RESEARCH STUDY Title: The Psychological Profile of Sarnelli Street Children: A Needs Analysis Study

Castillo, Desiree B. MA in Clinical Psychology October 2010

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background of the Study The emergence of street children in our society dates back to antiquity. Street children are the casualties of economic growth, poverty, loss of traditional values, domestic violence, physical and mental abuse. Their growing population in most continents alarm the entire global community. Life of street children varies from one country to another as defined by their culture and values. According to the study conducted by Aristotle University in Thessaloniki, Greece, definitions vary so widely across different countries for the term street child.But the term was used to encompass any child or adolescent under the age of 18 who works and/or lives in the street, alone or with his/her family, or asylum seekers who are technically homeless and without support.

Countless quantitative studies, most notably surveys, have been conducted with regards to the number of street children, the reasons for their presence on the streets, their demographic and household profiles, their resiliency and survival, and involvement in criminal activities. Among the objectives of these studies is to conceptualize a composite profile of a street child. However, it is not feasible to apply the general characteristics of a street child from one country to another, since issues, needs and problems differ in more than one way. Thus, it is important and necessary to look into the different aspects and forms of the street child experience. Identity profile provided by these survey studies presents the concrete stereotype of a street child. But most of the terms used to portray street children were analytically unhelpful; promoted a very

limited understanding of their actual lives; had a deeply stigmatizing effect; deflected attention and proper resource allocation from the larger population of the urban poor; and were manipulated to serve the socio-political agendas of funding and welfare agencies (Panter-Brick, 2004) . There is more to the lives of children than could be revealed by generalizations based on the criteria of physical location and social neglect. Thus, it is indeed valuable to focus on the children themselves.

Deeper understanding of their phenomenal world can be gained from examining the diversity of their experiences. In addition, objectively studying and qualitatively analyzing their personality structure by employing psychometric tests and projective methods, will yield valuable data about their psychological profile, specifically their cognitive ability, socioemotional functioning, and self-concept formation. This will provide us with intensive discernment regarding their psychological make-up. Consequently, it will assist the social workers and psychology professionals to painstakingly identify the essential needs of the street children which were unmet due to their tumultuous circumstances. Once these deprived essential needs are clearly distinguished, a more comprehensive and effective social assistance programs can be conceptualize to continually improve and enrich the lives of street children. Simultaneously, it will aid them to accordingly adjust to their situation so that they could function effectively.

The prevalence of these street children is among the primary focus of concern of our society. Government and Non-Government Organizations aims to provide care for these children; hence, the development of organizations and foundations to alleviate their deprived

condition. Through their social assistance programs, they are able to seemingly sustain the physiological, psychological, and spiritual deprivation that these children experience. The goal of this assistance is to assuage the feeling of homelessness and abandonment that these children are apparently encountering. Thus, children on the street, of the street, and children at risk are classified as institutionalized children once they are sheltered in a residential foundation.

The street children in Sarnelli Center are classified as institutionalized children. Sarnelli Center is a non-profit foundation established by Redemptorist Congregation which provides temporary shelter and residential assistance for street children. The institution seeks to provide these children with considerable physiological, psychological, and spiritual support. Through needs assessment of the social workers as gathered from the pertinent demographic datum of their clientele, their essential and tangible needs are being sustained. Further needs analysis methods will yield additional data with regards to the covert and underlying needs of these children. Thus, psychological assessment is among the social assistance program of the center. In this respect, it is the goal of this research to objectively examine and qualitatively analyze the results of the psychological tests administered to the small sample of street children which were sheltered by the institution. The information gathered will be utilized to be able to draw out the psychological needs of these children to therefore create a realistic and appropriate intervention plan to cater to these psychological needs.

Statement of the Problem The study aimed to generate a description of the psychological profile of Sarnelli Street Children. To achieve this objective, the following specific questions were asked: 4

1. What is the psychological profile of Sarnelli Street Children based on the following domains: a. Cognitive ability? b. Socio-emotional functioning? c. Self-concept formation? 2. What are the common traits that they share in each of the domains mentioned? 3. Based on the common traits revealed, what are the apparent psychological needs of these street children? 4. What programs or interventions can be conceptualized to sustain these apparent psychological needs in the domains mentioned? Significance of the Study The studies that will be cited in the literature review section were mostly foreign investigations. In the local setting, several data were presented due to dearth of information about the psychological profile of Filipino street children. Most local studies are geared towards the demographic profile of the street children. The purpose of this study is to obtain a description of the psychological profile of Sarnelli Street Children by quantifying their cognitive ability and qualitatively evaluating their socio-emotional functioning and self-concept formation through analysis of their IQ test results and projective drawing interpretations. It also aims to contribute additional literature about the profile of street children. But the chief purpose of the study is to be able to clearly recognize and identify the psychological needs of street children to be able to create a realistic and appropriate intervention programs to meet these needs.

Scope and Limitation The research study only involved a small sample size, n=30, which are all male street children who resided/residing in Sarnelli Center. No specific demographic category was considered. Data are exclusively generated from the available records of Sarnelli Center between year 2000 up to present. To quantify their cognitive ability, only the result of their Culture Fair Intelligence Test was utilized. Qualitative description of their socio-emotional functioning and self-concept formation were only gathered from the already available interpretation of their Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test (BVMGT) and Draw-A-Person Test (DAPT), respectively.

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Review of Related Literature

This chapter reviews the related literature about the profile of street children. The manner of review includes discovering where the research is coming from. This section also aims to identify the extent of studies regarding the topic. Accordingly, this chapter provides the necessary backbone and support in order for the research to stand credible.

By surveying the past researches related to the study, a historical perspective takes place. In this manner, this study is able to reflect, to compare, to learn from setbacks, and to produce a stronger and more efficient study. This part of the paper also provides the research with a rich source of data, both new and old that enhances and enriches the study.

The review of related literature focuses on discussing the following: 1) street children phenomenon, 2) street children in global perspective, 3) the psychosocial profile of street children, 4) the Filipino street children, and 5) the intervention used by the Philippine government to solve the issue of street children The specific topics provide necessary materials for the study.

THE STREET CHILDREN PHENOMENON

Regardless of definition, the phenomenon of street children is not new and neither is it restricted to certain geographical areas. The street urchin, the runaway, the street waifs and stray children were part of the urban landscape during the process of industrialisation and urbanisation in post-war Europe. This has also been the case in many populations that have undergone political, social or economic upheaval (Study on the Street Children in Zimbabwe, 2001).

Street children are found in most cities around the world. They live in the streets, they sleep in the open or in empty buildings, and they have no one to support them in their daily struggle for survival. Street children are probably the most visible face of child labor. Most of them are involved in petty trade or carrying goods, shoe shining, begging or collecting garbage. Street children are an extremely vulnerable group in all aspects of life, not just the nature of their work. Some of the children might be victims of trafficking, but, more likely, the fact that they live in the streets make them more vulnerable to trafficking than other children. They are children living without a safety net, often seeking new challenges or trying to escape their present circumstances. The fact that they live in the streets show that they are courageous. They

have made a decision to change their situation, by leaving their place of origin and trying to make a living on their own (Hatloy & Husser, 2005). United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) has grouped the street children in three main categories. The three main categories are: children at risk, children of the street and children on the street. The largest group in this typology is the children at risk category. These are the children of the urban poor and they form the reservoir from which street children emerge. Children on the street come to the streets to work in order to supplement their families income, and they will return home to their families at night-time. A significant number attend school on a part time basis. Worldwide, these children perform similar tasks - they shine shoes, wash and mind cars, sell lottery tickets, magazines and newspapers, carry goods and peddle cigarettes and chewing gum. Extreme poverty has forced them to become at least partially self-supporting. For children of the streets, the street is their main living place. Family ties may exist but are remote and their former home is visited infrequently. A sub-category of street child in the UNICEF typology is that of abandoned children. This category includes orphans, runaways, refugees and others who have no contact with significant carers. In terms of lifestyle and daily activities, abandoned children are very similar to children of the street. They are distinguishable in that all ties with family have been severed, either through death, displacement or abandonment. Children of the street, on the other hand, have occasional contacts with their families (Lalor, 1999).

There is a further instance of blanket generalization or categorical thinking about children living and working on the streetsone which roots itself in a discourse on risk. In the current welfare literature, street children are a prime category of children at risk. This phrase has

replaced earlier appellations such as children in need and taken over terms of reference such as children in especially difficult circumstances and children in need of special protection favoured by UNICEF. Children at risk is yet another catch all phrase, a generic term that is ambiguous rather than analytically helpful, a category assembled ad hoc rather than critically deployed, a construct that is stigmatizing for the children and that remains embedded in sociopolitical agenda about the urban poor. At the very least, the phrase raises the question at risk of what? Hutz and Koller (1999) once suggested that perhaps a more appropriate way of classifying street children would be in terms of the risks to which they were exposed to e.g., contacts with gangs, use of drugs, interruption of schooling, inadequate parental guidance, and the protective factors available to them such as school, supportive social networks, caring adults (Panter-Brick, 2004).

Children leave home for various reasons. Some leave voluntarily, searching for an adventure or for a way to make a living. Other children are rejected by their family, or may feel unwanted due to strained family situation. Others are encouraged by their parents to find work in the city in order to contribute economically to the household. Regardless of countless reasons, there may be complex underlying causes why children live on the streets.

