White Papers

We at Foster Care India work across all disciplines from advocacy/ capacity building, direct practice and research. We believe that our work sustains when we share with you the lessons we learn and the insights that occur “along the way”. The following white papers provide an academic view of child rights and protection in South Asia and India.

Please contact us with any questions or feedback through this website or directly to our Executive Director at iananand@fostercareindia.org.

Please click on the title below:

Child Rights in South Asia

Child Rights in India

Child Protection in India

___________

Child Rights in South Asia
By: Colin Forber

In South Asia today, a multitude of both problems and solutions are active in the realm of child rights. The guiding document in defining these problems and providing some basic guidelines for their amelioration is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), passed in November 1989, effective September the next year (i), and ratified by all South Asian countries within the following four years (ii). All nine South Asian countries, including Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Maldives, have made serious efforts in following the UNCRC. In this, India has made the most effort in creating a large legal framework to account for child rights, closely followed by Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (iii). In terms of the rights of the child to survival, development and protection, South Asian countries have shown a great amount of effort in fulfilling the stipulations of the UNCRC, and while they have had some success, there remain many problems and areas seriously in need of improvement.

The first of the major universal rights assigned to children under the UNCRC is the right of survival, ensuring a child’s right to all they need in order to live, including food, shelter, and basic health requirements such as timely immunisation. South Asia’s standing in this regard is not altogether positive. Across the region, roughly 27.8% of children are born underweight, with the highest rates of underweight birth occurring in Pakistan, at 32% and India, at 28% (iv). These figures can largely be attributed to maternal health and nutrition, particularly during pregnancy (v). However, though the mortality rate of children under five remains fairly high, at 60 deaths per thousand live births, higher than the world average of 48 as of 2012, these figures represent a significant decrease from the regional under five death rate of 129 recorded in 1990 (vi). This improvement is a reflection on overall efforts of governments in improving the health of their populations, namely their women and children, though clearly there is a lot of room for improvement.

In terms of shelter, there remains a very high rate of children living on the streets. In India alone, there were an estimated 18 million children living on the streets as of 1996 (vii). Further, there is a lack of decent objective numerical data owing largely to a reliance on village level and otherwise decentralised vaccination initiatives combined with a misunderstanding of the need and process amongst many rural populations (viii). The governments of South Asia, since their individual ratifications of the UNCRC, have made conscious efforts to improve these problems and have brought South Asia much closer to global standards.

Child development encompasses the extent to which a child’s mental, emotional and physical development is encouraged. As already explained, nutritional problems leave South Asia lagging behind the world in physical development. 37.7% of children in South Asia suffer from moderate to severe stunting, with India suffering a staggering rate of roughly 48% (ix). This combined with the large number of street children leave a large proportion without sufficient emotional or physical development.

On the other hand, South Asian countries are catching up to the world standards in school enrollment. Primary school enrollment, in particular, is in fact higher, at 93.9% for boys and 91.4% for girls, than the world averages of 92.1% and 90.3% respectively (x). This is despite a lower literacy rate and secondary school enrollment rate. Thus, while there is a strong focus by South Asian countries on primary school education, it is not necessarily translating to a higher rate of further education or learnedness of the population. The fact that the primary school enrollment rate is notably higher than the literacy rates (86.1% for boys and 73.6% for girls) (xi) suggests shortcomings in the primary school systems themselves. Again, this shows that while efforts are being made, and are enjoying some success, they are limited by scope and are therefore less effective than might otherwise be the case.

Much of the criticism leveled against South Asian countries is related to their treatment of child protection issues, particularly those of child labour and marriage. In studies conducted with women aged between 20 and 24 years, roughly 46% reported having been married before the age of 18 (xii). Throughout South Asia, despite the world standard minimum marriageable age of 18 years, individual countries’ laws allow far more leniency. In Pakistan, girls as young as 14 can be legally wed provided they have parental consent. In Afghanistan, the minimum age with parental consent is 15 years (xiii). In the remaining South Asian countries, laws passed in order to limit child marriages have had only limited success, due largely to the ingrained traditional and religious justifications for such arrangements.

