1Victimisation vulnerability of street (community) children
Robert Peacock
Fernanda Fonseca Rosenblatt
Core issues in this chapter
- A global and African occurrence
- The phenomenon of street children as symptomatic of structural victimisation
- Victimisation vulnerability of street children with specific reference to the macro
and micro environments
- Legal framework and Restorative interventions
-
Key terms
discrimination
negative labelling
marginalisation
survival sex
street situation
Introduction
The onset of the third millennium marked a worldwide antithesis to the very meaning of
childhood and social responsibility. Despite international instruments such as the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), children remain symptom-bearers
of prejudice, discrimination and conflict. Violent acts towards children reflect violent
environments, and pervasive cultural values sanction a climate that is permissive to their
victimisation. In a landscape of hegemonic cultural practices, inferior social status is
assigned to physique in particular, rendering children vulnerable victims of state,
structural, institutional and interpersonal violence. With domination and supremacy as
culturally energised constructs, the following discussion will focus on the victimisation
1 This chapter appears in Peacock, R (2013). Victimology in South Africa. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
vulnerability of street children, or maybe rather community children as they originate in
the first instance from communities and not the street. Also, they may still be attached
emotionally, socially and financially to their places of origin, despite their current street-
involvement.
Conceptualisation
Language has been identified as a source of inequitable distribution of power (Brown,
Esbensen & Geis, 2001). Those who control language control the “truth” and this is
especially true in the case of community children who are often labelled as “deviants”
and “outcasts”, conveniently pushed to the margins of state and societal responsibility, in
all likelihood to avoid possible “contamination”. Terminology such as “street children” as
well as other labels associated with this phenomenon invoke self-righteous middle-class
values stressing cultural differences in concepts of family life and home values as well as
the need for moral “reform”. For instance, street children are labelled as “young vultures”
(South Africa), “dust of life” (Vietnam), “bed bugs” (Colombia), “street gangs”
(Mexico), “fruit birds” (Peru), “mosquitoes” (Cameroon) or “nasty kids” (Rwanda).
Other names include “hopeless”, “parasites” and “thieves” (Smith, 1996:147).
In the social exclusion paradigm, street children are also viewed as a homogeneous
dispossessed mass which has fallen through support networks and invokes further
stereotypes related to gender, ethnicity and age such as “all street girls are sex workers”
and “older dark-skinned males should be feared” (Panter-Brick, 2002:149; Svetlana,
2001:530).
A useful conceptual framework should not only acknowledge variation in identity but
also similarities and differences in the experiences of community children to whom the
street, in its widest broadest sense of the word, has become home, with the proviso that
the categories of street children are viewed as neither discrete, nor necessarily
homogeneous, and may not always coincide with children’s own views of their lives
(Benítez, 2011; Bush & Rizzini, 2011).
The most frequently used definition is that of UNICEF and refers to a street child as a
male or female under the age of eighteen:
[...] for whom the street (in the widest sense of the word, including unoccupied dwellings,
wasteland, etc.) has become his or her habitual abode and/or source of livelihood, and
who is inadequately protected, supervised, or directed by responsible adults (Glasser,
1994. p.54).
A global overview
A nomadic lifestyle and other factors such as poor social support systems render it
difficult to determine the exact number of children who globally have made the street
their home, but the estimated figure of 100 million is usually most cited (Benitez, 2007).
Historically, street children have been associated more with the cities of Latin America –
where estimates have put the numbers of these children as high as 50 million (Lusk,
1992). As for Brazil in particular, estimates, or rather guestimates have been as high as 30
million, which would suggest that, in 1994, more than half of all Brazilian children were
street children However, a recently released national census on street children in Brazil,
has counted a much smaller number of 23.973 children and adolescents in what they have
named are in ‘a street situation’ (SDH & IDEST, 2011). It should be noted, however, that
critics point out that the said census was fielded without adequate consultation with all
the stakeholders and was completed in a too limited time frame in order to fully develop
and implement an adequate methodology to obtain a reasonably complete count (Bush &
Rizzini, 2011: 30. On the Indian subcontinent, the street is estimated to be home to about
18 million children (Human Rights Watch, 1996). But this phenomenon is also present
elsewhere. It is especially in Africa, with its high fertility and mortality rates that are
often stuck in extreme poverty, where street children become daily the casualties of the
collapse of economies, social disorganisation, political instability, military solutions to
social ills, and diseases of poverty such as Aids, tuberculosis and cholera. According to
the United Nations Children’s Fund (2002:2) an estimated number of 7000 children were
for example, roaming the streets of post conflict Rwanda – one of the poorest nations in
the world – orphaned by war, genocide or Aids (United Nations Children’s Fund, 2002).