According to World Health Organization in their module entitled, Profile of Street Children, the reasons why street children live on the street vary. However, there is one explanation that holds true for both developed and developing countries - poverty. Most street children go onto the street to look for a better way of life. Some of the common reasons includes: earning money for themselves and to support their families, finding shelter, escaping family problems including rejection and work demands at home, and escaping childrens institution. 9

Street children work on the streets to earn money for themselves. Some children need to work to support their families. Some children may have been denied a chance to go to school or have dropped out of school and have nothing to do. They can earn money by begging, carrying or bearing, car washing, drug trafficking, juggling, performing music, running errands, scavenging, sex work, shoe shining or vending. In overcrowded households, children may decide to leave home to make room for younger siblings and elderly family members. Others are on the streets because they do not have an alternative. They may have become separated from their families during civil unrest or their parents/ caretakers may have died from illnesses such as AIDS or killed during armed conflict. Other children may have nowhere else to go when they are released from institutions such as a jail or a detention center. Many children feel that living on the streets is better than coping with problems in their homes. These problems can include conflicts with parents, physical or sexual abuse or neglect (e.g. an abandoned disabled child). Some children are forced to leave home by their families because the family does not approve of a childs behavior or its consequences, e.g. pregnancy, homosexuality or substance use. In many cultures, children are expected to participate in routine family tasks. At times the demands on children may be more than they can take. This leads to the child feeling that he or she is a slave or a servant. Such children leave home in search of freedom from adult demands. Living in institutions which does not seem to be conducive for street children also causes them to prefer street life. Street children may feel that childrens homes are like prisons. They

10

cannot adjust to rules after experiencing the freedom of the streets. At times the personnel in these institutions may abuse children (World Health Organization, 2000).

Most children move to the street in search of realization of basic needs and not merely as an escape from the tedium of home life or the desire to express their independence by leaving friends and family. Running away from home is an act of resistance and an expression of absolute frustration with life circumstances. It is the strongest possible response to poverty and abuse that children in circumstances of deprivation and vulnerability can exercise. Their home life and street life are both defined by two major forms of deprivation of basic needs that are essential for healthy child development and socialization: a sound family life defined by supportive parents and intimate relationships, and adequate social provisions of food, shelter, clothing, and quality schooling. Typically, neither in the homes where they previously lived, nor on the streets where they have come to establish a new life that these needs are met (Schimmel, 2006).

Living on the streets for these children is not really a choice. Rather, it is due to few alternatives that their young minds could conceptualize. They might be experiencing the freedom from the constraints that they were reporting. However, according to Cummings (2006), under this
veneer of freedom and independence, one also finds hunger, cold weather, aggressive competitors, exploitation, and fellowship with the corrupt and violent side of law enforcement. Life is agonizing, and ones horizon does not extend beyond day-to-day survival, social relationships where individualism dominates, constant fear, andin the worst casedeath itself.

Given these dangers of street life, these children still prefers wandering in the city alleys and finding shelter in the side road. Schimmel (2006) argued that once a child has become

11

socialized into street life, it becomes an extremely difficult space from which to extricate himself. Having experienced a certain type of extreme freedom, having developed friendships and social networks, and having used drugs and glue, children will often be resistant to leave the street. Hence, the prevalence of street children phenomenon.

Cummings (2006) indicated in his research that studies and reports focusing on the street children phenomenon in countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa, tend to draw attention to a number of factors seen to be behind the appearance and growth of the phenomenon. Generally, these factors are mainly socio economic in nature; they include such issues as: 1. The children living on the streets do not face difficulty to adapt to street life. 2. Children living on the streets are not likely to be failures in society. 3. Peer group influence has no effect on children living on the streets. 4. That single parenthood has no effect on children living on the street. 5. That children living on the streets are not likely to be violent.

Children who live on the street do not have difficulty to adapt to life on the street. The mere fact that children have always like to be on the street is an indicator that life in the street might not be too difficult for them. The street kids live in a condition of extreme poverty. They are between five and fifteen years of age; the ones younger than five are usually a burden to the rest of the gang and the ones who are 15 years and over become too old to wander the streets without exposing themselves dangerously. The street kids have not had the opportunity of going to school for one reason or the other. Either they were never sent to school or there is no school within their communities.

12

The child profane pilgrim of the metropolis will have to be trained by his own means without any essential schooling or family, which we have seen has not even been protective. The socialization will be a result of direct learning from life in the streets, the only way possible in the absence of the home. We know the steps of this learning: violence, hunger, diseases, small robberies on the sidewalks, the selling of oneself to some passing pervert, stealing wallet or pickpockets, clever ways of cheating and in some cases involved in use of drugs and drug abuse.

It is also the notion that street children with higher quality support would adapt better. Findings further indicate that neither quantity nor quality of social support has any effect related to adaptation. The start point of the kid is the street. His home is the street, his friends are from the streets, food, clothing, and survival is all from the streets. The street kids never understand the life and benefits of a family. For many of these kids this is a way of life for them. They have comfortably adapted to the system of a street child in their own world. As a proof to adaptation in the street, the street child has developed their own system of communication and living in those hazardous conditions that is fast and informal. They know the streets and their rules to steal, that of shoes without laces, the rule of sniffing glue, of sexual abuse, the law of the strongest in which the strongest is the leader. They know about the violence in all relationships, even the most fraternal ones, between gang members. They know the violence of friendships and of total trust. They know about the situation with transient beings and night, situations where one is afraid and one tries to avoid. They also know that the police are easily corrupted and can accept bribes and be easily corrupt.

13

The child that is found from very early age on the street, start by becoming familiar and perhaps even controlling small territories where he can feel relatively secure, even being alone. From the time he joins a gang, the size of his territory expands or deepens since he is dealing with avenues and streets which he will work non stops with his new friends and his gangs. Usually the adaptation centers for the street kids are bus stops, train stations, market places, as well as places around bars and dilapidated buildings. They are mostly in central locations where they can easily get access car traffic and be able to approach people for begging. Little by little, the child turns to be city boy or girl, discovering the best corners and hiding places to sleep without being torments or awaken by some storeowner wanting to open his store. Normally a child who lives in the street hardly goes back to his original community where he was born. If a child lives his or her community, they would mostly end up in juvenile centers.

Children living on the streets are not likely to be failures in society. Children who lived on the streets usually will have opportunity to reform and become good citizens within society. In most cases, some of these street kids with this kind of opportunity will have great history and life story to tell. Street children are less violent from the violence from which they arise. The simple fact of their surviving and existing in the street is a violent act. Nonetheless, we have experience many instances in which street kids have end up to become very powerful people in society. Although it is a given fact that children who lived on the streets do not have all the opportunities expose to them as compared to those who lived with their family members. It is also true that children who lived on the streets are mostly not educated and have not been giving the opportunity to attend school for them to become good citizens of their countries. But it can also be true that not all children who are given the best opportunities to attend school, live with family, have regular food do come out and become good citizens of society.

14

As we see hundreds of children who never lived on the streets, highly educated but end up living on the street without any proper guidance and protection. One would be tempted to ask what the reasons are for this type of behaviors. Failure of children merely because they lived on the streets is not the only possible cause for failure. Many factors could be responsible that can be associated to street children failing in life. Again, we have witness many children who have lived on the streets for many years and have been fortunate to return to their families and successfully turned out to be good people within their societies.

Most street children are in the street because of peer influence. They lived in the street because they have friends and peers they could trust and do things in common. State of the World Children Report (1997), stated that, On the streets, they shine shoes, wash and guard cars, carry luggage, hawk flowers and trinkets, collect re-cycles and find a myriad other in-genius ways to make money. The street is the only place where the acquire brothers and sisters, and it the street is the place where they developed their own family ties and friendship. Street children are very particular of those who are from the outside. They prefer always to do business and have close relationship with those who have gained trust and confidence from their side. The street child has more confidence on their street counter parts than anyone else. Street children have strong faith, believe in themselves, and are ready to protect each other at any time. Street children always work in groups, share experience, and work together in groups.

It could also be argued that peer group influence may not have influence on a child living on the street because of the mere fact that a child who decides to get out of the streets and ready for a reformation can do that without any possible effect and influence of other children living on the

15

streets. They could choose to be an important person in society and would be able to achieve that goal. They could also choose to keep a very low profile not to be influence by others.

Peer group influence has a strong effect in leading other children to the streets because of some of the above reasons. In a peer grouping, each of the members wants to behave responsible and to assist one another. Living on the street, with no supervision, protection or guidance often makes street children vulnerable to a wide range of problems or hazards. Majority of the street children are face with violence, associated to street peers especially when they are under the effect of drug substance. Street children are not very welcomed in specific areas. They could only gain access in certain places if they associated or have links with peers of similar circumstances. Accordingly, most street children tend to exist in small groups when walking on the streets in order not to draw the attention of the people and get protection from one another within the same peer grouping. The reasons why many children end up in the streets are that they are more susceptible to adequate care and protection from the home. These children have less care and control at home to the point that even food is not provided. For this reason, they will end up making friends in the street who will in turn initiate them to the street life. In the street they live an independent life free from absolutely no control and protection. There they will now be oriented by senior peers on how the street life is all about.