The use of children for adult occupations, including labour and military service are both present, though not as prevalent as was the case before the implementation of UNCRC-related legislation. Child labour is an enduring problem through the poorer areas of South Asia, owing in large part to the economic destitution many areas face. An estimated 19% of children between the ages of 5 and 14 in South Asia are economically active (xiv). In addition, the use of child soldiers has been recorded in both Nepal and Sri Lanka, owing to their recent civil wars (xv). However, insufficient pressure has been applied to these governments, and the use of child soldiers in these conflicts has yet to seriously raise the ire of the world community.

It should be noted that reductions in child abuse have also been difficult to obtain because of the same limited nature of reporting and ineffectual nature of related legislation (xvi). Similarly, many pieces of legislation have been passed directed at child prostitution and other forms of sexual exploitation of minors, however, due to the unregulated nature of the sex industry throughout most of South Asia, it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of these efforts. It is known that in specific cases, ages of entry into the sex industry remain very young. In the Daulotdia brothel in Bangladesh, it has been estimated that the mean age of entry is roughly 13.5 years (xvii). In all these areas, progress has been made, but as can also be seen, serious problems remain. The biggest obstacle throughout is the gaps between the UNCRC guidelines, intent of governments to enact change and the abilities of those governments to create effective legislation that can affect that change.

South Asia has made some progress in tackling issues of child rights, namely in the creation of legal frameworks, however, while these efforts have yielded some fruit, they have often fallen short, and there remain many glaring child rights offenses. Therefore, it is often the aim of these governments to maintain stronger ties to extra-governmental and non-governmental organisations, allowing many policies to better impact their target populations (xviii). These efforts need to go further. There remain many instances of child labour and child marriage in the realm of child protection and serious concerns related to health and nutrition. What is needed are new and more innovative means of allowing well-meaning legislation to be effectively implemented.

Endnotes:

i. UNICEF.”Convention on the Rights of the Child.” Accessed September 22, 2014. www.unicef.org/crc.

ii. United Nations. “Children’s Rights.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://unchildrights.blogspot.in/2011/01/chronological-order-ratifications-crc.html.

iii. Save the Children. “The South Asian Report on the Child-friendliness of Governments.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/news/south-asian-report-child-friendliness-governments.

iv. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

v. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. “Nutrition and low birth weight: from research to practice.” http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/1/17.long.

vi. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

vii. NGO’s Coalition on Child Rights. “Community Perceptions of Male Child Sexual Abuse in North West Frontier Province, Pakistan.” http://www.crin.org/docs/resources/publications/SexAbuse1.pdf.

viii. Academia.edu. “Culture, Politics, and Religion: Exploring Resistance to Vaccinations in South Asia.” http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31059809/Salim_2012_Culture__Politics_and_Religion-libre.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1411385988&Signature=a5oYNWHQwHrdbS%2F04YtyBBovBwU%3D.

ix. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

x. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

xi. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

xii. Center for Reproductive Rights. “Child Marriage in South Asia.” http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/ChildMarriage_BriefingPaper_Web.pdf.

xiii. Center for Reproductive Rights. “Child Marriage in South Asia.” http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/ChildMarriage_BriefingPaper_Web.pdf.

xiv. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. “Child Labour in South Asia.” http://www.oecd.org/employment/emp/2955703.pdf.

xv. US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. “Children needing protection: experience from South Asia.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2083248/.

xvi. US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. “Children needing protection: experience from South Asia.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2083248/.

xvii. US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. “Children needing protection: experience from South Asia.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2083248/.

xviii. Save the Children. “The South Asian Report on the Child-friendliness of Governments.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/news/south-asian-report-child-friendliness-governments.