There is also an estimate of 12 000 street children in South Africa and around 21 000 in
Ghana (Consortium for Street Children, 2009).
The developing world is particularly vulnerable to market fluctuations and it was the
collapse of the currency of a country such as that of Indonesia that forced the poorest
onto the street and caused the abandonment of children (Amnesty International, 1999).
Due to economic strain, as in the case of Brazil, children live and work on the streets of
Haiti to supplement the meagre income of their families. Here it is conservatively
estimated that close to 500 000 of the country’s seven million people, are children who
are living and working on the streets of the major cities (D’Aubreu, Mullis & Cook,
2001; Kovats-Bernat, 2000). As a result of the current global economic slump, an
estimated 6 000 children live and sleep on the streets of the capital of Madagascar where
they receive no public services and face frequent police harassment, whereas the number
of a further estimated 75000 street children are on the rise in Manila, the capital of the
Philippines (Médecins Sans Frontières, 1998).
The end of communism also created conditions whereby there was no safety net for the
unemployed and disadvantaged members of society and cities such as Moscow, St
Petersburg, Kiev, Sophia and Bucharest – as elsewhere in the Eastern Bloc – are
experienced an unprecedented growth in the number of street children. For instance, it
has been estimated that there are one million homeless children in Russia alone (Jones,
2003; Amnesty International, 1999).
Although in developing countries the phenomenon of street children can reach far more
dramatic dimensions – in terms of both size and severity of the problem, street children
also occur in the New World (i.e. North and South America) and Europe (Panter-Brick,
2002:153). However, in Great Britain it has been argued that estimates of homeless
youths tend to be inflated by welfare agencies to legitimise their role, but also minimised
by bureaucratic institutions to sidestep legal or financial problems. Statistics are thus
manipulated and characterised by hidden agendas, but suffice to say that with current
global projections of a record number of 180 million people unemployed worldwide
(United Nations News, 2003a), it is likely that the street will increasingly become a place
of refuge (albeit paradoxically) to the marginalised and most vulnerable ones in our
respective societies.
In South Africa, apartheid and its associated total institutions (institutions of oppression,
exclusion and conflict) stratified the street child phenomenon according to race with the
highest incidence recorded amongst the African population, followed by the “strollers”
from the coloured community (Peacock, 1989; Schärf, 1988; Swart, 1988a). The legacy
of apartheid, and in particular apartheid capitalism, continues to reproduce social
inequality with the phenomenon of street children as symptomatic of class society
amplified by strain, frustration, multiple deprivations and experiences of recurrent
indignities.
Worldwide, the vast majority of street children are boys. Depending on the country,
estimates of the percentage of street girls range from as low as 3% to 30% (Wernham,
2004). Until recently, gender-defined roles, such as caring for siblings, kept girls at home
(Pilotti & Rizzini, 1994; Wernham, 2004). Furthermore, once girls are on the street,
authorities are more likely to intervene than in the case of their male counterparts (World
Health Organisation, 1996).
The typical age of a street child varies from place to place. In developing countries
children as young as eight live completely on their own, but in developed countries such
children are usually over the age of 12. In the developing world children as young as five
(or younger) living on the streets are usually the infants of homeless parents (Panter-
Brick, 2002; World Health Organisation, 1996).
CRIME AND VICTIMISATION RISK FACTORS
The economic deprivation of individuals and groups eventually produce chronic poverty
and overt conflict. However, one also needs to take into account emotional concomitants
of group traits and interaction. Intra- and intergroup prejudice and discrimination will
contribute to strain, rendering nationhood, ethnicity, gender, class and age as
interconnecting systems of difference, but belonging to a larger system of privilege and
inequality (Peacock, 2002). Political and institutional factors (state structure, elite politics
and discriminatory political systems), geography and demography may play important
parts in terms of the final manifestation of crime and victimisation, especially with
relation to problems of overpopulation, resource scarcity and underdevelopment in
general (Utterwulghe, 1999). Large-scale socio-political changes often cause the
disintegration of social and political systems, contributing to further imbalances of power
and societal pathology. We see, for instance, throughout history that whenever societies
are in turmoil there is usually an ascent in the numbers of street children (Peacock, 1994).
Changes in the political and economic arrangements in the post-communist countries
following the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989), transitions from right-wing rule to
democracy in Latin America, the aftermath of apartheid in South Africa (and economic
apartheid elsewhere), post-war turmoil and urban conflict, as well as the trauma of loss of
life and a family home are all variables making street children a common sight in
countries such as South Africa, Latvia, Romania, Tajikistan, Bosnia, Kashmir,
Afghanistan and Peru. Iraq can now also be added to the latest list of casualties. A million
refugees from former Yugoslavia’s multifaceted conflict were under the age of 18,
highlighting also the worldwide plight of 25 million people displaced in their own
countries (Children’s Rights Worldwide, 1994; United Nations News, 2003).
