Say Yes, Autumn 2007: Children on the streets: a mixed response

Concern about children living and working on the street has spawned a range of new facilities, institutions and services. There have been success stories, and in some places numbers may have started to decline. But there are still children out there.

Fuat (not his real name) is in grade five, but his short–cropped hair and thin brown arms make him look younger. You might spot him around 7 p.m. one evening in his T–shirt, sandals and stained school trousers, trying to slip past the driver onto the number 302 bus home. Like his friends, he spends his mornings in school in an old shanty–town neighbourhood in the shadow of Ankara’s citadel, and his afternoons in the city centre working to support my family. He parries questions about his parents’ roots and occupations, how much he earns and where the money goes. My teacher knows I shine shoes, he says, She doesn’t say anything.

For around ten liras any boy can acquire a rough wooden box with a foot–rest on top, a shoulder–strap and two compartments for sponges, leathers, rags, dubbin and dye. Then begins his daily battle with the zabıta or municipal police, who move him on and can even confiscate his box. When he is young he can always find some kind–hearted gentleman or lady to give him work, even if their shoes are not so dirty — and despite the many adult men who ply the same trade at fixed points on pavements and in parks. But he must keep an eye out for gangs of older boys addicted to thinner and glue.

Initial shock

Wandering shoe–shine boys are among the many children — girls as well as boys — who work on Turkey’s streets. Others sell bread–rings, pick through garbage, clean windscreens at traffic lights, or peddle handkerchiefs or pencils on street corners and at bus stops. Their numbers multiplied in the mid to late 1990s, when children also started to be found sleeping in doorways, stealing from shops and picking pockets. Officials and citizens were forced to recognise an issue which they had never imagined they would face.

It took some time to get over the shock. We came to realise that these children were not just a nuisance but also that they were in danger: that they suffered harrassment and violence from officials, passers–by and other children; that their health was in danger from cold, hunger, fatigue and exhaust fumes; that they were vulnerable to abuse, accidents and all sorts of uncorroborated accusations, and that their school careers — if they had any — were likely to be short, unhappy and unsuccessful. We determined not to label them ‘street children’, as if they were a different species.

Listening and learning

Then we started to talk to them. We discovered that some came from broken homes, and that many were the children of poor parents who had migrated precipitously from other provinces, especially in Southeast Turkey, with many mouths to feed. We began to distinguish between children of the street and children on the street — the former living on the street 24 hours a day; the latter working on the street at weekends or after school in order to help support themselves and their families. We learned that the children were acutely sensitive to the condescension and discrimination which they faced. We estimated their numbers, in the early 2000s, at anywhere between 40,000 and 80,000 — mostly boys of all ages, but also including many girls of primary school age.

Finally, we started to act. We sought ways of protecting those already on the street, of introducing them back into the community and of preventing others from joining them. Concerned citizens founded associations, and municipalities started to offer assistance and set up shelters. The Social Services and Child Protection Agency (SHÇEK), a national government body, came to provide services, activities and sometimes accommodation for children on the street in the child and youth centres which it runs in many provinces.

New Service Model

In 2004, an inter–ministerial committee was formed under the coordination of the State Ministry responsible for SHÇEK, with the Ministries of Justice, Interior, National Education and Health all taking part. The committee prepared a New Service Model for Children Living and/or Working on Streets. Aims included the provision of shelter and treatment and enrolment or re–enrolment of the children in school. UNICEF provided technical support.

Building on existing good practice and international experience, the model envisaged that mobile teams and street offices should be established to identify the children concerned. The children would then be referred to medical rehabilitation centres, if needed, or directly to social rehabilitation centres. Throughout this process, each child would be supported by a social worker, psychologist or child development specialist. Children living on the streets would be reunited with their families wherever possible, or otherwise placed in SHÇEK institutions or boarding schools.

Prevention and cure

The prevention of street life came to be regarded as just as important as the cure. Efforts were made to identify children at risk of starting to live or work on the streets. SHÇEK started to support their parents through training and grants. The Ministry of National Education set out to develop the capacity of teachers and school guidance counselors to identify and support children at risk of dropping out of school. In 2005–6, in a reflection of public anxiety, a parliamentary enquiry was held to investigate … the reasons why they are on the street, and make recommendations for solutions.