___________

Child Rights in India
By: Colin Forber

Since the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child by India in November 1992 (i), efforts towards child rights in the country have become more organised and more motivated. Many of the programmes that had been in operation well beforehand, most notably the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme (ii), were strengthened and complimented by these efforts. However, for all this focus and effort directed at child rights, there has often formed a rift between good intentions and well-meaning legislation and programmes, and actual change. This is due to a combination of factors, most notably a disconnect between the central government and the communities it seeks to serve and recurring conflicts between rights stipulations and traditional values and mores. Child rights are moving forward in India, but not without a great deal of resistance and setbacks in both government implementation and societal acceptance.

The central Indian government has made the most progress towards forming a legal framework for child rights of all the countries in South Asia (iii). This concerted effort has been applied since the country was founded in 1947 (iv). The two main programs contained within this are the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme, which was formed as a result of the National Policy for Children (NPC) in 1974 (v), and the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS), which was introduced in 2009-2010 (vi). Between these two, both child development and child protection have been addressed by the government. In addition, much of their purview includes issues which touch on both child survival and child participation, particularly the ICDS, which, since its inception, has grown to be one of the largest programmes in India, and one of the largest child development and welfare programmes in the world (vii). All of this falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD), which in early 2006 was upgraded from a department in order to better address the needs and issues placed upon it. There can be little doubt that there is a great push for child rights in India and that much of this has come just recently. Much of this can be attributed to the fact that while these efforts have been taking place for over 65 years, the introduction of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and a better understanding of India’s shortcomings in relation to caring for its children have helped to motivate lawmakers to new and more effective action.

Further, there has been a steady stream of more targeted groups and legislation directed at improving the plight of children in India today. Among the guidelines and other pieces of legislation to come into effect after the passing of the UNCRC are The Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act of 1992 and The Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Amendment Act of 2002, both intended to address child survival issues, The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act of 2006 and The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act of 2012, intended to address child protection and The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act of 2009 intended to address child development (viii). These are then complimented by The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, first passed in 2000, with a new, replacement bill put forward in 2014 (ix). These are paired with a large and growing child rights infrastructure administered by the MWCD, which manifests as the ICPS and ICDS in terms of implementation and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) in terms of monitoring and general oversight, particularly in relation to legislation and the verification that it meets national and international standards for child rights (x). In this way, the government has made to ensure that they have efforts directed at all the major areas involved in child rights: child survival, child development, and child protection.

However, for all this effort, many of the problems facing India today can be seen in the limited success of these schemes. In March of 2013, a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India found that the ICDS, which had been in existence for nearly 40 years, to be deficient in every major category it was set up to address. In terms of child survival, the audit found that India was ranked 149th of 195 countries in terms of child mortality rates. Child nutrition, the other major area of focus for the ICDS, was very poor, with Indian children having a higher moderate to severely underweight rate than its neighbours, and even sub-Saharan Africa (xi). These figures are corroborated by UNICEF data, which puts the rate of severely underweight children at 15.8%, higher than any other South or South East Asian country. In addition, the rate of stunting provided by UNICEF is 48% for children in India. This is a lot higher than the still shocking rate of 37.7% for all of South Asia (xii). This is a perfect example of the gulf between intent and reality of government efforts and programs in India. For all the legal framework and legislation put in place in order to address the issues of child rights, the lack of centralisation in the government, combined with the disconnect between the central government and the rural and low-income urban populations means that large-scale programmes have trouble implementing correspondingly large change. When change does happen, it is difficult to have that translate across all necessary variables.

Further, there is the issue of these efforts and pieces of legislation coming into conflict with long established social, religious or otherwise traditional mores. The most prominent and possibly infamous of these are the issues of child marriage and sexual offenses. Despite The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act of 2012 and The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act of 2006, the fact remains that social norms ranging from the remnants of the caste system, to the traditional patriarchy to a full gambit of other social restrictions mean that while the government has had some success in cracking down on these offenses, the fact that their efforts are working directly against many of the traditions of the people mean that change is slow (xiii). Many of the problems facing the government in terms of child protection in particular are related to the more difficult task associated in changing social paradigms rather than simply changing the laws.