In a climate of socio-economic deprivation and political turmoil, children are often
devalued in economic terms. For instance, in Guatemala (where 70% of the population
live in abject poverty), in Honduras (where the figure is 80%) and in Mexico City (the
most populated city in the world), it is estimated that three out of ten children fight to
survive the streets (Casa Alianza, 2003). Economic and social conditions of marginalised
communities in Canada and the United States also make a street lifestyle preferable to
that of a family life characterised by poverty, family disintegration and parental rejection
(Beavis, Klos, Carter & Douchant 1997; Flynn & Brotherton, 2008; Gibson, 2011;
Miller, Hoffman & Duggan 1987). In Ethiopia, impoverished children from dysfunctional
families and communities seek refuge on the streets of Addis Ababa in the hope of
receiving a formal education (Niewenhuys, 2001:548).
In the recently released first national survey on street children in Brazil (SDH & IDEST,
2011), 70% of the children who admitted sleeping on the street indicated violence at
home as the main reason for not returning home in the evenings – either referring to
verbal quarrels with their parents or brothers/sisters (32.2%), to physical violence
(30.6%), or to sexual violence or abuse (8.8%). According to other research – also carried
out in Brazil in 1992 – “street-living” children reported higher levels of physical violence
(corporal punishment) at home (62%), compared to “street-working” children (23%)”
(Wernham 2004:49). International research supports the notion of family-based violence,
abuse and neglect as important pathways to the streets (Benítez, 2011), However, this
should also be seen in the context of macro-level factors that impact negatively on family
and community life. Sanders’ (1987:5) summation of social factors that contribute to the
presence of street children in Brazil could also be extended to elsewhere in the world: “…
a consequence of poverty associated with massive social disruptions like internal
migration and rapid urbanisation which confront traditional cultures with unprecedented
challenges.”
According to Human Rights Watch organisations (Amnesty International, 1999:3;
Human Rights Watch, 2003:2), state violence is pervasive and impunity is the norm in
countries all over the world once community children arrive on the street. Massive
killings took place in Brazil and Colombia and the notion of “social cleansing”, notably
in Bulgaria and the Sudan, is based on the racial, ethnic or religious identification of
children. In countries such as Guatemala, India, Kenya and Ethiopia, street children are
viewed as “anti-social”, a scourge on a city’s tourist-filled streets, routinely subject to
harassment and physical abuse, or charged with vague “offences” such as vagrancy or
loitering, or “status offences” such as being in need of discipline. The research of Kovats-
Bernat (2000:415) highlights the antagonistic stance taken by the Haitian state – not too
dissimilar from the apartheid regime in South Africa – and its paramilitary proxies
towards displaced youth. The predominant form of street violence in Haiti is largely
quasi-political in nature, and child morbidity and death have become an expected
outcome for children who live and work on the street.
Impact and consequences of living on the street
Street children lack basic resources to sustain healthy living. They lack proper shelter and
thus can regularly be seen in shop doorways or other public spaces using newspapers or
whatever else they can find as a mattress (Fonseca, 2008). An inadequate diet leads to
malnutrition, anaemia and vitamin deficiencies. In adverse weather conditions they are
exposed to common diseases such as tuberculosis, and skin and parasitic diseases. In
addition to dental problems, they frequently experience, according to the World Health
Organisation (1996), sexual and reproductive health problems – all of which can be
prevented relatively easily if their most basic needs are met. Chemical addiction and
survival sex also place street children in a high-risk category. Research conducted during
the apartheid era (Peacock, 1989), predicated that black male street children as young as
ten years old were frequently sexually abused by white paedophiles (male and female)
whilst attempting to survive a street lifestyle.
According to a study conducted by Peacock and Theron (1992) of a group of street
children in Hillbrow (Johannesburg), 85% engaged in survival sex to avoid hunger and
cold, whereas a further 48% of research participants were also inhaling solvents so as not
to experience cold or hunger. Chemical addiction served furthermore to mask feelings of
aversion and anxiety when the research participants engaged in sexual practices with
adult clients.
Amnesia, depression and suicidal thoughts are negative side effects associated with
solvent inhalation or “glue sniffing”, with extensive brain, liver and kidney damage as
further symptoms. Laryngeal freezing and thus suffocation may also occur, and the
Sudden Sniff Death syndrome has been identified, referring to sudden cardiac arrest as a
result of inhalation (Lowenstein, 1987; O’Connor, 1979).
