Ending violence against children in Cambodia will take stronger Commune/Sangkat level child protection structures

Welcome Back!

You have Gifts for Good in your basket.

Checkout Now
Continue shopping for more gifts

Welcome Back!

Last time you were here, you were looking to help vulnerable children and families. Your support can save and change lives.

Donate Now
Learn more about our appeals

Phnom Penh, 31 May 2016: Children comprise a large segment of Cambodia’s population with 35% below the age of 15; regrettably, violence against Cambodia’s children is still high and has immense consequences for them and for Cambodia as a whole.

According to UNICEF (2014), over 50% of children experience physical violence, 25% are emotionally abused, and approximately 5% experience sexual abuse. The health consequences of violence against children in Cambodia totaled US$168 million in 2013, accounting for 1.10% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

In 2007, the Royal Government of Cambodia established Commune Committees for Women and Children (CCWCs) nationwide to assist Commune Councils on any matters related to women and children in each Commune/Sangkat. This is a critical government body at the local level, which has important multi-sector and multi-ministry representation that is important for addressing violence against children (including the health centre, school and police). CCWCs have positive impact on planning, providing support, awareness raising, and responding to issues related to women and children. However, there are a range of factors that hinder them from becoming more successful and addressing the issue of violence against children.

A recent study (conducted by World Vision, UNICEF, Plan International, Save the Children and ChildFund) in 32 Communes/Sangkats across 10 provinces and Phnom Penh showed that CCWCs still lack understanding of their mandated roles and responsibilities, have limited technical capacity, have a complex accountability structure, lack a national network of social services delivery, and have limited budget – all factors that impact their effectiveness and functionality.

This highlights the need for an enhanced policy framework on the role of the CCWCs that will help them to become more successful in preventing and responding to violence against children occurring throughout the Kingdom.

The current policy framework for CCWCs provides guidance on structure and administrative roles; however, it does not provide enough detail for these bodies to fully respond to issues. Many CCWCs have reported struggling with complex accountability structures, challenges coordinating with the social services, a lack of funding, both for basic administrative duties (such as fuel to visit families in need), and challenges in budgeting (through the Commune Investment Plan) for social issues.

In some cases, CCWCs have moved beyond their coordination role and have filled the role of social workers themselves by providing direct services; despite good intentions, these services were often inadequate and in some cases placed children at continued risk. The policy framework must be strengthened to support CCWCs in coordinating with networks, NGOs and government institutions that can provide the services required by citizens.

In response to this, World Vision, Save the Children, and ChildFund, is respectfully requesting the Government of Cambodia to further prioritise preventing violence against children by strengthening the policy framework and role of CCWCs. Specifically:

1. Policies related to CCWCs should be reviewed and amended by relevant Government Ministries (especially Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation) to bring greater clarity to their responsibilities and provide more quantifiable indicators (that can be monitored), detailing the roles and participation of police, health centres, schools commune councilors, and other government actors.

2. The Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation should further collaborate to provide specific training to CCWCs on budgeting for child protection and identification and monitoring of vulnerable children. Training can include the following topics: referral mechanisms, community based care programs, and the negative impacts of residential care institutions.

3. The Ministry of Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation should adopt a comprehensive social service delivery system that will improve services at the village and commune levels, including a clear funding request to the Ministry of Economics and Finance to implement the system. The system should also clarify how CCWCs should interact with WCCCs.

4. As part of the above system and budget, funding for CCWCs should be increased through an improved and simplified process for securing CIP funds for social services, with a greater focus on prevention activities, data collection, and resources for home visits.

With the highly publicised Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Australians are acutely aware of the risks and long-term damage that is common among children growing up away from their families.

We’ve learned some heartbreaking lessons in Australia, which means that today, our most vulnerable children are very rarely placed in residential care. If they are, it is a last resort measure, and never on a permanent basis.

Unfortunately, the residential care model continues to persist in many developing countries. Many of these centres are unregistered, under-regulated and under-staffed by workers lacking in any formal qualifications. As a result, children are vulnerable to physical and sexual abuse, neglect and sometimes exploitation. These risks are heightened in facilities where volunteers, tourists and visitors are permitted to have direct contact with children.

Residential care facilities also pose a range of psychosocial risks to children. One of the most well-documented issues is that of attachment disorder, where problems emerge when children are unable to sustain a bond with their primary caregivers. Attachment disorders are common among children in residential care where they are separated from their families and frequent staff turnover is the norm.

Well-meaning Australians frequently support residential care programs in developing countries – and at first glance, one can understand this urge to help children without parental care. It is seemingly an appropriate way to make a small difference to the complex and enormous problem of poverty. Many residential care facilities can also provide positive and tangible evidence of the impact they are having on the lives of vulnerable children. But it’s important to look at the problem carefully.

Poverty challenges an individual’s ability to access their basic human rights —for instance, a child’s right to education and healthcare. Children with disabilities, living in poor communities, face even greater barriers.

In developing countries, residential care models are often promoted as an easy solution to the challenges of poverty. For families struggling to survive, it can seem like the only option. It may also appear to be one way in which parents, who generally want the best for their children, can provide the education, shelter and nutrition that they themselves may have missed out on in their own childhoods.

This view is certainly borne out by research findings. In a 2011 Cambodian government study, more than 90 per cent of respondents believed a poor family should send a child to an orphanage for education if they could not pay for it themselves .

In addition, the significant amount of funding enjoyed by residential care centres, usually donated by well-meaning donors, often deprioritises community-development programs. Funding is diverted from those initiatives which help parents to access their children’s rights, and provide the necessary support to ensure children can remain living with their families and local community.

These factors combined means that the availability of residential care is actually incentivising family separation.

ChildFund Australia actively discourages models of residential care that promote the separation of a child from their parents or extended family. Instead, we work in partnership with children, their families and communities to tackle the causes of poverty so that children have greater access to their rights, while remaining among the family and friends that they know and love.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child states: “The family, as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community.”

Children have an important and fundamental right to grow up in their families, and it is important that we make every effort to avoid the unnecessary harm caused by separation.

By subscribing, you agree to receive communication from ChildFund Australia.