Along these lines, it should be made clear that there has been some progress made. While childhood nutrition and mortality rates remain poor, the actual drop in the under five mortality rate (U5MR) has been drastic. In 1970, the U5MR was 211 for every 1000 live births. By 1990, it had dropped to 126, in 2000, 92 and in 2012, the U5MR was 56, only slightly more than a quarter what it had been just 40 years before (xiv). In addition, simply stating that the ICDS is deficient in its duties fails to account for the fact that following the CAG report, the ICDS has undergone serious re-evaluation and restructuring (xv). Further, though there are serious child’s rights issues remaining, there have been some tangible successes as well. The most prominent of these, from a statistical perspective, is the high rate of primary school enrollment, due in part to the provisions made by the government for free and compulsory education. Enrollment for both boys and girls is over 98%, and literacy rates for both genders also fare well compared to other South Asian countries. Therefore, while there are many systems that are failing to provide the change they promise, this deficiency is not universal.

India has made great strides in some areas of child rights, and there is now the organisation and legal framework to institute more meaningful change. However, this has not always resulted in the extent of change that has been expect or is required by both national and international oversight committees. While there have been serious improvements in the state of the education system, there remain serious issues to do with child nutrition. This gap between legislation and full and effective implementation is the main problem facing the Indian government now. The future success of the country relies on the children raised today, and while there are great improvements being made, there remains much to do.

Endnotes:

i. United Nations. “Children’s Rights.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://unchildrights.blogspot.in/2011/01/chronological-order-ratifications-crc.html.

ii. Ministry of Women and Child Development. India: Third and Fourth Combined Report on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2011. Government of India, 2011. p xxiv.

iii. Save the Children. “The South Asian Report on the Child-friendliness of Governments.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/news/south-asian-report-child-friendliness-governments.

iv. HAQ Centre for Child Rights. “Indian Laws and Policies.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://www.haqcrc.org/indian-laws-policies.

v. Ministry of Women and Child Development. India: Third and Fourth Combined Report on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2011. Government of India, 2011. p 5.

vi. Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India. “Integrated Child Protection Scheme.” Accessed September 26, 2014. http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/st_abouticps.aspx.

vii. Comptroller and Auditor General of India. “Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://saiindia.gov.in/english/home/our_products/audit_report/government_wise/union_audit/recent_reports/union_performance/2012_2013/Civil/Report_22/Report_22.html.

viii. HAQ Centre for Child Rights. “Indian Laws and Policies.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://www.haqcrc.org/indian-laws-policies.

ix. The Indian Express. “Juvenile Justice Bill introduced in Lok Sabha.” Accessed September 26, 2014. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/juvenile-justice-bill-introduced-in-lok-sabha/.

x. Ministry of Women and Child Development. India: Third and Fourth Combined Report on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 2011. Government of India, 2011. p xxiv.

xi. Comptroller and Auditor General of India. “Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://saiindia.gov.in/english/home/our_products/audit_report/government_wise/union_audit/recent_reports/union_performance/2012_2013/Civil/Report_22/Report_22.html.

xii. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

xiii. AlJazeera America. “Rape in India: Reading between the lines.” Accessed September 26, 2014. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/15/rape-in-india-readingbetweenthelines.html.

xiv. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

xv. Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India. “Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://wcd.nic.in/icds/.

___________

Child Protection in India
By: Colin Forber

Children are a country’s future, and their protection and a the opportunity to grow in a positive environment is essential to the future of a people. UNICEF defines child protection as “preventing and responding to violence, exploitation and abuse against children” (i). This includes a wide range of specific offenses that change over time and depend on the society in which they occur. India faces a number of problems to do with child protection, from child labour, to participation in the sex industry, to trafficking, to child marriage. The government of India has, for decades, recognised its responsibility in caring for its children, namely through the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) first implemented in 1975 (ii). However, the ICDS’s mandate is limited to child development. Child protection in India has been more sporadic, and until recently, largely unorganised. Current organised momentum on child protection from the government of India is a relatively new. For this reason, there are many issues remaining in child protection in India, but the policy focus that these issues are receiving represents a positive improvement in how child protection is approached and problems solved.