A stressful past, a deprived and hostile street environment, and a transitory lifestyle make
street children vulnerable to emotional problems and learning difficulties. They also tend
to be excluded from participating in most of the community activities and facilities
afforded to other children. For example, they generally end up having little or no contact
with formal schooling (Benítez, 2011).
Resilience towards adversity is certainly also a characteristic of many street children
(Smith, 1996). Although they are marginalised and frequently labelled as criminals – and
the definition thereof is always relative – they are able to form sophisticated social
networks, providing a surrogate family environment by caring for the younger ones.
Many children as young as ten years old are also on the street to provide financial
assistance to their families through begging and the performance of odd jobs (Peacock,
1993). The apartheid experience has taught us, however, that resilience towards adversity
should never be overestimated, leading us to underestimate the real impact and
consequences of victimisation.
The problem of street children in perspective
From the above discussion it is clear that the phenomenon of street children could be
viewed as a product of unequal power relations in and between societies. Their
victimisation is an outcome of struggles over ideological interests and material goods
unevenly distributed according to nationality, race, ethnicity, gender, class and age and
stabilised in its dynamics by the functioning of social institutions and cultural practices.
Repeat victimisation on the street will concur with the functions the street holds for a
child. According to Swart (1988:41), the street has the following three functions:
• It provides some refuge from adversity that can be permanent or temporary, individual
or collective, where the child eats, sleeps and suffers.
• It forms the child’s turf or source of livelihood where he or she can obtain money, food
and shelter, subject to negotiation, arbitration or warfare.
• The streets beyond the familiar are blank, unknown territory, holding fascination and
risks.
In the absence of guardianship, street children will be considered attractive targets,
especially when vulnerable and engaged in high-risk activities such as solvent inhalation
(see also Cohen, Kleugel & Land, 1981).
Their victimisation is, however, not a discrete experience and any analysis should also
take cognisance of
• the cyclical nature of crime and victimisation (victim and offender sequences, victim
and offender homogeneity, as well as victim and offender recidivism)
• the relative meaning of crime and victimisation
• the shortcomings of a criminal law definition thereof.
Research on street children needs to adopt frameworks that accept their definitions of
their own circumstances and should encompass a culturally sensitive understanding of
risk factors that shape their lives. The notion of belonging to the street is generally a very
important component to street children’s individual identities and, therefore, the decision
to leave the street may well imply a change in the way each of these children perceive
themselves and conceive their own life choices (Lucchini, 1996). Hence, programmes
involving street children should allow for their voices to be heard as a means of
understanding their own views (about themselves and their “street situation”) and of
enabling interventions that could assist them to reorganise their sense of selfhood and
identity.
For purposes of further research, multi-method research methodologies or triangulation
on this complex phenomenon would be particularly important as it may demonstrate how
closely violent patterns of behaviour are tied together with everyday reproductions of
social structures, thereby examining the relevance of cultural patterns of interpretation
together with institutional constructions of violence. To view the phenomenon of street
children as simply the result of personal pathology or family dysfunction would be
reductionist and distortive, and distracts from the multi-locational and embedded nature
of this phenomenon with structural causes that sustain victimising processes.
Furthermore, intervention strategies based on notions of “victim support” rather than
contextually and culturally relevant assistance will disempower street children through
the perpetuation of patronising middle-class values. Such a condescending portrayal of
being passive and helpless constitutes an arrest of personal agency and may contribute to
a victim career (see also Chapter One on destructive notions of victimhood and
empowerment).
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
The street situation of millions of children across the globe comprises grave violations of
fundamental rights set forth in legislative endeavours. For instance, the intention behind
Article 54 of the most ratified human rights treaty in existence, namely the Convention of
the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) (1989) is to hold governments accountable in
respecting the rights of children including:
• freedom from violence, abuse and hazardous employment
• freedom from hunger and protection from diseases
• free compulsory primary education
• adequate health care
• equal treatment regardless of gender, race or cultural background.
Similarity exists between Section 28 of the South African Constitution (Act 108 of 1996)
and the contents of Article 40 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child (1989). The Bill of Rights of the South African Constitution, in particular Section
28, describes the rights of the child referring, amongst others, to the right of the child to
be protected from maltreatment, neglect, abuse or degradation.
South Africa is also a member of the African Union and the British Commonwealth. Both
these bodies subscribe to the protection of the rights of children. In fact, the UNCRC is
the only one of the core human rights treaties supported across all 53 Commonwealth
member states (Sen & Hajdu, 2009). Most notably, is the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) which was adopted in 1986 and is relevant to countries on the
African continent. The Charter includes the recognition of human dignity inherent to any
human being, and exploitation and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is prohibited.
