponsoftheWeak.EverydayformsofPeasantResistan-ce,YaleUniversityPress,NewHavenyLondres.

ScottoCarmenyAnabelCastillo.(1994)“LaViolenciaCotidianaenVenezuela.ElcasodeunBarrio”en:LuisUgaldeetal.,LaViolenciaenVenezuela,MonteAvilaEditoresLatinoamericana,UniversidadCatólicaAndrésBello,Caracas.


7. Bibliographical references

Baumrind,D.(1966)Effectsofauthoritativecontrolonchildbehavior.ChildDevelopment,37,887-907.

Bee,H.(1996)Acriançaemdesenvolvimento.PortoAlegre:ArtesMédicas.Cecconello,A.M.;DeAntoni,C.;Koller,S.H.(2003)Práticaseducativas,es-

tilosparentaiseabusofísiconocontextofamiliar.Psicol.Estud.,vol.8,n.Esp.,Maring.

Costa,F.T.;Teixeira,M.A.P.&Gomes,W.B.(2000)Responsividadeeexigên-cia:Duasescalasparaavaliarestilosparentais.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica,13,465-473.

Darling, N.; Steinberg, L. (1993) Parenting style as context: An integrativemodel.PsychologicalBulletin,113,487-496.

Montandon, C. (2005) As práticas educativas parentais e a experiência dascrianças.Educ.Soc.,vol.26,n.91,p.485507.

Weber,L.N.D.;Pradoet.al.(2004)Identificaçãodeestilosparentais:opontodevistadospaisedosfilhos.Psicologia:ReflexãoeCrítica,v.17,n.3,PortoAlegre.



Documents

Family practices and child participation: an exploratory ... · Chairman Elizabeth Sussekind Executive Director Gary Barker Programmes Director Marcos Nascimento Programme Co-ordinator