In many instances, street children living with their peers act as supportive means for their existence on the street and helped develop their ability to cope with street life, concerning food, shelter, entertainment, earning money, and protection, especially during their early days on the street. Younger children depend on older street children to provide them with guidance and protection. In most cases, the older street children behave more like the parents and provide all necessary

16

instructions to the other street children. In order for these children to survive, they need to reside in areas were they could be sure there is adequate protection from older street children within their peers.

One of the major problems faced by street children on the other hand with their peers is the punishment inflicted upon them when they refuse to carry out a specific task given by their seniors. Refusal to undertake any instructions can lead to serious violence and torture by the rest of the peers. A child without friends to protect him has a little hope of surviving. Older boys lead the groups and protect the younger ones from rival groups. In exchange, the younger boys pay protection fee. Street children who live in the streets have cabals of peers and each of those cabals has a set policies and principles that work well for them. It is very common that older boys who have been on the street for longer period are to provide the opportunity for leadership. The leader within the peer group provides daily directives, instructions, and provides guidance to the rest of the team on important task needs to perform. There is respect for each other and great trust within the peer groupings. In other words, the street child who lives in the street wants to have a status. Whatever the status is he or she would strive hard to be like their peers either wanting to become a leader in the future within their peer setting or would want to have a position that would be recognized by his peers. While waiting to achieved this kind of status a street child will therefore be forced or be pressured to be involved in all of the behaviors a street child should undergo.

Single parent statuses also contribute to street children phenomenon. Studies and reports on the street children phenomenon also argue that street children home essentially from homes where there are single parents. It has also been argue that many of these single parents are from poverty stricken homes. This means they are hardly able to take responsibility of a child. In fact, The State of

17

the Worlds Children (1997) points out those parents of street children have irregular incomes and for the most part are employed in the informal sector and may be involved in illegal trades and in downright criminal activities like burglary. These conditions of poverty force single parents to abandon their children who in turn resort to the street because they could not get the required control and support they needed from their mother. Because street children do not get adequate support in their respective homes, they end up in the street and join the rest of their friends who have already been on the street for sometime.

A young boy who shares a single room with his mother and other sisters, solves a problem by finding somewhere to sleep with his friends. He is attach to his family but will prefer to sleep outside and visits the home occasionally. He is part of the family and does not need reintegration. Nevertheless, it is better for him to sleep out than to stay at home. When he finds a group of friends which whom he can stay at night, his situation has improved. He becomes visible as a street child and part of our problem, but for him, being on the streets solves the problem of sharing an overcrowded room. This is all part of the single parent problem. In reality majority of these parents have strong ties with their children, but the means of support is mostly not available. The extent of poverty faced by this single parent is such that she would have to accept a behavior pattern from the child that she herself would not be able to control. This is because the mother is poor and cannot provide food, shelter, clothing, and schooling for the child. Survival for even herself can be a difficult task.

The notion, that children living on the streets are not likely to be violent, increases the likelihood of street children phenomenon. But the question is whether children living on the streets are likely to be violent children. Firstly, we need to look at the background for these children leading them to the streets. It has been argued in the beginning that there could be numerous reasons ranging

18

from, single parenthood, poverty, unemployment, and wars. These are all valid reasons for children to be in the streets. Children left unattended from proper care, tend to run away from their parents since they are poor and cannot afford to provide basic needs. The character of these children before going to the streets has been one of family relationship and obedience. In the streets, they now get to know new tricks when they start interaction with other friends living on the streets. During this interaction, they get to learn all the methods required for a street child to survive. In addition, in most cases violence becomes one option for street children to develop. The culture of violence gradually builds up and becomes a character in street children. Because street children has to ensure responsibility for themselves while on the streets, they easily practice the rule of being violence so that they could be able to protect themselves from the public or police when caught in an illegal act. In a conflict situation with one another, they easily get irritated and fight, use knives and in some cases even guns. These are all tactics to enable them engaged in self-defense.

When children realized they can be torture and even killed by adults who would want to take advantage of them, it sends a signal that can lead them to become violence children. They know this will probably be the way out in defending themselves. Street children are regarded with a mixture of suspicion and contempt. The children themselves are equally wary of adults. It takes a special kind of person for acceptance into their milieu. The street child also needs protection and would do anything to ensure he or she gets the protection needed (Cummings, 2006). Thus, these children may view that being on the street does not actually teach them to be violent. Rather, street life renders them strategies for self-protection.

STREET CHILDREN IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

19

In 1989, UNICEF estimated 100 million children were growing up on urban streets around the world.14 years later UNICEF reported: The latest estimates put the numbers of these children as high as 100 million. And even more recently: The exact number of street children is impossible to quantify, but the figure almost certainly runs into tens of millions across the world. It is likely that the numbers are increasing. The 100 million figure is still commonly cited, but has no basis in fact. Similarly, it is debatable whether numbers of street children are growing globally or whether it is the awareness of street children within societies which has grown. While there are understandable pressures for policies to be informed by aggregate numbers, estimates of street child populations, even at city levels, are often hotly disputed and can distract rather than inform policy makers (Consortium of Street Children, 2009). Worldwide, there is a higher incidence of street boys than street girls. The proportion of girls among street children is reported to be less than 30% in developing countries and about 50% in many developed countries. There are a number of reasons why there are fewer street girls: 1.) Fewer girls may be abandoned by their families. Girls are often socialized (taught by their families and culture) to be submissive and caring and therefore they tend to have fewer behavioural problems as compared to boys. Since girls have fewer behavioural problems, they have less conflict with their families and do not need to leave their home. Families might get rid of girls by other means, e.g. marrying them off when they are as young as 13. The girl would then have another family; 2.) The authorities or individual members of the community may pick up girls on the street more quickly. For example, girls may be recruited to do domestic work in private households or to work in the commercial sex industry; 3.)Street girls may be less visible to researchers or educators. Some street girls disguise themselves as boys to protect themselves

20

from harassment by the police, welfare workers, employers and other street children and others may only appear on the streets at night (World Health Organization, 2000).

Street children often seem younger than their chronological age, due to acute and chronic malnutrition, which stunts their growth. However, their furtive, hunted expressions and devilmay-care attitude toward the world reveal a maturity beyond their years (Le Roux & Smith, 1998). The majority of street children worldwide are aged between ten and fourteen years (Lalor, 1999). In developing countries children as young as eight live completely on their own. In developed countries, street children are usually over the age of twelve (World Health Organization, 2000). Before age ten, parents appear to be loath to allow the child to enter the harsh world of the street. Also, children younger than ten are not as capable of competing for the kind of work street children do. Once engaged in street life, the childs street career is often terminated by his or her changing appearance, as he/she grows older. By about fourteen or fifteen years of age, adolescents are beginning to lose their appeal to passers-by. Thus, the age profile of street children appears to be a function of the nature of the demands of street life (Lalor, 1999).

Cummings (2006) reported in his research that some have estimated that as many as 70% of street children run away because of physical and/or sexual abuse and family conflict (Jenks 1994). Others flee for adventure or freedom, but often confront unanticipated risks, some of which are life threatening. The "hard core" homeless youth may number as high as 500,000 in the United States, but services meet only a fraction of that in need (Baggett and Donough 1988). Additionally, 500,000 juvenile prostitutes roam streets, many of whom are among the covert homeless and thus not included in statistical reports, because they ostensibly have shelter (Sereny 1985). In reality, they live

21

a precarious existence with pimps or a series of boyfriends, or with other prostitutes (King 1991). On a global level, sexual exploitation is an enduring condition for girls.

The Youth Accommodation Association in 1991 estimated that prostitution varies from individual cases to mass victims of organized crime. This may encompass a selection of children; some run away from home or from situations, some are sold by their parents, some are forced or tricked into prostitution, some are street children, some are working part-time and some fulltime, some are amateurs, and some are professionals. Prostitution of very young children is known to occur in Asia, Latin America, Europe, Africa, and North America.