In addition, the Child Justice Act (75 of 2008) recognises the ‘best interests of the child’
(see also Artz and Smythe in this volume).
Despite these legal safeguards, in South Africa, as well as elsewhere (most notably from
the developing world), children are frequently forced to supplement the meagre income
of their families, and are often compelled to leave their family homes, despite parental
love and care, thereby falsely dichotomising free will and victimisation. They are
deprived of the rights to develop to the fullest, to be ensured of protection from harmful
influences, abuse and exploitation, to participate fully in family, cultural and social life.
rendering them particularly vulnerable to adversity, interpersonal violence and contact
with the criminal justice system.
Regardless of the spirit in which legal frameworks have been developed to ameliorate
problematic situations (both nationally and internationally), and maybe at times with the
best of intentions, the social and political environment in which legislation needs to be
introduced can never be ignored (Peacock, 2009). Within the context of political will and
the availability of resources, the rather substantial legislative frameworks tend to design
“one-size-fits-all” protection nets for children in any (risk) situation overlooking the
particular victimisation vulnerability of street children. The challenge would require a
shift from an “abstract” to a more “concrete” notion of children, wherein the particular
risks and needs of street children are carefully differentiated from those of other children.
(Melo, 2011). For instance, the UNCRC right to “free compulsory primary education” is
somewhat impractical for street-involved children who have no longer contact with
school. For those, the right to “street social education” – a more targeted “service”
provided by “street educators”, who identify children on the street and provide them with
education and counselling – is far more useful and a potentially important force in the
process of “street detachment” (Oliveira, 2000).
Given the circumstances in which street children live, and archaic legislation that
criminalises poverty (such as anti-vagrancy and anti-begging laws) they are very likely to
come into contact with the criminal justice system, regardless of whether or not they have
actually engaged in criminal behaviour. In fact, they are commonly seen as “a threat” to
the safety of public spaces and, in turn, repressive responses are the most common
initiatives amongst authorities’ attempts to tackle the street children phenomenon (Bush
& Rizzini, 2011). And once they are caught up in the criminal justice system – where
commonly they become further victimised – street children often get trapped in a cyclical
process, moving back and forth between the streets and detention (Wernham, 2004).
Generally, street children are under-policed as victims and over-policed as offenders.
Reflections upon street children’s almost inescapable contact with the criminal justice
should lead to the promotion of diversion programmes designed to turn these children
away from formal court proceedings and detention (Benítez, 2007; Fonseca,
2008;Wernham; 2004). Such repressive interventions do not allow for their voices to be
heard and individual experiences to be considered, but instead deliver blanket responses
that further reinforce their criminal label and lessen the (already few) life options
available to them In this context, restorative justice (see also Batley and Weitekamp on
restorative justice in this volume), offers a realm of principles and values that might well
shed light on how youth justice systems around the world could be reformed to become
more sensitive to, and more efficacious for, the street children phenomenon (Fonseca,
2008). Whilst challenging the strategy of punitive segregation, restorative justice calls for
informal participatory processes of conflict resolution that allow for the active
involvement of all parties concerned. In turn, restorative justice promotes an empowering
model of justice in which work is supposed to be carried out with – and not at – victims,
offenders and communities (Cunneen & Hoyle, 2010; Johnstone, 2011; Woolford, 2009).
Conclusion
Notwithstanding legal safeguards, street children remain socially expendable and the
relative autonomy and subsequent multiple victimisation inherent to the constructs of age,
class, gender and race resonated in their labelling as “deviants”, “commodities” or
“outcasts”. The tyrannical nature of their victimisation is sustained by societal
constructions of institutional, structural and cultural violence, a world shaped by privilege
and status, and their only “crime” is to be a child.
Content and application questions
~ You are a member of an urban renewal team with the responsibility of focusing on
vulnerable children. Indicate how you will go about identifying the street children
problem in the area and particularly the impact of the macro and micro environments,
child labour and the legislative safeguards to prevent it, as well as commercial sexual
exploitation of children.
~ In your opinion, what could be done to better harmonise governmental and
nongovernmental responses to the street children phenomenon?
~ In your opinion, how could the youth justice system be reformed in order to become
more sensitive to, and more efficacious for, the problem of street children in your
country?
Websites, films and suggested activities
Websites
Consortium for Street Children (www.streetchildren.org.uk)
Street Child World Cup (www.streetchildworldcup.org)
UNESCO (www.unesco.org)
Pangaea – Street Children – Worldwide Resource Library
(http://www.pangaea.org/street_children/kids.htm).