The misuse of children in illegal trafficking, labour and sex industry work remains a serious problem. Throughout India, the trafficking of children for economic, sexual or other purposes has been the target of multiple pieces of legislation and articles codified in the constitution, including the right to personal liberty and the “right to be protected from trafficking and forced into bonded labour.” (iii) In addition, individual acts from The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act of 1956 (ITPA) (iv) to the newly redesigned Juvenile Justice Bill (JJ Bill) of 2014 (v) have sought to put in place specific measures and laws to combat intra and international trafficking of all persons and children in particular. All of these efforts admit an ongoing problem. In India, an unknown number of children are abducted, kidnapped, sold or otherwise taken from their homes for purposes ranging from labour to marriage to work in the sex industry (vi)

Exact estimates as to the number of children in the sex industry in India are not known for certain, with figures ranging from 300,000 to 500,000 in total (vii). However, it is estimated that roughly 40% of prostitutes began working in the industry before the age of 18 (viii). Many efforts have been made to correct this problem, both on the part of the central government, most recently in The Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act of 2012 and individual state-level piece so legislation (x). Prostitution remains the most common destination for trafficked children. An estimated 12,000-50,000 women and children are smuggled into India each year for work in the sex industry (xi). Consistent demand and the profits produced by the sex industry have hampered efforts to limit its prevalence, and enforcement has remained inconsistent. This lack of enforcement has also meant that there has not been as much success in limiting the number of children engaged in these activities. The sex industry remains a large portion in the increasingly prosperous Indian economy (xii).

Related to these previous two points is the prevalence of child labour, and the frequently abhorrent levels of exploitation often incurred. UNICEF reports a child labour rate of roughly 12% (xiii). Much of this, as stated previously, is supported by child trafficking, and most is fueled by simple economic necessity within households (xiv). According to the 2001 census, there are roughly 12.6 million child labourers in India (xv). In 1987, the Government of India implemented the National Policy on Child Labour, and in recent years, the Ministry of Labour and Employment has reported a significant decrease in child workers, despite admitting to still being home to the largest child labour force in the world (xvi). This reduction nevertheless represents one of the more successful policies to be implemented in child protection in India.

Protection from destitution and neglect are both focuses of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). There are no definitive statistics as to the number of children living and working on the streets of India, but UNICEF’s estimates of roughly 18 million provides a rather staggering perspective of the scope of the problem. The fact that the urban population of India, as a percentage of the whole, is increasing steadily (32% as of 2012) also leaves little room for respite from this problem. The children themselves face a large number of abuses and gaps in necessities and health. Abuse is rife, as is substance abuse, disease and infection, and economic exploitation. UNICEF further defines these children, as “children of the street” and “children on the street”, denoting those who live without parental or other supervision on the street, in the first category and those who might live and work on the street, but return to familial care at night in the second category. Using these guidelines, there have been a number of direct practice level initiatives that have enjoyed some success. Most notable among these is Childline, a nationwide service based on reporting of child-related issues using a free phone service. Individual efforts have thus helped, however mobilisation of different services together is needed to make the best use of this success.