Most street children have unfavorable family histories in common. They often come from nuclear families, especially single-parent households headed by the mother. Frequently, they have had no positive father figure and suffered parental rejection and physical hardship. Consequently, they are reluctant to trust adults and find any authority or control imposed upon them irksome. Yet most yearn to return home, provided that the familial factors that drove them away change (Le Roux & Smith, 1998). Street children are considered to be out-of-school youths. Most of them are school dropouts and some have never been to school. Poverty accounted for these decrease in literacy in children. As cited by Brink (2001), in the Human Development Report (2000), it is estimated that, worldwide, there are about 250 million child labourers and that as many as 100 million children live or work on the street struggling for survival with no adult support, protection or provision and no, or very little, education. In the review of the studies on street children in India done by Bose in 1992, it was reported that most street children have never attended school, and a majority of those who do drop out before completing school (Ouma, 2004). Of 200 22

Tanzanian street children interviewed in a research study, 95% had never been to school while living on the street (Lugalla and Mbwambo, 1999 as cited in Schimmel, 2006). Street children have adopted unique values which make it hard for them to enroll and remain in school: they value the jobs they do to earn a living more than they value getting an education. Attending lessons in a normal primary school is difficult because they have to create time for work. They also value their independence and would rather be free to walk and work in the streets than be confined to a school (Government of Kenya/UNICEF, 1995 as cited in Ouma, 2004). However, street childrens advantageous perception regarding their jobs on the street and their personal freedom is not solely the reason why they drop out of school. Factors including the failure of the state in most countries to deliver political stability, economic development and sustainable livelihoods reduce poverty and extreme deprivation, and in general provide an environment of general well-being and access to the benefits of modern human civilization for the majority of the citizens (Aina, 1997 as cited in Ouma, 2004 ), contributes largely to the increasing illiteracy of children, most especially those who are in the streets. Although dropouts, most street children would also like to go back to school in order to secure a better future. However, the longer they spend on the streets, the worse their prognosis for educational rehabilitation (Le Roux & Smith, 1998). Street children are required to fend for themselves. The children of the street support themselves mainly through begging (42%), carrying things for people (15%), and petty theft (12%); nearly all of them keep for themselves whatever money they earn. Interviewer assessments of client functioning in a number of areas showed that about one client in six (16%) probably suffered fair to poor mental health, more than a third (36%) were in fair to poor physical health, and over 40% had significant nutritional deficiencies. In most cases, these

23

assessments were more negative for the children of the street than the market children, but the differences were not large (Cummings, 2006).

Life in the street has become a generic condition in contemporary society. Almost one quarter of homeless people in the various countries are children (persons seventeen and under), the average age of which is nine. Few street children have escaped emotional, behavioral, and academic problems, and among those who have serious behavioural problems, few of the children receive any treatment (Cummings, 2006). There may be as many as 100 million street children in the world, unloved, undernourished, and uneducated. Society often tries to forget them, or ignore them, or sometimes even deny that they exist. The problem will not go away by itself, however, and unless addressed soon, may lead to more dire consequences.

THE PSYCHOSOCIAL PROFILE OF STREET CHILDREN

Living on the street, with no supervision, protection or guidance, often makes street children vulnerable to a wide range of problems or hazards. These problems that they are facing have a great impact on their psychological well-being. It affects their self-concept, interpersonal relations, and overall adjustment. Problems of street children are presented in three classes: social, physical and psychological. Their social problemsincludes poverty and illiteracy, discrimination and lack of accessible resources, violent environment and stigmatization. They lack basic resources to sustain a healthy living. They usually have no financial means to buy decent clothing (which may be necessary in cold places), and no money to buy food, which is crucial for their development. Because of the costs of services most street children

24

cannot afford to go to school. Street children live in places where they are not adequately protected from the environment. When the community makes plans, it does not take into consideration the street childrens plight. Street children tend to be excluded from participating in most of the activities and facilities of other children. This is one reason why street children often do not have access to medical, educational, recreational and vocational resources. They face problems such as lack of vaccinations; poor health, illiteracy and they cannot acquire skills needed for finding jobs. Society usually perceives street children as difficult children who are out there to cause trouble. In general, the public thinks that street children are uncontrollable and violent, have substance use problems, have no morals, have lost all the ability to feel emotions such as love and that they turn into terrorists and revolutionaries. They tend to be unsympathetic to the street childrens plight. This negative attitude may be a result of the societys inability to care for its people. Street life also gives them a feeling of social insecurity and uneasiness. The street is an unprotected environment and street children are exploited frequently. In some places, street children may even face the possibility of physical injuries or death from violence. Common sources of violence are: the police, gangs, drug syndicates, those who operate commercial sex businesses, death squads, other street children, families and sexual partners (World Health Organization, 2001).
Physical violence is often accompanied by psychological violence. Insults, name-calling, isolation,

rejection, threats, emotional indifference and belittling are all forms of violence that can be detrimental to a childs well-beingespecially when it comes from a respected adult such as a parent

(United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Cultural Organization, 2005). Street children typically face danger on a daily basis; their lives are threatened in a myriad of ways. Human Rights Watch reports that, street children throughout the world are subjected to routine harassment and physical abuse by police, government, and 25

private security forces, out to wipe the streets clean of a perceived social blight. Street children face extortion, theft, severe beatings, mutilation, sexual abuse, and even death (Schimmel, 2006). Once on the street, children adopt one another, and other street people, as models. Through this arrangement, cognitive and affective needs are met (Richter, 1988a as cited in Le Roux & Smith, 1998). The daily lives of many street children are unstructured and unstable. Kennedy (1987 as cited in Le Roux & Smith, 1998) has stated that, "in the long run, this sense that nothing is stable can produce distortions of the mind. Living in a constant state of survival mode in which street children must be preoccupied with finding food, shelter, and clothing takes a severe toll on their psychological well being It was found that children on the street were at risk of developmental difficulties far greater than those of the average child and that they suffered from higher rates of suicide, depression, and drug use than children living at home. (Molnar, Rath, and Klein, 1990 as cited in Schimmel, 2006). In part, this is because they are expected to exercise independence at an age when they still need the care and support of an adult. With no family or formal structure for moral, emotional, and psychological support and protection, they truly exist on their own. There is no doubt that such a situation has a serious impact on their psychological health.A South African study of the psychological conditions of street children reported that, Street youth easily lose track of time and distance, and wander aimlessly. Some researchers have reported low self-esteem, apathy, and fatalism among street youth (Lugalla and Mbwambo, 1999 as cited in Schimmel, 2006). Lack of schooling is one of the most significant deprivations that street children face. It most likely affects their cognitive ability which renders them poor if not unstable academic achievement. One small study of street children in Columbia recorded intelligence and

26

neurological functioning below the national average. The author of the study argued, however, that given street children's low socioeconomic status, high rates of illiteracy, multiple siblings, and non-intact families the results were better than might have been expected and that the degree of self management required on the streets might enhance cognitive development (Apektar, 1988 as cited in Scanlon, Tomkins, Lynch & Scanlon, 1998). Parks, Stevens, and Spence (2007) have collated data regarding the cognition of homeless children and adolescents. Their data includes mostly homeless children and adolescent males in the United States which were given measures to assess their cognitive domains. According to their research, there are some evidences to suggesting that homeless children are more cognitively impaired than disadvantaged domiciled children from comparable backgrounds. In these comparison studies, homeless children exhibited intact functions in early childhood (as infants and toddlers), which were followed by motor and receptive vocabulary impairments during preschool years. Subsequently, school-aged homeless children demonstrated deficits primarily in the area of scholastic achievement. The homeless may also exhibit more behavioural and emotional disturbance than the domiciled and may have more educational difficulties. Some studies suggest that duration of homelessness may be related to such difficulties and that appropriate schooling may ameliorate educational delay.

In addition to cognitive and intellectual problems, street children suffer from psychological/mental problems. Street children suffer psychological problems from undue family pressures, abuse and neglect at home. Very often, they develop low self-esteem. Among the psychological/mental problems that they encounter consists of their stressful past, transitory lifestyle, mental health and substance use.

27

Many situations and events that pushed these children onto the street in the first place (like natural disasters, man-made disasters, exploitation and conflicts) may have a lasting impact on their well being. For example, the family conflict that pushed the child onto the streets continues to deprive the child of emotional and material support for years afterwards. Street children in some large cities move frequently from district to district or between cities. Sometimes they do this by choice, but at other times they are forced to move to hide from the police, welfare authorities, gangs, and drug syndicates. This type of lifestyle leads to problems of social isolation and loneliness and difficulties in developing emotional attachments to special individuals. The stresses that street children experience make them vulnerable to emotional problems, psychiatric disorders and learning difficulties. They do not receive adequate care for these conditions. Thus, many street children are involved in harmful use of psychoactive substances. This can lead to overdose, increase the chance of accidents, violence, unwanted pregnancy and unprotected sex. Over time, the continued use of substances can lead to complications such as brain and liver damage (World Health Organization, 2001). Further, these children perceive the streets as productive or barren, friendly or unfriendly, at different times of the day or night (Kennedy, 1987 cited at Le Roux & Smith, 1998 ). Physical danger is all too real, and visibility means not protection but vulnerability (Peacock, 1994 cited at Le Roux & Smith, 1998). Evidently, it renders them psychological distress which tends to mold their psychological well-being. The characteristics of children on the streets that has been 28

identified includes children who abuse drugs (solvents, glue), distrust and controls of adults, high impulsivity, escaping rather than facing their problems, internal locus of control, adherence to conventional morality, high value on personal freedom, low self-confidence and reluctance to disclose or opening true life story (Cummings, 2006). In the study conducted by Hosny,

Moloukhia, Elsalam and Elatif (2007) among the 35 street children in Alexandria, Egypt using the observation sheet, Sadek Scale for Adaptive Behavior, 2nd Edition, Arabic Version, it was discovered that these children possessed these behaviors: antisocial behavior (46%), aggressive behavior (43%), substance use (43%), helper (one who offers help to others and tries to provide help to others if required) (42%), destructive behavior (37%) and paranoia (31%). In a research study done by Kerfoot (2004) it was found out that street children has good reasons to be suspicious of adults, to be restless and unable to settle, and unwilling to divulge information about themselves and their families until some trust and confidence has developed. Getting accurate information from street children is quite difficult. They have developed an extraordinary capacity to tell stories. Lying about their ages, family background, the reasons for being on the streets, and their current circumstances is included in their well-rehearsed scripts (Felsman, 1989; Leite & Esteves, 1991 cited in Aptekar, 1994). Presenting information about themselves is part of their survival skills which, like those of other nomadic entertainers, rests on their ability to manipulate their audiences (Aptekar, 1990a cited in Aptekar, 1994). There are other reasons why the children manipulate information. Manipulating information has a psychological function that allows the children to get back at a society that devalues them. Falsified information also serves to keep society at bay about the details of their lives. In many cases, the children purposely create a secret code or a private language (adopting a special argot may be related to the degree of hostility toward street children) with the purpose of hiding the truth (Lemay, 1975; Ricuarte,1972, 1977 cited in Aptekar, 1994). 29

