Child welfare in Ghana: The relevance of children’s rights in practice

Abstract

When Ghana ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) it made a commitment to ensure compliance with the UNCRC by reviewing its children and youth social policies. Yet, to date, there is little empirical evidence that compares how children's rights are perceived by professionals at the strategic and operational levels in Ghana. Thus, this article seeks to provide an insight by comparing the two professional levels. Drawing on in-depth interview data with government personnel who have strategic responsibilities of child care policies and with operational staff in a residential child care institution we analyse how the relevance of children's rights is constructed by these two groups.Findings: It is concluded that at both professional levels the concept of children's rights is associated with legislation and institutions, rhetoric of rights and child participation. However, for many of the operational staff children's rights appeared to be an abstract concept even though it was central to their daily work.Applications: The study suggests that implementation of the UNCRC has so far remained largely at the policy level, as a result, very little has been accomplished to advance children's rights in terms of changing the relationship between the State and children. It is therefore critical to organise more child rights training for professionals who are engaged in direct work with and/for children at all levels of the Ghanaian society to inform their practice. Further, the training needs to rectify the limitation and misconstrual of the concept of children's rights to only child participation.

Participation of youth in decision‐making procedures during residential care: A narrative review

“…For instance, perceiving the young person as manipulative or engaging in inappropriate behaviour (Manful & Manful, 2013), or in need for protection (Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Manful & Manful, 2013), may be used as a justification for not allowing young people a voice. For instance, perceiving the young person as manipulative or engaging in inappropriate behaviour (Manful & Manful, 2013), or in need for protection (Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Manful & Manful, 2013), may be used as a justification for not allowing young people a voice.…”

“…The 10 studies focusing on the organization/service show challenges and facilitators with regard to the aspect of time (Pålsson, 2015;Salamone-Violi et al, 2015;Stevens, 2008), the organizational culture (study Brown et al, 2010;Brown et al, 2011;Henriksen et al, 2008), and the policy context (Brown et al, 2011;Cousins & Milner, 2006;Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Manful & Manful, 2013). For instance, the study by Brown et al (2011) shows that facilities that agreed licensing and accreditation should require family and youth involvement and were more likely to be either licensed or accredited than facilities that disagreed.…”

“…For instance, the study by Brown et al (2011) shows that facilities that agreed licensing and accreditation should require family and youth involvement and were more likely to be either licensed or accredited than facilities that disagreed. Inadequate funding for services (Brown et al, 2010;Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Manful & Manful, 2013), greater level of statutory regulations (Cousins & Milner, 2006), intimidating jargon (Brown et al, 2011), and contrasting government agendas (Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008) were regarded as challenges to the young person's participation process.…”

“…Most studies report on the role of the professional in promoting or obstructing the young person's participation process (Brown et al, 2011;Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Hitzler & Messmer, 2010;Manful & Manful, 2013;Pålsson, 2015;Roesch-March, 2014). Most studies report on the role of the professional in promoting or obstructing the young person's participation process (Brown et al, 2011;Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Hitzler & Messmer, 2010;Manful & Manful, 2013;Pålsson, 2015;Roesch-March, 2014).…”

“…influence the importance children's views are assigned in decisionmaking processes. For instance, perceiving the young person as manipulative or engaging in inappropriate behaviour (Manful & Manful, 2013), or in need for protection (Fudge Schormans & Rooke, 2008;Manful & Manful, 2013), may be used as a justification for not allowing young people a voice.…”