Among those “children of the streets” are those who have been orphaned, either through the death of one or both parents, or through parental abandonment. In 2007, the Ministry of Women and Child Development found that among street children throughout India, 65.9% were living with their families. That leaves an additional 34% of street children bereft of parental care. Abandonment of children is a serious issue. Studies have shown that of the roughly 20 million orphaned children in India, only a small proportion had no living parents. Further, though the government of India, in the form of its Integrated Program for Street Children, addresses many of the difficulties facing these children, and has much organisational structure aimed at getting them off the streets, there is still a lack of organisation in preventative measures. Much of this has to do with the fact that pregnancy and early childhood support has been largely administered through the anganwadi system in the Integrated Child Development Services scheme, which as of early 2013 was shown to be providing services inadequately. A number of factors, including economic, traditional and social variables all contribute to a huge number of children abandoned to the streets in India. Efforts have, as yet, been too limited in scope and focus on causation and thus have been too limited in effect.

Multiple laws and policies, including The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act of 2006 and The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act of 2012, have also provided coverage of child protection issues. The effectiveness of these has faced one major obstacle in particular: a lack of centrally directed organisation. It was only in 2009-2010 that the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) was implemented, some 34 years after its child development counterpart (ICDS). All of these are administered by the Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD), which itself was only upgraded from a department in early 2006. This central oversight means that apart from simply passing legislation, there is a more durable and effective mechanism for implementing these changes. Further, ICPS’s ability to participate in goal-setting and larger scale strategic planning mean that the government’s ability to affect long term improvement is greatly increased. These developments are new. India has always had a problem in the strength of its state and central governing authority, so the ultimate impact of these efforts will be difficult to judge in the short term.

India’s many child protection issues have caused it many problems in the past, and organisation in addressing these issues has often been lacking, but recent government efforts, namely the creation of the ICPS in 2009-2010, is resulting in progress. The many child protection issues often have similar causes, and though specific pieces of legislation have had some success in addressing specific abuses, the comprehensive approach of the ICPS was direly needed. For this reason, much of the ICPS’s mandate and actions to date have involved direct implementation of child protection schemes across the country. The real question from this point on is the ability of the ICPS to have its efforts make a significant impact on the ground. There have been many efforts in both child protection and child development over the decades that have fallen short of their admirable goals due to an unfortunate gap between policy and implementation. This has often been exacerbated by a lack of effective research and quantitative monitoring of child protection issues and abuses. Current efforts have the ability to overcome much of this, and stakeholders both within government and in outside voluntary organisations represent a large reserve of motivation and experience. The success of these efforts will be clear in the coming years.

Endnotes:

i. UNICEF. “What is Child Protection?” Accessed October 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/protection/files/What_is_Child_Protection.pdf.

ii. Comptroller and Auditor General of India. “Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://saiindia.gov.in/english/home/our_products/audit_report/government_wise/union_audit/recent_reports/union_performance/2012_2013/Civil/Report_22/Report_22.html.

iii. Resource Group on Child Rights in Rajasthan. A Compendium of Frequently Asked Questions on Child Protection. Jaipur, Rajasthan: Save the Children. 2013. 9.

iv. Resource Group on Child Rights in Rajasthan. A Compendium of Frequently Asked Questions on Child Protection. Jaipur, Rajasthan: Save the Children. 2013. 10.

v. Government of India. The Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Bill, 2014. As Introduced in Lok Sabha, Bill No. 99 of 2014.

vi. Khan, Dr. Intezar. “Child Trafficking in India: A Concern.” George Warren Brown School of Social Work. Accessed September 30, 2014. http://brownschool.wustl.edu/sites/DevPractice/Labor%20Rights%20Reports/Child%20Trafficking%20in%20India.pdf.

vii. Panda, Rasananda, Ashir Sutar, and Mallika Bakshi. “Commercial Sex Work and Commercial Sex Workers in India: A New Perspective.” In Development Issues in India: Policies and Perspectives, edited by Dr. Atanu Mohapatra. Delhi: Manglam Publishers and Distributors. Accessed October 1, 2014. https://www.academia.edu/8071552/Commercial_Sex_Work_and_Commercial_Sex_Workers_in_India_A_New_Perspective.

viii. UNICEF. “The Children: Picture in India.” Accessed October 1, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/india/children.html.