Some studies have stated that a small but relative proportion of children on the street have extreme behavioral and emotional problems. But since these children may not show the type of symptoms which can easily be identified by known psychiatric disorders, they do not acknowledge to seek help. Despite being unwilling and hesitant to attribute psychopathology to these street children, it has been determined between three groups of boys. Herein, the first group has shown no signs of psychological problems and disorders. Second group shows moderate to severe symptoms of psychological disorders; and the third group fell somewhere in between the two aspects. Studies have found that street children, specifically boys with a strong inner desire of control display less psychopathology such as depression. On the other hand, those with an extreme external locus of control usually spend longer time on the street and obviously have less positive relationships with their peers. These street children also show more signs of psychopathology, especially in terms of psychosomatic symptoms and depression. It has also been found that some of these street children, has symptoms of oppositional attitude, such as non-aggressive type and under-socialized. The study also presented three categories of street children. These included those who were delinquent, those who frequently escape but displayed no signs of delinquency and those children who showed signs of psychosis. These street children with delinquent behavior may have a tendency to display truancy, involved in theft, assaultive behavior, substance abuse, promiscuity, and other conduct disorders (Cummings, 2006).

Madu, Meyer, and Mako (2005) studied some aspects of the psychological make-up of street children in South Africa. They investigated the tenacity, purpose in life and quality of interpersonal relationship of 216 South African street children. The research made the following distinctions on these samples: hardcore street children are those who live on the streets day and

30

night and fend for themselves; part-time street children are those who do odd jobs but they have a home where they retire at night; sheltered street children are those confined in sheltered home; and non-street children are those children who are not involve in street life. Kobasas Hardness Scale and the Antonvskys Scale of Sense of Coherence were used to tap their tenacity. Crumbaughs Purpose in Life Scale and the Sociability Scale developed by the Human Science Research Council of South Africa were administered for information on purpose in life and quality of interpersonal relationship, respectively. Results of their study showed that the hardcore and the sheltered street children are more tenacious than the non-street children. In line with Frankls (1963) theory on tenacity, hardcore and sheltered street children are more likely to be faced with series of decision-making processes and harder realities of life than the part-time street children. Also, the hardcore and the sheltered street children may be reacting to or sustaining their existential thrownness with tenacity. Thus, they would be more hardened and more tenacious. It was also revealed that hardcore street children and sheltered street children have a lower purpose in life than the non-street children. The same factors that made them very tenacious may also make them to have a lower level of purpose in life than the non-street children. Having no purpose or low level of purpose in life may predispose any one not to guard against substance abuse, unsafe sexual behaviours and other risk-taking behaviors since the person would see nothing or little to lose in life by engaging in such activities. Futhermore, results indicated that hardcore street children have poorer interpersonal relationships than the part-time street children and the non-street children. Since hardcore street children are often not in close contact with their parents or parent-substitutes, the basic skill of interpersonal relationship that is normally acquired from parents may be lacking. For hardcore street children, the good-me self and the bad-me self may not be distinct from each other anymore, since the

31

attributes may not be seen by them any more as being able to change peoples attitudes towards them, as long as they are on the streets. This attribute would contribute a lot to hardcore childrens lack of care and self-protection against risk-taking behaviors.

The temperamental characteristics of street children may have been the reason for their awkward behavior in their social interactions. Temperament refers to the outward manifestation of ones intrinsic behavioral patterns in a given social situation. A research study about the temperament characteristic of street children in Eldoret, Kenya was done by Ayuku, Devries, Mengech, and Kaplan in 2004. They assessed the temperament of these children using the Revised Dimensions of Temperament Survey (DOTS-R), a 54-item, factor-analytically developed self-report instrument that measures nine temperament dimensions. Their research assessed the temperament in samples representing four groups of children(n=204): on the street, those children who spend most of their time in the streets or markets, usually as child workers but retain strong family links, usually returning to the family home to sleep at night; and the off the street children, who are for whatever reason, fully participate in street life at an economic and social level, these children although they have a home to go to they do not go home with any degree of regularity or consistence; the sheltered children, who are either abandoned or orphans, these children have no home to go to, even if they wished, they are on the streets because of the death of a parents or rejection by their parents and unavailability of appropriate extended family; the school children, who came from disadvantaged neighborhood school in Eldoret town. Results of their study showed that the four groups of children differed significantly on the following dimensions: approach/withdrawal dimension, activity level-sleep, the task orientation dimension and the activity level-general dimension. The highest mean scores

32

on the activity level-general and the activity level-sleep were in the off the street children that is consistent with their scavenging lifestyle and their sleeping patterns ,they have to be vigilant when sleeping on shop verandas, rundown buildings, and trash-bins. On the other hand, the shelter children recorded the highest scores on approach/withdrawal and task-orientation dimensions. Like the of the street children, this temperament stylistic trait seems to have a good fit with their lifestyle and institutional demands. The religiously oriented shelter programs, in their local and international fund-raising activities, actively employ these children. They are encouraged to approach prospective donors and assigned highly supervised tasks of singing, acting and/or proselytising to obtain support for the programs as well as the household chores in the shelter. Although not significantly different from the other groups, the sheltered street children also reported the highest negative mood quality indicating, perhaps, that they are not so happy in this situation although it provides a good fit with their other traits of approach/avoidance and task-orientation. The trend data also suggest that both off and on the street children tend to differ from their more socially controlled age-cohorts in the shelters and schools on the dimensions of flexibility/rigidity and rhythmicity-daily habits. The of the street children have the same habits of waking up, looking for food, begging, scavenging and sniffing glue each and every day with no variation for weekends as do the control group. The on the street children also have the same activities each day of waking up (at home) and then out in the streets begging, hawking and carrying things for people until well after dark. Thus, the street based children higher scores on these dimensions supports the interpretation that in order to survive street children have had to develop a more flexible behavioural style and higher degree of regularity in their daily life. These children have to actively minimize the many risks that they

33

are exposed to compared to the shelter and school children that must fit into social controlled programs of planned and organized diversity. Results of this study (Ayuku, Devries, Mengech, and Kaplan, 2004) also made it possible to classify who are the easy and difficult children among the four categories. Interestingly both street children groups (on the street, of the street) have about the same degree of easiness while, the shelter children, classified, as difficult children are somewhat less so than the extreme school children. On the face of it, these results seem counterintuitive as street children are publicly recognized as the problem group and, therefore, common sense might assume that they have temperaments that are more difficult. However, the goodness of fit criteria in temperament theory needs to be kept in mind. The school children, originating from impoverished economic and therefore difficult backgrounds express a good fit with their difficult temperament styles. In especially difficult circumstances, the expression of an easy temperament seems to represent a paradoxical fit with the demands of the environment that cannot easily be judged in the simple terms of goodness or badness of fit. The off the street children, by their temperament style, seem to have adapted easily to their environment with the support of their brothers in peer groups and gangs to which they owe high degrees of loyalty and conformity. The on the street children present another pattern of the easy child temperament style. These children owe loyalty to their female-headed families, which maintain some modicum of stability in their lives. They go to the street to earn money, which they share with their families. The family keeps some sense of order in their lives without the high degrees of social control that would conflict with the demands of the street that require quickness in adaptation and response. The family reduces the stress of street life for these on the street children in an analogous way to how the peer group and gang does it for the off the street children.

34

Street children's paradoxical easy temperament style may be an expression of a continuous childhood developmental struggle to find a niche in a hostile and dangerous world constituted by especially difficult circumstances. Although not statistically significantly different than the control group, the off the street children's relatively higher score on the mood dimension indicates perhaps a conditioned contextual pathway formed by the cumulative reactions of others. Expressions of good mood and friendliness to most people in the street by street children fits well with their dependence on strangers for donations and other favors. Further results of the study (Ayuku, Devries, Mengech, and Kaplan, 2004) pertaining to the easy child and difficult child temperament clusters emphasize the fact that children are born with individual differences in terms of their temperament styles. Some children are born in the average range, but others come into the world with extremely positive or extremely negative, socially undesirable temperament traits. The difficult children phenomenology is more withdrawing from novelty, less adaptable, and secondarily or as a reaction, with a more negative mood and high emotional intensity. Ultimately, this child is predisposed to externalizing behavioral disorders (such as violence) when the parental/teacher attitudes to discipline are dysfunctional. The school children had a lower score on mood, and approach/withdrawal dimensions, which is consistent with their difficult behavioral style. The easy children are reported to be more approach oriented, sociable, less intense, and to have higher levels of positive mood quality. The street based children who rely on friends for material and emotional support are more sensitive to the social environment. They are beginning or about to begin going through the stormy period of puberty and individuation transitions without any family support. Their easy temperamental style may enhance these children's adjustment processes on the streets, but it also places them at risk for adapting quickly to antisocial behaviors from gangs and

35

others on the streets. On the other hand, their temperament may evoke from the environment certain interpersonal or other forces that might not otherwise be noticeable or prominent. For example, the irritable (difficult) child may evoke physical abuse from an overstressed parent with insufficient self-control. Either being victimized or exposed violent acts perpetrated on siblings in early childhood might be a reason for street children having an easy temperament later on in childhood. A contextual pathway has been created based on a coping strategy to avoid beatings and to obtain money and material support on the mercy of the public. Furthermore, children's temperaments shape their responses to the people and things in their daily lives; especially those that induce stress.

