STREET KIDS

SALESIAN PROJECT

Apart from schools, the other institution traditionally considered as a central axis in socialization, is the family.� For years,�the ideal family module had prevailed with its own domestic relationships.� According to this module,� new children were welcomed. The rest of the family, often including aunts, uncles, and grandparents, treated these new children affectionately.� With support and affection, new members in the family learned lessons about values, solidarity, loyalty, and the importance of getting along with others.� At the same time, the family guided them in their exploration of larger worlds including their neighborhoods and communities.

����������� Today, this module of the nuclear and extended family has suffered drastic transformations as a result of� changing social realities.� Different kinds of families exist,�leading one to believe that family itself is in crisis.�� Without doubt,�there has been a break from the past, leaving a rebellion against the traditional family module as the only alternative.� A search is in process to find alternatives, which respond better to the individual needs of family members.� This search, tends to be erratic and in many cases painful:� there is no perfect replacement family simply waiting to be taken off the shelf.

 Today, many different types of families exist as a nuclear family: extended families, single parent families (especially with women as the head of household), families with step-parents,� biological families, and� adoptive families are among the many possibilities.��� Even within families which appear to have a similar structure, there are differences within family relationships.  These differences range from the traditional patriarchal families, to families in which there is a hope for more democratic relations.� These relations can range from monogamy, serial monogamy, polygamy, triangular relationships within a single household, relations between members of the same sex, and single parent households.� These relationships may be stable or unstable.� Finally, there are those who have chosen to or have accepted living alone as the only alternative to the conflicts in which these relationships and families posses.

 Where once only religious ceremonies were accepted,� civil marriages and common law marriages are becoming more and more accepted.� On the other hand, the stability and duration of marriage has been declining dramatically.� Serial monogamy has become quite common:� it is not unusual to encounter adults of 30 years who have formed three our four successive relationships or who arrive at middle age and decide to �begin their lives again with a new partner.�

With the dissolution of these couples, individuals may or may not form new relationships.� Those who do not may simply not encounter new opportunities, or they may decide to remain single, or, less often, they may decide to dedicate themselves to bringing up their children.

The size of the nuclear family had been reduced as birthrates have declines radically due to various factors.� No longer is a large family a source of pride.� Nevertheless, the lowering of standards of living and educational achievement associated with large families has not been universal.� The advantages of having smaller families appear to be more important to middle and upper class families.� Though working class families have also reduced their family size, the benefits for them have not been as significant.

����������� Another factor worthy of note is that from an early age, children now leave their homes daily, a circumstance due mainly to the participation of women in the labor market.� Today it is common that married women work outside the home, and even more common among single mothers.�� These women leave their homes early in the morning, taking their children to the homes of friends or relatives or to more or less specialized daycare centers.� At the end of the day they return home with their children, tired from a days work, but with the responsibility� for making dinner, supervising their children�s homework, and rising early to make� breakfast the next morning. (What about doing the laundry?� Cleaning the house? It can�t all be done on weekends)�

����������� Although their may be the supposition that in families where two parents work, these domestic obligations are shared, it is rarely the case.� The majority of the responsibility falls one the shoulders of the women, who assume this double duty as a fact of life.� Among younger couples, however, there is at least a breath of change as men accept the idea that they will share�� many more domestic tasks with their wives.

����������� There are a number of questions we should ask ourselves about the implications of these situations:

1.      If we can�t speak of a single kind of family, can we say that the multiple family types are losing their traditional capacity to adequately socialize their children?

2.      What kinds of change must society demand from families in order to conserve some of its traditional functions for the socialization of children?

3.      If the family is losing some of its traditional responsibilities and capacity of socialization, what other institutions or conditions will be able to replace it?� This is� especially if we recognize that the school, as well, has become weaker in fulfilling its central functions.

4.      Is the street or workplace� best substitute we can come up with for the family or the school as an agent of socialization?

�� ���� We can only offer tentative answers to these varied and complex questions, answers� which are only aimed at creating a wider and more profound debate on the part of everyone concerned with the problems of children.

 ���� In the first place, it is a fact that girls, boys and adolescents are passing less and less time at home with their families.� This means that their opportunities to interact with members of different generations, to exchange opinions with them and to understand and be influenced by their values and views of the world have been reduced.�� Even those boys and girls, especially those from middle and upper social strata, who do spend a great deal of time at home are often lonely and isolated as their parents often leave the home quite early and come back only after work in the evening.� For many of these children, the only interactions they have are with televisions or computers or perhaps, domestic employees who are rushing to finish the day�s tasks before going home to their own families just at the time when children arrive home from school.

 ���� Given this situation of less interaction with fathers and mothers at home, the diverse functions which have been traditionally assumed by families,� primarily those of early socialization and care of children, should be adopted to a greater degree by other institutions.

 ���� Nevertheless, the delegation of these functions to other institutions will not solve all these problems, not will it be able to relieve� the demands which society makes of adults to build families.�� Other adjustments will be necessary for these new types to be able to respond adequately� to the great changes which our societies have experienced and which will require new kinds of citizens.

 ����� Each child is part of a specific kind of family.� Street children are generally members of poor families� which live in misery, are often headed by mothers forced into prostitution, or families formed by couples whose relationship has disintegrated under the pressure of poverty.� Many of families� are unstable and are unsuccessfully trying to defend themselves against all kinds of social and economic crises.� Psychological and physical� violence are too often a response to these conditions.� All these circumstances result in a lack of human development which is common all over the world.

����� The family is the social catalyst of the underlying structural forces which push children into work and the street prematurely and into circumstances which will alter their development permanently.� It is a mistake to view poverty, suffering or economic desperation as primary causes of child homelessness.� Certainly when misery filters like a nightmare through the lives of a family, it easily becomes a family which expels or abandons its children, that is to say, a family which is force to send its children into the streets so that they must �fend for themselves� in order to survive.� But homelessness among children is a product of many other factors which are structural, cultural and personal as well.� It is within the family that the personalities of children are built and that they receive their human, cultural, religious and civic values.� Because of this, it is important to strengthen family structure.)

MAIN MENU