Strengthening (Re)integration from Child Sexual Exploitation: Children and Young People’s Recommendations

Abstract

This article explores care leavers’ views and recommendations for practitioners and policymakers on the transition from leaving care to living independently in the community.

Seven young adults fully reintegrated through programmes in Kathmandu, Nepal, co-produced action research with 21 of their peers (aged 16–26 years). This article outlines how children and young people affected by child sexual exploitation experience community reintegration, and their views on the key issues, reintegration services need to consider.

Findings explored boys’ and girls’ experiences of stigma and discrimination by community members and revolved around social and cultural norms and narratives on masculinity and femininity that denied their victimhood. This article focuses on the theme of independence as it appears to reflect a changing context for reintegration practitioners in South Asia.

Children and young people had not been reintegrated in their family; instead, they were living independently—a situation that can be described as ‘integration’ (with an urban community) rather than ‘reintegration’ (with their family of origin). Research participants’ exploration of ‘independence’ reflected this context and was defined as emotional or financial independence.

The research appears to identify an adaptation to reintegration services to enable a smoother transition for care leavers. Most models of reintegration assume that children will ‘reintegrate’ with their families of origin. This research found that children sexually exploited in Kathmandu chose to ‘integrate’ into a new community to overcome isolation, exclusion and non-acceptance by their families and communities of origin and, in so doing, experienced emotional and financial independence. In this context, successful integration requires the provision of activities for parents that explain indicators of trauma so that they can appropriately support their children. In addition, support for care leavers targeted on psychosocial wellbeing, life-skills and income generation enables young people to live independently from their families and be ‘integrated’ into an urban community.

Keywords

Nepal child sexual exploitation independence community integration reintegration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alderson

, & Morrow

(2011). The ethics of research with children and young people: A practical handbook . SAGE Publications.

Acharya

(forthcoming). Standing on our own two feet . Research Report from the RISE Learning Project: Learning from Young People Affected by Child Sexual Exploitation, Kathmandu, Family for Every Child and Kumudini.

Asquith

& Turner

(2008). Recovery and reintegration of children from the effects of sexual exploitation and related trafficking . Oak Foundation, Geneva.

Bovarnick

, Peace

, Warrington

, & Pearce

(2018). Being heard: Promoting children and young people’s involvement in participatory research on sexual violence, findings from an international scoping review. Findings from an international scoping review . The International Centre: Researching Child Sexual Exploitation, Violence and Trafficking, University of Bedfordshire, Luton.

Bhattacharjee

(2015). Recovery and reintegration of children and adolescents affected by child sexual exploitation: Regional mapping for South and Central Asia . Family for Every Child

Beazley

, & Ennew

(2006). Participatory methods and approaches: Tackling the two tyrannies. Doing Development Research , 189–199.

Cody

(2017). Connecting the dots: Supporting the recovery and reintegration of children affected by sexual exploitation: Thematic report . Bangkok. ECPAT International and International Centre: Researching Child Sexual Exploitation, Violence and Trafficking, University of Bedfordshire.

Given

L. M.

(2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research (Vol. 2). SAGE Publications.

Interagency Group on Children’s Reintegration. (2016). Guidelines on children’s reintegration . Family for Every Child/Interagency Group on Children’s Reintegration.

10.

Marshall

(1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice: An International Journal , 13(6), 522–525.

11.

Mayall

(2004). Sociologies of childhood. Developments in Sociology. An Annual Review , 20, 43.

12.

Pain

(2004). Social geography: Participatory research. Progress in Human Geography , 28(5), 652–663.

13.

Prout

, & James

(1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood . Routledge.

14.

Radford

, Allnock

, & Hynes

(2015). Preventing and responding to child sexual abuse and exploitation: Evidence review . UNICEF. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42138011.pdf

15.

Spaccarelli

(1994). Stress, appraisal, and coping in child sexual abuse: A theoretical and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin , 116 (2), 340–362.

16.

Turner

, Norman

, & Zunz

(1993). From risk to resilience, a paradigm shift, a literature review and annotated bibliography . Fordham University Graduate School of Social Sciences.

17.

Veitch

(2013). ‘Feeling and being a part of something better’: Children and young peoples perspectives on reintegration. Perth Home: The Child Recovery and Reintegration Network .

18.

Veitch

, Dharel

, & Ojha

(2014). Learning from children exposed to sexual abuse and sexual exploitation: The Bamboo Project study on child resilience: Resilience in child domestic workers, Nepal . Children Unite, London, UK.

19.

Wedge

(2013). Reaching for home: Global learning on family reintegration in low and lower-middle income countries . Inter-agency Group of Reintegration. https://bettercarenetwork.org/library/principles-of-good-care-practices/leaving-alternative-care-and-reintegration/reaching-for-home-global-learning-on-family-reintegration-in-low-and-lower-middle-income-countries