Meanwhile, in June 2005, the implementation of the new service model had been discussed at a conference in İstanbul. The conference, jointly organised by SHÇEK, the Projects Coordination Centre of the Ministry of National Education and UNICEF, was attended not only by officials from various ministries and international organisations but also by members of parliament, children, the media and representatives of provincial governorates, municipalities and non–government organisations (NGOs). There followed a series of local workshops in the worst–affected cities of Adana, Ankara, Antalya, Bursa, Diyarbakır, İstanbul, İzmir and Mersin. In each province, a City Action Plan (CAP) was devised together with a two–year plan for its implementation.

Most of the plans also emphasised the need for vocational education for children living and working on the street or at risk of doing so, to provide them with marketable skills and so prevent the cycle of poverty which pushed many of them out to work in the first place. Several cities decided to work with the media and muhtars (neighbourhood officials), to establish hotlines, and to hold awareness meetings. Local inter–sectoral councils or committees were set up to oversee implementation, often with a measure of child participation.

Getting results?

Other organisations from the European Union and the International Labour Organisation to municipalities and grassroots NGOs also pursued activities of their own related to children living and working on the street, whether directly or in the context of projects in related areas such as child labour and children in contact with the law. Reports from the target cities indicate that:

• The number of units, facilities and institutions providing services to children living and/or working on streets has increased. There are now mobile units and coordination centres in almost all of the cities with CAPs. In İstanbul alone there are 15 mobile units. Most of these cities also have shelters for children on the street. Several have street offices and/or first–stop centres. All have centres where children who have been living or working on the street receive social rehabilitation. In Bursa, for example, an impressive Sevgi Köyü, or Affection Village, has been built and equipped with computers and facilities for music, sport and innumerable other activities.
• There are drug rehabilitation centres in Ankara, Antalya, Diyarbakır, İstanbul and İzmir. More than 300 children who had drug or substance abuse problems have been treated. İstanbul and İzmir also have medical rehabilitation centres.
• More than 1,000 children who were out of school have been registered, including some at regional boarding schools. Over 2,000 children who were already registered at school but who were not regularly attending classes have started to do so.

Slipping the net

As a result of these developments — perhaps coupled with better economic conditions — officials in some cities believe that the number of children living and working on the street is on the decline. Civil society representatives, on the other hand, argue that the social conditions which cause children to take to the streets — such as migration, income inequality and family breakdowns — are as prevalent as ever. In the worst–affected cities, it is not hard to see that there are still children out there.

Fuat’s elder brother says he started shining shoes entirely of his own volition seven years ago. The first day was really hard, but we were needy and it was better than just kicking my heels. He reports that fewer children from his neighbourhood are going out to work, and more are staying on at school. But in the twelve years he has been working as a waiter, peddler and shoe–shine boy to support his ailing parents, he says, nobody has ever lent his or his family a helping hand. His unlived childhood is a stark reminder that street life cannot be tackled in isolation from poverty and other social ills — and that the safety net is only loosely woven.

In the case of children living on the street and addicted to substances like adhesives, rehabilitation facilities are not always available, while some reportedly refuse treatment and return to their former lives. The numbers of these children may be few but they are entitled to the same rights to education, health and protection as other boys and girls.

A test for social policy

Key government ministers are expected to meet soon with SHÇEK and UNICEF officials to review the implementation of the New Service Model. More shelters, mobile teams, street offices, coordination centres and medical centres may be needed. Funding may also need to be addressed. Lacking specific budgets, the CAPs have so far relied on borrowing: a building from one organisation, a vehicle from another, a driver from a third, a teacher from a fourth. Central government agencies, municipalities and NGOs could arguably coordinate more effectively at the local level; too much seems to depend on the commitment of individual provincial governors or deputy governors.

At the national level, the issue of children on the street needs to be treated as a symptom of the exclusion of poor or unfortunate families and children from the opportunities which society makes available to others.

Previous page  |  Next page

ARCHIVE

Search UNICEF Turkey
   

• Advanced Search

Download this issue in pdf format. [PDF 808KB]

 * How to use RSS …