ix. HAQ Centre for Child Rights. “Indian Laws and Policies.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://www.haqcrc.org/indian-laws-policies.

x. Dr. Intezar Khan. “Child Trafficking in India: A Concern.” George Warren Brown School of Social Work. Accessed September 30, 2014. http://brownschool.wustl.edu/sites/DevPractice/Labor%20Rights%20Reports/Child%20Trafficking%20in%20India.pdf.

xi. ChildLine India. “CHILD Protection & Child Rights » Vulnerable Children » Children’s Issues » Child Trafficking.” Accessed September 30, 2014. http://www.childlineindia.org.in/child-trafficking-india.htm.

xii. Panda, Rasananda, Ashir Sutar, and Mallika Bakshi. “Commercial Sex Work and Commercial Sex Workers in India: A New Perspective.” In Development Issues in India: Policies and Perspectives, edited by Dr. Atanu Mohapatra. Delhi: Manglam Publishers and Distributors. Accessed October 1, 2014. https://www.academia.edu/8071552/Commercial_Sex_Work_and_Commercial_Sex_Workers_in_India_A_New_Perspective.

xiii. UNICEF. “Statistics and Monitoring.” Accessed September 22, 2014. http://www.unicef.org/statistics/.

xiv. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. “Child Labour in South Asia.” http://www.oecd.org/employment/emp/2955703.pdf.

xv. Ministry of Labour and Employment. “About Child Labour.” Government of India. Accessed October 1, 2014. http://labour.nic.in/content/division/child-labour.php.

xvi. Ministry of Labour and Employment. “About Child Labour.” Government of India. Accessed October 1, 2014. http://labour.nic.in/content/division/child-labour.php.

xvii. United Nations General Assembly. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Accession by General Assembly, November 20, 1990.

xviii. Pietkiewicz-Pareek, Beata. “Common social problems among Street Children in India.” Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012. Accessed October 1, 2014. http://www.arsa-conf.com/archive/?vid=1&aid=3&kid=60101-415&q=f1.

xix. World Health Organisation. “Global Health Observatory Data Repository.” Accessed October 15, 2014. http://apps.who.int/gho/data/?theme=country&vid=10400.

xx. Bal, Baishali, Ripu Mitra, Aiyel H. Mallick, Sekhar Chakraborti, and Kamalesh Sarkar. “Nontobacco Substance Abuse, Sexual Abuse, HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infection Among Street Children In Kolkata, India.” Informa Healthcare USA Inc., 2010. Accessed October 15, 2014. http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kamalesh_Sarkar/publication/44887332_Nontobacco_substance_use_sexual_abuse_HIV_and_sexually_transmitted_infection_among_street_children_in_Kolkata_India/links/0deec518889d8d338b000000.

xxi. ChildLine, India. “Childline 1098 Service.” Accessed October 22, 2014. http://www.childlineindia.org.in/1098/1098.htm.

xxii. ChildLine, India. “CHILD Protection & Child Rights » Vulnerable Children » Children’s Issues » Street Children.” Accessed October 1, 2014. http://www.childlineindia.org.in/street-children-india.htm.

xxiii. Chauhan, Chetan. “About 20m kids in India orphans: Study.” Hindustan Times. July 26, 2011. Accessed October 1, 2014. http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/newdelhi/about-20m-kids-in-india-orphans-study/article1-725905.aspx.

xxiv. ChildLine, India. “Integrated Programme for Street Children.” Accessed October 15, 2014. http://www.childlineindia.org.in/Integrated-Programme-for-Street-Children-IPSC.htm

xxv.Comptroller and Auditor General of India. “Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme.” Accessed September 25, 2014.

xxvi. HAQ Centre for Child Rights. “Indian Laws and Policies.” Accessed September 25, 2014. http://www.haqcrc.org/indian-laws-policies.

xxvii. Ministry for Women and Child Development. “About Us.” Accessed October 22, 2014. http://wcd.nic.in/.