In the research carried out by UNICEF in Egypt in 2001, 14% of street children explained that they normally suffer from various psychological problems while living on the street, which are often associated with their inability to cope with street life. Also associated with this is their experience of lack of attachment and affection. Many street children normally feel estranged and mostly alienated due to the way they are treated by the community at large, even with peer support and encouragement. These problems became clear when discussing the various unhealthy symptoms and psychological problems many of them share. Most of them reported that they urinate at night while sleeping, they have constant nightmares, and that, they cry for a long-time for no particular reasons. Many street children, despite the amount of entertainment they encounter on the street and peer support, find themselves unable to cope with street life, especially during their early days of living on the street. The notion of childhood as a time of emotional vulnerability implies that traumatic events scar the psyche, which carries over to adulthood. Straker (1989 as cited in Cummings, 2006) has

36

pointed out that there are many mediating variables; for example, the developmental age at which a specific trauma occurs. Cognitive limitations often mean that children cannot fully understand the implications of unpleasant events, and this moderates their impact. Wachs (1992 as cited in Le Reoux & Smith, 1998), however, has found that the greater the exposure to stressful events, the greater the probability of deviant behavior when children are faced with later stresses. The strongest counterargument in the debate over street children's emotional

vulnerability relates to the development of autonomy. According to Donald and Swart-Kruger (1994), freedom is consistently reported by street children as both their goal and highest value. Scharf et al. (1986) have described this as "freedom from institutions, freedom of movement, freedom to choose activities and daily rhythms, and freedom from commitments. Although the emotional sacrifice entailed in achieving these freedoms may be high and the value placed on them may, in part, be a defensive denial of that cost, the exercise of such freedoms does have implications for sense of autonomy and self-reliance. In the overall development of street children, these may be extremely important attributes (Donald & Swart-Kruger 1994 as cited in Le Reoux & Smith, 1998). Some researchers have perceived that resilient children present few of the cognitive or emotional disability, which has connections with their material and social situations. Even though the system of prevention and protection are not understood fully, it has been assumed that social support in terms of understanding, acceptance and companionship gives by a significant individual or group, is somehow involved. In addition, it must also be understood that street children who seems to exist unscathed from the horror of neglect, violence and abuse are still highly prejudiced to emotional trauma.

37

It has been a fact that people do not experience adverse situations as equally stressful as that of street children. The level of stress relies on the personal assessment of seriousness of a specific situation including the available coping resources. In this regard, there is an increasing effort to determine the factors, which encourage resilience. In line with street children, three factors have been discovered that linked with resilience. These include the presence of supportive biological and kin family, constitutional aspects and the external social support factors. According to Donald and Swart-Kruger (1994), there is a paradox among evidence that shows the developmental hazard and vulnerability in terms of emotional, physical, social and cognitive regions and the evidence of adaptability, coping mechanism, adaptability (Cummings, 2006). These symptoms are believed to gradually disappear with the amount of time children spend on the street and become fully socialized and able to cope with street life through their own defense mechanisms and coping skills. However, despite of the difficulties in which these children had been subjected, some of them may show tremendous resilience and potentialities beyond their years. Street children are socialized on the street, primarily by their peers; their socialization process emphasizes the acquisition of survival skills, although not education and capabilities development. According to World Health Organization (2001), the childs personal strengths, theirs resourcefulness (the ability to solve problems quickly and efficiently with available resources), and resilience (the ability to recover from shock, depression, and other difficult circumstances) determine their survival. Resourcefulness and resilience would depend upon the child's creativity, hard work, intelligence and concern for one another. Many literatures support that idea that children are resilient and that the psychological aspects will heal if they would be given greater opportunity. According to Garmezy (1983), the

38

lesson that should be learned from recent researchers lies in the reaffirmation of the potential resilience, which emerges in children who are mostly under stress. Such idea does not mean that they are not affected by the childrens experiences, but they have the ability to resist of being overwhelmed by them. It has been noted that this potential to recover usually depends upon the provision of a caring surroundings in the post-trauma stage. In this regard, the challenge for those devoted to adhering to the problem of street children phenomenon is to give a nurturing environment (Cummings, 2006). Many social workers advocate institutionalization of street children as the best way of promoting positive psychosocial adjustment. Psychosocial adjustment refers to the positive outcome of the social, psychological, environmental, and relational issues encountered during the development of an individual resulting to better adjustment. To understand the level and extent of psychosocial adjustment among street children who reside on the streets, as compared to other categories of children who are residents of institutions to understand the potential effect of institutionalization on street children, El-Komys Psychosocial Adjustment Scale was used in a 40 samples of Egyptian street children, divided into institutionalized and non-institutionalized children. Results revealed that the institutional sample clearly showed greater psychosocial adjustment, which may have resulted from the presence of interventions in this setting as opposed to their virtual absence in drop-in centers. Data analysis indicates that children residents of governmental institutions have a higher degree of social adjustment than the sample of those who reside on the street. This refers to the role played by the social workers, the administration and governmental programs provided for children who are fully residents of the institutions. Street children who visit the drop-in centers and reside on the street show a lower level of social adjustment due to their deprivation of direct and long-term behavioural modification programs

39

and the lack of attachments. What emerges from the data is a clarion call for frequency, intensity, and duration of service provision, rather than a clear-cut advantage for institutionalization. Street children need greater care than they are now receiving in either venue (UNICEF, 2001).

THE PROFILE OF FILIPINO STREET CHILDREN According to the statistics presented by the Department of Social Welfare and Development in 1998, there were 1.2 million street childrenabout 70,000 of them in Metro Manila alone. Another report estimates that there are approximately 1.5 million children on the streets working as beggars, pickpockets, drug abusers and child prostitutes (ECPAT). Almost 2 million of Manila's 2.5 million children younger than 15 years old live on or below the poverty line. 75,000 of these children live on the streets after having run away from home or being abandoned. They beg, steal, scavenge for food, and sell newspapers, cigarettes, and leis. About 20,000 of the street children prostitute themselves (Street children-Philippines/archives.mht) .Today, the number of children and youth living part of their lives on the streets in the Philippines could reach two million out of a total population of 84 million (Cullen, 2005). In the Philippines, most street children are between 6 and 17 years old and work to supplement family income. Forced onto the streets because of economic difficulties, they become involved in cleaning cars, peddling, prostitution and, to a lesser extent, drug dealing. Children also end up on the streets because of family violence and abuse. Filipino street children experience loneliness, neglect, abuse, drug addiction, and various medical problems. They face constant harassment and arrest by the police, as well as abuse from other street children. They desire educational opportunities to improve their chances of obtaining a stable job, but their

40

prospects are dim. They also hope to return home, provided the factors that drove them away have changed (Mid-Term Review Project Document, 1990 as cited in Le Reox & Smith, 1998). The majority of children visible on the streets are boys (about 70%), while thirty percent (30%) of the total street children population are girls. Girls are fewer because, among other reasons, they are generally helping younger siblings, they are usually hired as domestic helpers within private households, they are lured or trafficked into prostitution and are housed in brothels. It is speculated that the male child is expected to do less work at home than the female child. Their gender and situation on the streets render them more vulnerable to physical and sexual abuse/ exploitation than boys, who are better able to protect themselves. As a result, teenage pregnancy (among girls aged 15-17) and sexually-transmitted diseases are common among street girls. However, there are not enough services or facilities that respond to medical and

health needs of street girls (Situationer of Street Children in the Philippines, 2003). According to the Stairway foundation there are three different categories of street children: children on the streets, children of the streets and completely abandoned children. "Children on the streets" make up approximately 75% of the street children in the Philippines. These children work on the streets but do not live there, having a home to return to after working. Some of them even continue to attend school while working long hours on the streets. In contrast, "Children of the street" on the other hand make their homes on the street. They make up 25%-30% of the street children in the Philippines. These children often create a sort of family among fellow street children. Some of them still have family ties, but do not visit them and some even see these ties as bad. "Completely abandoned children" have no family ties and are entirely

41

on their own for physical and psychological survival. They make up about 5%-10% of the street children in the Philippines (KASAMA, 2005). Studies have consistently pointed to at least three major immediate factors that push children to stay or live on the streets. These are the poverty of the family, family relationship factors (child physical or sexual abuse), and peer-gang influence. In Metro Manila, population growth, urbanization, and migration have increased through the years. Children are often forced by circumstances to help their family to make out a living or fend for themselves on the streets. Most of them are the children of poor parents who migrated from rural areas in the hope of finding better job opportunities in the city but whose lack of education rendered them illequipped to struggle for survival in the urban jungle and are thus confined to a life of abject poverty. For the street children, life on the streets is a constant struggle to overcome the various negative elements that threaten to overtake them and destroy their hope for survival. They work under the heat of the sun or in the dark of the night from six to 16 hours, seven days a week, often in a combination of "occupations," each considered a legitimate way to survive(Situationer of Street Children in the Philippines, 2003). Most of the street kids in Metro Manila are unable to tell when their life in the street began. It is as if they had been born into it and that for as long as they could remember the street had always been part of their lives. Earning a living is a daily preoccupation and it is in the street where they find the opportunity to do so. Having earned some money, food comes

naturally as the next important preoccupation. Their typical meal is a kind of porridge that they call kabawor kanin at sabaw. When there is no money, they resort to begging for food

42

scraps. One meal a day is perhaps what a street child can most realistically expect. Having more is a bonus.