Films
Masud, C. & Masud, T. (Writers). 2005. A Kind of Childhood. Bangladesh.
Padilha, J. (Writer). 2002. Bus 174. Brazil.
Polak, H. (Writer). 2004. Children of Leningradsky. Russia.
Pritchard, T. (Writer). 2011. Street Kids United. United Kingdom.
Activities in class
Street Kids United reports the journey of homeless children living on the streets of
Durban, as they form a team to compete in the Street Child World Cup. An interesting
activity in class would be to watch this inspiring documentary and then form a circle to
debate the street children phenomenon. The use of a “talking piece” (e.g., a book), as
used in peace-making circles, should provide the opportunity for everyone in the class to
speak and be listened to.
20.10 Suggested readings
Baron, S.W. 2003. Street youth violence and victimization. Trauma, Violence and Abuse,
4:22-44.
Bordonaro, L. I. 2010. From home to the street: Cape Verdean children street migration.
In S. J. T. M. Evers, C. Notermans, & E. van Ommering (Eds), African children in focus:
A paradigm shift in methodology and theory?. Leiden: Netherlands African Studies
Association and Brill Academic Publishers.
Cheng, F. and D. Lam. 2010. How is street life? An examination of the subjective
wellbeing of street children in China. International Social Work, 53(3): 353-365.
Cross, C. & Seagar, J. 2010. Towards identifying the causes of South Africa’s street
homelessness: some policy recommendations. Development Southern Afgrica, 27(1):
143-53.
Dimenstein, G. 1991. Brazil: War on Children. London: Latin America Bureau.
Hagan, J. and McCarthy, B. 1999. Mean Streets: Youth Crime and Homelessness,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lalor, K. J. 1999. Street Children: A Comparative Perspective. Child Abuse & Neglect,
23(8): 759-770.
Nkomo, M. & Olufemi, O. 2001. Educating street and homeless children in South Africa:
the challenge of policy implementation. International Journal of Education Policy,
Research and Practice, 2(4):337-56.
Pinheiro, P. 2006. World Report on Violence against Children. New York: United
Nations Secretary General’s Study on Violence against Children.
Ward, C. L. & Seager, J. R. 2010. South African street children: a survey and
recommendations for services Development Southern Africa, 27(1):85-100.
References
Amnesty International. 1999. On the streets. Available at:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news/mag/mar99/cover.html (accessed on 28 April 2003).
Aptekar, L. 1994. Street Children in the Developing World: A Review of Their
Condition. Cross-Cultural Research, 28(3): 195–224.
Brown, S.E., Esbensen, F. & Geis, G. 2001. Criminology. Cincinnati: Anderson.
Beavis, M.A.N., Klos, T., Carter, T. & Douchant, C. 1997, January. Literature review:
aboriginal peoples and homelessness. CMHC Research Report. Ottawa: Lexus.
Benítez, S. T. d. 2007. State of the World's Street Children: Violence. London:
Consortium for Street Children.
Benítez, S. T. d. 2011. State of the World’s Street Children: Research. London:
Consortium for Street Children.
Bush, M. & Rizzini, I. 2011. Closing the gap between rights and realities for children and
youth in urban Brazil: reflections on a Brazilian project to improve policies for street
children. Rio de Janeiro: CIESPI: PUC-Rio.
Butler, U. & Rizzini, I. 2003. Young People Living and Working on the Streets of Brazil:
Revisiting the Literature. Children, Youth and Environments, 13(1). Available at:
http://colorado.edu/journals/cye (accessed on 11 February 2012).
Casa Alianza. 2003. Street children. Available at: http://www.casa-alianza.org/EN/street-
children (accessed on 28 April 2003).
Campos, R., Raffaelli, M., Ude, W., Greco, M., Ruff, A., Rolf, J., Antunes, C. M.,
Halsey, N., & Greco, D. 1994. Social networks and daily activities of street youth in Belo
Horizonte, Brazil. Child Development, 65:319-330.
Cohen , L.E., Kluegel, J.R. & Land, K.C. 1981. Social inequality and personal
victimisation: a test of the model with Canadian data. Journal of Crime and Justice,
3:129–139.
Children’s Rights Worldwide. 1994. Street children – community children. Available at:
http://www.pangaea.org/street_children/worl/rights2.htm (accessed on 27 April 2003).
Consortium for Street Children, 2009. Street Children Statistics. Available at:
http://www.streetchildren.org.uk/_uploads/resources/Street_Children_Stats_FINAL.pdf
(accessed on 11 February 2012).
