Understanding Systems and Structures: Children's dreams

Mapping the dreams of children in the Irular community and understanding structural barriers

The following is an excerpt from the presentation by Sadiq at the 'Decoding measurement, unpacking systems and structures' webinar held on 8 December 2023. Sadiq is a community researcher working in Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu and was a participant of the first cohort of the Community Evaluators Fellowship.

For nearly 15 years, I have heard the term “child rights” in almost every programme that I have been part of. 

The fundamental principle that ‘every child possesses the right to life, survival, protection, and development’ has been reiterated time and again. There is also primacy to the principle of the ‘Best Interest of the Child’. Similarly, the Right to Education, and the significance of leisure and play gets stated time and again. Throughout, the resounding mantra is that every child, without exception, should have access to these rights. It is clear – every child needs to be protected, and the call is for the inclusion of all children.

I have worked as a frontline grounded team member with various programmes dedicated to child rights. I have also been a respondent in numerous evaluations. I have observed the prevalence of the use of the term "Child Rights." In the last decade, the term “systemic shift” in child rights programmes has become very popular. 

Since February this year, I have been part of a certificate course on Evaluations for community evaluators. My learnings from there made me wonder whether people who use terms "structural change" or "system shift" are really able to comprehend the same in the way it manifests on the ground.

Let us consider the example of children in the Irulas hamlet in Krishnagiri. Their parents are unable to access stable livelihoods, and have been relocated multiple times. Children lack identity documents and face discrimination when accessing education or healthcare.

Now, a child born in this hamlet acquires the community's identity within minutes of getting born into this world. Her gender identity becomes linked with this communal identity in no time. She is exposed to discrimination based on various factors such as poverty, parental occupation, access to livelihood, and community discrimination - often by a family member.

Mainstream Child Rights advocates acknowledge this discrimination and re-emphasize that "no child should be denied education or healthcare." I never understood this statement. Now I realise, that this kind of acknowledgment extends to recognising that children from dominant castes can also face poverty and discrimination based on class and gender.

In essence, the discrimination faced by Irular children gets integrated into a mantra – "no child, regardless of caste and gender, should face discrimination." What an evaluator does is to break down ‘discrimination’ into a number of sub-indicators, and then demonstrates that  this kind of discrimination exists not only among Irulars but also in poorer members of other communities. This integration may appear progressive, but the fear is that the caste-factor often gets diluted.

As an emerging evaluator with lived experience of discrimination, I sought to comprehend the idea of systems and structures. I employed a participatory tool, asking children from three Irular hamlets to articulate their dreams.

With a cross section of children in three Irulars hamlets, I asked them to list all dreams that they have. Children listed varied kinds of dreams. Some wrote their ambitions and aspirations. Some wrote what places they would like to visit; or what they would like to eat. Some wrote certain activities they would like to do.  

Then I sat with three community leaders, Anand, Ammu and Anthonyammal. They are my fellow peers - students emerging from the evaluators programme. We together analysed these dreams by looking at the following questions.

Category 1: Are there some dreams that Children would not consider dreaming of? For example, being an agricultural labourer or being a sanitation worker. They have grown up hearing from their parents the various troubles and challenges they are facing, so naturally they may not want the same fate. They listed such potential dreams.

Category 2: Are there some dreams that Children cannot dream of? For example, being a software professional or becoming a stock broker. 

Category 3: Are there dreams which these children were explicitly or implicitly told by the society not to have? For instance, they are not allowed to play inside the pond that is adjacent to the temple. There is a private school adjacent to the dominant caste hamlet, which does not admit students from Irulars. Many occupations associated with upper castes, like being a priest or starting a marriage hall are not open to them.

Most advocates of structural change focus on raising awareness and providing exposure to new opportunities as the foundation for structural change. They focus on category 2.

However, what often goes unacknowledged is the need to understand the category 3 responses.  There is intentional suppression of certain dreams for certain children belonging to certain sections by the society. This act of "actively disallowing certain dreams" to certain sections is not arbitrary, but is deeply rooted in structural reasons.

When society, explicitly or implicitly, imposes such restrictions, it goes beyond merely limiting specific aspirations; it often leads to restricting children from the very act of dreaming itself. 

This form of "disallowing" wields power derived from age-based discrimination. It appears and definitely is a scenario of adults imposing their views and opinions on children. If one puts ‘child’ at the centre, ‘adult’ is an automatic binary. However, one should not stop their understanding of child centricity at this level. One needs to acknowledge that the rationale behind disallowing certain dreams of certain children is intricately tied to the privileges and disadvantages experienced by respective associated adults. 

The context and power relationship that Irulars have vis-a-vis mainstream society determine the power of allowing and disallowing children from dreaming. The act of disallowing children from dreaming is, fundamentally, a political decision driven by social and economic considerations. This raises a pertinent question: Shouldn't we, as a society, measure and critically examine this phenomenon?

Ultimately, measuring and addressing this form of active disallowing of children from dreaming is a crucial step in understanding systems and structure.

Tool: Mapping and Analysing Dreams of Children to Understand Systems and Structure associated with Child Rights

Step 1: Arrange group discussions with a cross-section of children of a particular community across age, gender and locations. 

Step 2: Facilitator prepares a chart with spaces for children to draw, write or picturise their dreams. The chart should be very large, so that many children can write or draw in one chart.

Step 3: Before asking them to start drawing, have a discussion on what is a dream, and what are various kinds of dreams. Here, the facilitator should only ask questions and say ‘Yes’ to all answers coming from children. This ‘Yes’ should come in such a way that the entire body of facilitator says yes. Have this discussion until children are speaking to each other. When children are speaking to each other, the eyes of facilitators should be on children in such a way that these eyes encourage children to speak with each other.  

Step 4: Now ask them to write or picturise anything. The Facilitator should know drawing does not come naturally to all children, therefore there is no need to encourage children only to draw. Similarly, if any child needs any help, other fellow children could help him or her. Facilitators may also help. 

Step 5: Now use this chart to sit with children or young adults from the particular community with whom the facilitator has a very trustful relationship. The group should have at least four persons and not more than 7-8 persons.

Step 6: Now the group should look at all the dreams and answer some questions around the ‘missing’ dreams. Three questions are:

(a) Are there some dreams that Children would not consider dreaming of?

(b) Are there some dreams that Children cannot dream of?

(c) Are there dreams which these children were explicitly or implicitly told by the society not to have?

Write answers to these in three charts through drawing etc. Focus on the third question, find more answers and verify through evidence whether this is happening. Provide evidence of these not happening, if that is the case.

Step 7: The group may also ask more questions to itself and answer them in charts.

Step 8: Present these charts back to a few children and have a discussion with them without children feeling that their dreams are being curbed.