The other consuming preoccupation is household glue. It has become part of the daily routine and sniffing it comes almost as naturally as eating and sleeping. It has become, in a sense, part of their survival mechanism in the city jungle. Sleep marks the end of the day. As with waking up, there is no regular place for sleeping. For many, sleep takes place where nightfall overtakes them or wherever their drugged body finds it convenient to rest. The next day, the cycle begins again

(www.manilatimes.net/national/2009/feb/08/yehey/top_stories/20090208top1.html). . Street Children are treated so poorly in the Philippines. Generally, street children have

refused to remain in neglected, hidden away areas of the city. We found that the majority of street children had staked out the most beautified areas of the city squares, major highways, outside shopping centres, markets, fountains, tourist attractions, and near restaurants. These are areas of the city that are rich in resources: people to beg from, tourists to sell small items to, restaurants that hand out free food, grass to sleep on, fountains to wash in, and plenty of areas to play. But they are also areas of the city that the wealthier residents of the city would prefer to claim as their own and to keep beautiful. This situation has given rise to many uncomfortable encounters between the rich and poor. While walking along the streets or sitting in a restaurant, youre often approached by snotty-nosed, barefooted, half-naked street children asking for food. Others can be seen tapping on tinted car windows, asking for money. Walking down the steps to the train station, you see mothers holding out malnourished babies. And in the parks or outside the local 7/11, street 43

children can be found sniffing rugby (a brand of glue). This seems to have incubated a lot of distrust, frustration, and hostility among the general public towards street children. Street children are often called yagit by the general public which translates as rubbish on the street (Street children-Philippines/archives.mht).

PROGRAMS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS FOR FILIPINO STREET CHILDREN

Efforts to rationalize services for street children began with the network facilitating the process of conducting a situation analysis to determine their actual conditions and needs. Through this process, it was discovered that by involving various sectors of the community and, in some cities, the children themselves, as active participants in the situation study, greater community interest and action for and on behalf of street children could be generated. The children are helped where they are on the streets. Street contact workers are trained to conduct nonformal education and provide basic needs. Some are successful in getting the children off the streets and into school. This project needs constant followup, monitoring and financial support. Street children themselves are sometimes trained to become street educators themselves. They belong to the peer group and are respected and accepted. They help to break down the lack of trust that street children have of social workers and helpers. Maximum participation of children in the work is a sign of best practice. Nonformal education on the street is an indication of this.

44

Dropin centers for street children are common in the major cities, but they are vulnerable to the childrens love of the freedom they have on the streets. The dropout rate can be high. There is the added difficulty of providing sufficient care that will make a difference in the lives of the children. The centers provide basic needs and shelter but the programs are usually shortlived. When children do stay longer, they are referred to centers that provide care for the long term. Residential livein centers are expensive projects and there are not many of them. Unless they are placed in an area remote from the street and efforts are made to locate and bring the parents into the process of helping the children, their success rates will be low, as many children will be enticed to go back to the streets. Opportunities for education are also being provided to street children. This is an approach that tries to bring responsive children into the school system by providing support and encouragement and regular followup and monitoring. Livelihood opportunities for parents of the street children are sometimes provided by the project. Thus the child becomes valuable to the family, as the child is a source of financial assistance (KASAMA, 2005). The Philippines also adopted specific goals for children under its Philippine Plan of Action for Children (PPAC) in the 1990s and Beyond, through Proclamation No. 855 in December 1991. The latest, the Philippine National Strategic Framework for Plan for

Development for Children, 2000-2025 (Child 21), provides guidelines for the country plan of action for the Filipino child. In addition to this, the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) are implementing the Street and Urban Working Children Program to enhance the effectiveness of

45

services delivered by national and local governments and NGOs (Situationer of Street Children in the Philippines, 2003). Another program given to them is the Street Contact For Children. It is a project of NonGovernment Organizations and the Philippine Government. This entails regular contact by dedicated social workers with groups of street children. The workers relate with the children to win their trust, offer legal and personal protection against acts of abuse by the authorities and work to release the children from jails and holding cells or to get charges against them dismissed. The project provides basic needs such as clothes, food, medical help and shelter when needed. Efforts are made to contact parents and enable the child to visit the parents. Parttime work for older children is provided when possible (KASAMA, 2005).

Theoretical Framework or Conceptual Paradigm The study which aims to discover the psychological profile of Sarnelli Street Children is anchored in the following psychological theories which were the theoretical basis of the instruments used: Raymond Cattell's Two Kinds of Intelligences, the Crystallized and Fluid Intelligences (CFIT), Max Wertheimer's Gestalt Principle (BVMGT), and Sigmund Freud's Psychoanalytic Theory (DAPT).

Raymond Cattell's Two Kinds of Intelligences: Crystallized and Fluid Intelligence. The discovery that there are really two kinds of intelligence was made by Raymond B. Cattell in

46

1940. In his psychometric research on individual differences in intelligence, Cattell identified fluid and crystallized intelligence (abbreviated gF and gC, respectively) as factors of "general intelligence." He defined fluid intelligence as the ability to find meaning in confusion and solve new problems, whereas crystallized intelligence is defined as the ability to utilize previously acquired knowledge and experience. The terms should not be taken to imply that one form of intelligence is the "crystallized" form of the other. Rather, they are separate though correlated mental abilities. Together, they comprise g, or "general intelligence." Fluid intelligence includes such abilities as problem-solving, learning, and pattern recognition. Crystallized intelligence is possibly more amenable to change as it relies on specific, acquired knowledge (wikepedia.com).

Max Wertheimers Gestalt Principle. The basic tenants of Gestalt psychology suggest that perception is actively organized by certain mental rules or templates to form coherent objects or wholes. The underlying rule is that the whole is different from the sum its parts (Freedheim & Weiner, 2003). The concept of Gestalt psychology is the total reaction of the whole organism to a whole situation. It conceives of a patterning which is the absolute organization of a total personality in its interactions with a total situation (Hutt Adaptation of BVMGT).

Sigmund Freuds Psychoanalytic Theory. Psychoanalytic Theory holds the notion that psychic determination, unconscious mental activity, and the role of childhood experience shapes ones personality. The role of meaning was also central to Freuds vision of psychoanalysis. In his view, symptoms, thoughts, feelings, and behavior could all be viewed as the final common pathways of meaningful psychological processes, many of which are unconscious. These

47

unconscious materials find its expression in our actions and behaviors (Kaplan & Saddock, 2003). Most of the time, these are projected in which thoughts, patterns and feelings about oneself and the environment is revealed. Freud conceived personality as consisting of three major systems, the ID (pleasure principle), the EGO (reality principle) and the SUPEREGO (moral principle). In the normal person, these three systems form a unified and harmonious organization. Thus, enabling the individual to interact with his environment efficiently and with satisfaction, in the fulfilment of his needs and desires. When the three systems are not in harmony with one another the person is maladjusted, his efficiency is reduced, he is dissatisfied with himself and the world. The dynamics of personality consists of the changes in the distributiom of energy throughput the personality. The conduct of a person is determined by his dynamics. If the bulk of the energy is controlled by the superego, his conduct will be moralistic. If it is controlled by the ego, his behavior will be realistic. And if it is retained by the id, which is the source of all psychic energy, his actions will be impulsive. What a person is and does is inevitably an expression of the way in which the energy is distributed (Hall, 1954 as cited in Hasan, 1980). Four characteristics of Freuds theory have persisted and influenced modern work on personality development. Firstly, interaction with a social environment is necessary for each successive stage to unfold. Secondly, adult personality is largely a function of interactions likely to occur within a nuclear family. Thirdly, early personality development often occurs as a resolution of internal conflicts and is likely to be unobservable. Fourthly, events in early childhood determine personality to a greater extent than do later events (Hasan, 1980). Most of the time, these are projected in which thoughts, patterns and feelings about oneself and the environment is revealed.

48

In the DAP, the impact of psychoanalytic theory is very evident because we do find the realistic, moralistic and dynamic impulses in the DAP productions. As a matter of fact the entire projective technique is based on the psychoanalytic constructs and the mechanism of projection.