Cunneen, C., & Hoyle, C. (2010). Debating Restorative Justice. Oxford: Hart
D’Aubreu, R.C., Mullis, A.K. & Cook, L.R. 2001. Social support and the ability to adapt
to life among Brazilian street children. Journal of Social Psychology, 141(1):127–136.
Ennew, J. & Swart-Kruger, J. 2003. Introduction: homes, places and spaces in the
construction of street children and street youth. Children, Youth and Environments,
13(1). Available at: http://colorado.edu/journals/cye (accessed on 11 February 2012).
Flynn, M .& Brotherton, D. (2008). Globalizing the Streets: cross-cultural perspectives
on youth, social control, and empowerment. New York: Columbia University Press.
Fonseca, F. C. d. 2008. Meninos de Rua: um Desafio para a Justiça Restaurativa no Brasil
[Street Boys as a Challenge for Restorative Justice in Brazil, Portuguese]. In E. Kosovski,
H. Piedade Jr. and R. Roitman (Eds.), Estudos de Vitimologia [Victimology Studies,
Portuguese]. Rio de Janeiro: Letra Capital.
Glasser, I. 1994. Homelessness in a global perspective. New York: Maxwell.
Gibson, K. E. (2011). Street kids: homeless youth, outreach, and policing New York's
streets. New York, New York University Press.
Hindelang, M.J., Gottfredson, M.R. & Garafalo, J. 1978. Victims of personal crime: an
empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimisation. Cambridge: Ballinger.
Human Rights Watch. 1996. Police Abuse and Killings of Street Children in India.
Available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae6a7eb0.html (accessed on 10
February 2012).
Human Rights Watch. 2003. Street children. Available at:
http://www.hrw.org/children/street.htm (accessed on 28 April 2003).
Inciardi, J. A. & Surrat, H. L. 1997. Children in the Streets of Brazil: Drug Use, Crime,
Violence, and HIV Risks. Substance Use and Misuse, 33(7):1461-1480.
Johnstone, G. (2011). Restorative Justice: Ideas, Values, Debates (2nd ed.). London:
Routledge Violence, and HIV Risks. Substance Use and Misuse, 33(7):1461-1480.
Jones, L. 2003. Homeless and alone: Russian street children. Available at:
http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/world/ newsid (accessed on 28 April 2003).
Kovats-Bernat, J.C. 2000. Anti-gang Arimaj and the war on street children. Peace
Review, 12(3):415–422.
Lowenstein, L.F. 1984. Glue sniffing and substance abuse. Contemporary Review,
224(1421): 309–313.
Lucchini, R. 1996. Theory, Method and Triangulation in the Study of Street Children.
Childhood, 3:131-145.
Lusk, M. W. 1992. Street children of Rio de Janeiro. International Social Work, 35(3):
293-305.
Lusk, M. & Mason, D. 1994. Fieldwork with Rio’s Street Children. In I. Rizzini (Ed.),
Children in Brazil Today: A Challenge for the Third Millennium. Rio de Janeiro: Editora
Universitária Santa Úrsula.
Medecins sans Frontieres, 1998. Top ten humanitarian stories under-reported by the US
media. Available at: http://www.msf.org/content/cfm (accessed on 28 April 2003).
Melo, E. R. (2011) Crianças e Adolescentes em Situação de Rua: Direitos Humanos e
Justiça, São Paulo: Malheiros.
Miller, D., Hoffman, F. & Duggan, R. 1980. Runaways: illegal aliens in their own land.
New York: J.F. Bergin.
Niewenhuys, O. 2001. By the sweat of their brow? Street children, NGOs and children’s
rights in Addis Ababa. Africa, 71(4):539–556.
Noto, A. R., Galduróz, J. C. F., Nappo, S. A., Fonseca, A. M., Carlini, C. M. A., Moura,
Y. G., Carlini, E. A. 2003. Levantamento Nacional sobre o Uso de Drogas entre Crianças
e Adolescentes em Situação de Rua nas 27 Capitais Brasileiras [National Survey on
Drug Use among Street Children in Brazil’s 27 Capital Cities, Portuguese]. São Paulo:
CEBRID.
O’Connor, D.J. 1979. A profile of solvent abuse in school children. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 20(4):365–368.
Oliveira, W. (2000). Working with children on the streets of Brazil: politics and
practices. New York: Haworth Press.
Panter-Brick, C. 2002. Street children, human rights and public health: a critique and
future directions. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13:147–171.
Peacock, R. 1989. Die manlike swart straatkind: ’n verkennende psigokriminologiese
ondersoek. Unpublished Master’s dissertation, University of Pretoria.