CONCEPTUAL PARADIGM

PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE OF SARNELLI STREET CHILDREN Cognitive Ability (CFIT) Socio-emotional functioning (BVMGT) Self-concept (DAPT)

IMPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS

APPLICABLE PROGRAMS AND The conceptual paradigm shows INTERVENTIONS the framework of the study. The psychological profile that will be described are the cognitive ability, socio-emotional functioning and self-concept formation. Data were generated from the available results of CFIT, BVMGT, and DAPT, respectively. Common traits for each dimension will be gathered. It will serve as the basis to determine their underlying psychological needs. Thus, program and intervention will be made.

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 49

This section presents the research method and design, research locale, participant selection, instruments used, procedures followed and the data analysis employed to explore the psychological experiences of male convicts.

Research Design

The research design that will be used in this study is the Quantitative Descriptive approach. Quantitative descriptive studies report their results using descriptive statistics, naturally enough. This is a technical term covering such statistics as percentage, mean, median, incidence, and prevalence. Quantitative description will be made on the results of the CFIT, wherein the mean IQ will be computed. Likewise, prevalence and incidence of qualitative interpretations of BVMGT and DAPT will be noted and frequency will be presented.

Research Locale The location of the study is the Sarnelli Center for Street Children, Center 2, Residential Unit. It is situated in Baclaran Church Compound in Paraaque City, Metro Manila. The center houses street children ages 7-16 years old. Social workers supervise the center. Houseparents are tasked to cater to the children. The locale is an open environment. Thus, the children can roam around. They can also go out to the streets to play and mingle with other children. The house where the children reside are serviceable despite its barely conducive state.

50

Samples and Sampling Techniques The samples in this study are the children who resided in the center since 2000 up to 2010 (present), and those who are still currently residing in the center. A small sample size of 30 was used. All of the samples are male children ages 7-16 years of age with the highest percentage of the samples falling on the age range of 13-16, early adolescence stage. More than 70% hailed from Metro Manila. Almost 80% of the samples were admitted in the center from 2006-2010 (present). More than half of them (53.33%) are still residing in the center. Many of them (63.33%) came to the center through the referral of other centers in Metro Manila. Less than half of them, but with the highest percentage (46.67%), were deprived of basic needs. Exactly half of the samples were middle born child. The highest percentage (93.33%) of the samples has separated parents. Out of this family structure, 70% of them were reported to have experienced neglect. Thus, they were not exposed to adequate source of basic needs. In fact, most of them are school drop-outs. Some did not even have formal schooling prior to their admittance in the center. Below is the demographic profile of the samples.

DEMOGRAPHICS Age 7-9 10-12 13-16 Status 9 10 11

TOTAL (n=30)

PERCENTAGE TOTAL (n=30) 30% 33.33% 36.67% 30% 16.67%

Current the Center

in Discharged (Reunited with 9 Relatives) Discharged (Transferred to 5 Another Center)

51

Resident Date of Admission Place of Origin Year 2000-2005 Year 2006-2010 (present) Greater Manila Area Metro Manila Province Eldest Youngest Middle Child Only Child Separated Parents Abandoned by parent/s who were adopted Neglected Orphaned Widowed Parent Neglected Had a new family Educational Background Kinder Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 First Year High school Second Year High school No Formal Schooling

16 7 23 6 22 2 9 3 15 3 28 6 21 1 2 1 1 5 1 4 6 6 1 1 3 2 1

53.33% 23.33% 76.67% 20% 73.33% 6.67% 30% 10% 50% 10% 93.33% 20% 70% 3.33% 6.67% 50% 50% 16.67% 3.33% 13.33% 20% 20% 3.33% 3.33% 10% 6.67% 3.33% 46.67% 33.33%

Birth Order

Family Structure

Circumstances of the Inadequate source of basic 14 Problem needs Ran away from home due to 10 maltreatment

52

Ran away from home due to 4 guilt feelings (done 2 6 4 19 1

13.33%

something offensive) Maltreated Source of Referral Relatives Street Campaign From other centers From other people

6.67% 20% 13.33% 63.33% 3.33%

Table 3.1. Demographic Profile of Samples from Sarnelli Street Children (n=30).

As part of the centers programs, they were all given psychological assessments when they resided in Sarnelli Center 2 (Residential Center). The assessment procedures are among the basis of their case management program. Nonrandom Sampling, particularly convenience sampling was used. The researcher decided to draw on the available data about these children which were found in the archives of the center. Most of the selected samples were assessed using the CFIT, BVMGT, and DAPT.

Instrumentation The researcher used the available results of the samples psychological assessment, particularly their CFIT, BVGMT, and DAPT evaluation. The Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT) was conceived by Raymond B. Cattell in 1940s. It is a nonverbal IQ test that measures analytical and reasoning ability in the abstract and novel situations. The test includes mazes, classifications, conditions and series. Such problems are believed to be common with all cultures. The test has three scales. Each scale is suitable for a particular age levels and level of 53

school achievement. The first scale of the culture fair test is used for children (4-8 years) and the people of mental retardation. The scales 2 and 3 are used for screening purposes at job and college admission situations. The scale 2 and 3 contain two equivalent forms as A and B with the following features: 1) Each form can be administered individually or with combination of the other form. When it is administered individually, it is called short intelligence test. However, when the both forms of a scale are combined, it is called a full scale test. 2) Each form is comprised of four subtests: series, classifications, matrices and conditions. Each subtest is preceded by several practice questions. The testing and retesting of the scales 2 and 3 in the alternative forms have proven that the culture fair IQ test is consistently reliable. Dozens of the studies prove that full culture fair IQ test is reliable up to .80s. The validity of the culture test has also been established. Its scores correlate in mid .80 with the general factor of intelligence and show consistently strong relationship with other mainstream intelligence tests such as WAIS, WISC, Raven Progressive Matrices, Stanford-Binet, Otis and General Aptitude Test Battery. The Bender Gestalt Test is used to evaluate visual maturity, visual motor integration skills, style of responding, reaction to frustration, ability to correct mistakes, planning and organizational skills, and motivation. Copying figures requires fine motor skills, the ability to discriminate between visual stimuli, the capacity to integrate visual skills with motor skills, and the ability to shift attention from the original design to what is being drawn. Out of the five variety of scoring for the test, Hutts, Hutt and Briskins, and Halperns scoring system was used. The original 9 stimulus cards produced by Lauretta Bender in 1938, as copied in the work of Max Wertheimer was used. Administration involves the copy phase and recall phase. Additionally, observing the examinee's behavior while drawing the figures was done to provide the examiner with an informal evaluation and data that can supplement the formal evaluation of 54

the examinee's visual and perceptual functioning. Scoring concentrated on finding pathological and emotional signs. Diagnostic accuracies were found to be high based on many studies. The Draw-A-Person test (DAP) was developed by Machover in 1948 and used figure drawings in a more projective way, focusing on how the drawings reflected the anxieties, impulses, self-esteem, and personality of the test taker. In this test, children are first asked to draw a picture of a person. Then, they are asked to draw a picture of a person of the sex opposite of the first drawing.Then, they are asked a series of questions about themselves and the drawings. These questions can be about the mood, the ambitions, and the good and bad qualities of the people in the drawings. The pictures and the questions on the DAP are meant to elicit information about the child's anxieties, impulses, and overall personality. DAP is interpreted according to psychodynamic theories. The figure of the same sex with that of the examinee is seen to be reflective of impulses the examinee finds acceptable while the unacceptable instincts are portrayed by the figure of the opposite sex. The sizes of the figures are also reported to reveal the gender preferences of the examinee. The reliability and validity of this test has been proven by many studies which attested to its effectivity in revealing the unconscious aspects of the self.

Procedure and Data Gathering and Analysis A research proposal about the psychological profile of Sarnelli Children was suggested for study. But before it would be embarked on, the possibility of obtaining available psychological results were ascertained. The assigned social worker confirmed the availability of possible data. Then, data gathering was conducted. The pertinent demographics of these children were recorded. Results of their CFIT evaluation BVGMT, and DAPT were also gathered.

55

When all the needed data were collected, mean IQ score was computed to get the overall level of cognitive ability of the children. The frequency of each qualitative interpretation of BVMGT and DAPT were tallied to tap their socio-emotional functioning and self-concept formation, respectively. Description of their psychological profile will be made from these statistics. From these results, needs analysis will be collated. Then, applicable programs and interventions will be made to accordingly meet these needs.

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS OF THE STUDY

The research study has generated a description of the psychological profile of Sarnelli Street Children based on the following domains: Cognitive ability, Socio-emotional functioning, and Self-concept formation. Table 4.1 COGNITIVE ABILITY PROFILE (n=30) TEST ADMINISTERED: CFIT SCALE 1 (Abbreviated Form, Tests 1, 3, 5, 9) AND CFIT SCALE 2 SUBJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CFIT SCALE CHRONOLOGICAL AGE IQ SCORE 86 87 95 93 92 75 95 89 92 56

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

88 107 109 70 105 85 72 93 90 82 113 59 82 90 95 90 91 90 84 78 80

57

Mean IQ Score= 88.56 Mean IQ Interpretation= Below Average

2. What are the common traits that they share in each of the domains mentioned?

3. Based on the common traits revealed, what are the apparent psychological needs of these street children? 4. What programs or interventions can be conceptualized to sustain these apparent psychological needs in the domains mentioned?

58

59

60