Peacock, R. 1993. Family stress in the lives of street children. Social Work: a
Professional Journal for the Social Worker, 29(2):173–180.
Peacock, R. 1994. Street children. Africa Insight. 24(2):138–143.
Peacock, R. 2002. Macro and micro links between interpersonal violence and violence in
broader society: an integrated etiological perspective. Acta Criminologica: Southern
African Journal of Criminology, 15(3):39–44.
Peacock, R. & Theron, A. 1992. Die verband tussen swart straatkinders se biologiese en
emosionele behoeftes en die tipe misdaad wat deur hulle gepleeg word. South African
Journal of Sociology, 23(1):26–30.
Peacock, R. (2009). Institutional victimisation: Legislative framework and youth
marginalisation in post apartheid South Africa. Paper presented at the XIII International
Symposium on Victimology. Mito: (23 – 28 August).
Pilotti, F. & Rizzini, I. 1994. The (Dis)Integration of Latin America and its Impact on
Children. In I. Rizzini (Ed.), Children in Brazil Today: A Challenge for the Third
Millennium. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Universitária Santa Úrsula.
Ribeiro, M. O. & Ciampone, M. H. T. 2001. Homeless Children: the Lives of a Group of
Brazilian Street Children. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(1): 42-49.
Rizzini, I. 1996. Street Children: An Excluded Generation in Latin America. Childhood:
A Global Journal of Child Research, 3(2): 215-233.
Rizzini, I. & Butler, U. M. 2003. Life Trajectories of Children and Adolescents Living on
the Streets of Rio de Janeiro. Children, Youth and Environments, 13(1). Available at:
http://colorado.edu/journals/cye (accessed on 11 February 2012).
Roux, J. L. 1996. Street Children in South Africa: findings from interviews on the
background of street children in Pretoria, South Africa. Adolescence, 31(122):423-431.
Sanders, T.G. 1987. Brazilian street children, Part 1: who they are. UFSI Reports. Latin
America: UFSI.
Santos, B. R. d. 2008. Street Youth in New York City and São Paulo: Desconstructing the
Striking Differences, Global Similarities, and Local Specificities. In M. Flynn and D. C.
Brotherton (Eds.), Globalizing the Streets: cross-cultural perspectives on youth, social
control, and empowerment. New York: Columbia University Press.
Schärf, W. 1988. Street kids: past achievements and future challenges. Child Care
Worker. 6(8):13–15.
Scheper-Hughes, N. & Hoffman, D. 1994. Kids out of place. NACLA Report on the
Americas, 27:16-23.
Scheper-Hugues, N. & Hoffman, D. 1998. Brazilian Apartheid: Street Kids and the
Struggle for Urban Space. In N. Scheper-Hugues and C. F. Sargent (Eds.), Small Wars:
The Cultural Politics of Childhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.
SDH – Secretaria de Direitos Humanos da Presidência da República & IDEST – Instituto
de Desenvolvimento Sustentável. 2011. Primeira Pesquisa Censitária Nacional sobre
Crianças e Adolescentes em Situação de Rua [First Census Study of Children and
Adolescentes in a Street Situation, Portuguese]. Brasília: SDH.
Sen, P. & Hajdu, C. (Eds). 2009. Child Rights in the Commonwealth: 20 Years of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Schurink, W.J., Snyman, I., Krugel, W.F. & Slabbert, L. 1992. Victimisation: nature and
trends. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.
Siegel, L.J. 1998. Criminology, 6th ed. London: West Wadsworth.
Smith, C.S. 1996. The life-world of street children in the Durban metropolitan area.
Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Pretoria.
Svetlana, S. 2001. Street children in Moscow: using and creating social capital.
Sociological Review, 49(4):530–541.
Swart, J. 1988a. Streetwise: opening the way to self-actualisation for the street child.
Africa Insight, 18(1):32–41.
Swart, J. 1988b. An anthropological study of street children in Hillbrow, Johannesburg,
with specific reference to their moral values. Unpublished Master’s dissertation, Unisa.
United Nations Children’s Fund. 2002. New York Amsterdam News, 12 April: 2.
Utterwulghe, S. 1999. Rwanda’s protracted social conflict: considering the subjective
perspective in conflict resolution strategies. The Online Journal of Peace and Conflict
Resolution, Issue 2.3. Available at: http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpr (accessed on 15 April
2003).University of South Africa: Pretoria.
Wernham, M. 2004. An Outside Chance: Street Children and Juvenile Justice – an
International Perspective. London: Consortium for Street Children.
Woolford, A. (2009). The politics of restorative justice: a critical introduction. Halifax:
Fernwood.
Recommended