Why is change needed?

There is a global movement to end child institutionalization and promote family and community-based care. The movement is informed by 80 years of research, which demonstrates the harm of institutional care. The research shows that meeting children’s sanitary and nutritional needs in an institutional setting is not enough. Instead, it harms the physical, psychological, and cognitive development of children, increases the risk of them developing attachment problems, and limits their long-term life chances. High turnovers of institutional staff limit effective relationship building; there is insufficient time to provide a basic standard of emotional care. Children in institutions are often at risk of maltreatment by staff or peers and are denied access to kinship networks, which have a major role to play in many societies.

Care reform is informed by the UN Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children. The (Nepalese law ??) also recognizes the right of ALL to grow up in a family environment, and the (Nepalese law) recognizes the rights of children with disabilities to live in the community and have access to basic services.

The ‘care reform” movement—or the  ‘deinstitutionalization’ DI movement—consists of three change pillars: 

1. Prevention of separation and family strengthening,

2. Expanding family and community-based alternative care and

3. Tracing and reintegration of separated children.

Such reform does not happen as a direct result of new legislation but is dependent on the development of comprehensive national strategy plans, detailed steps of institutional closure over time and a continuum of services developed at the local municipality and ward levels. These should support the reintegration of children and also respond to the different risks and vulnerabilities of families and children at risk of separation. A comprehensive National Care Reform Strategy which guides the DI process is essential to all countries.

The primary causes of separation in Nepal:

• Poverty coupled with the belief of family members that a child will have better living conditions in a residential facility.
• In conflict in Nepal, the traffickers’ sales-pitch had evolved from offering ‘safety from bullets’ to the promise of an ‘education, wealth and success’ in the city. There continues to be a ready supply of poverty-stricken and desperate families willing to pay for their children to receive this apparently ‘golden opportunity.’
• Volunteerism and child care receive paying youths from affluent countries.
• Religious groups: Buddhist monasteries that no longer have a supply of children from Tibet are recruiting poor children from other ethnic groups, especially from Dalit groups, to fill their monasteries. They receive sponsorship funds from the West for each novice. Some Christian churches are offering boarding schools in India.
• Migration: both parents are going abroad today, placing their children in care.
• Lack of local services, families to children with disabilities have had no choice if they want services.
• A strong belief in segregation among segments of civil society organizations & donors that special schools with residential facilities are best for children with disabilities.

While institutionalization of non-disabled children in Nepal has primarily been conducted by non-state actors, children with disabilities are predominantly institutionalized by the state. 

Child Care Homes / orphanages in Nepal: are operated by individuals or non-governmental organisations for the purpose of providing residential care for children in vulnerable situations or those in need of special protection. While some of these institutions provide needed support to these children, others are solely based on profiting from their vulnerability.90% of children in homes have parents so are thus in breach of the 2019 Resolution.

Orphan trafficking is a form of child trafficking in which children are removed from their families, often under false pretences, and transferred or recruited into child care institutions, where they often face various forms of exploitation for profit[1]. When a child is trafficked in this way, their identity is frequently falsified so in documents they appear to be an orphan—a process known as ‘paper orphaning’.[2] The exploitation of children in these circumstances ranges from sexual abuse to forced labour, begging, or being sold for illegal adoption or servitude. Some are trafficked for their organs, while others simply disappear. The 2023 Trafficking in Persons Report states that “Nepal must significantly increase monitoring of children’s homes and orphanages and hold accountable those that do not meet the government’s minimum standards of care,” putting pressure on the government to initiate a de-institutionalization process. DI without a comprehensive National Plan will leave children totally unprotected.

---

[1] Separation of children in Nepal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCHbQdcs4YU

[2] UBS Optimus Foundation and the Law Futures Centre, Griffith University, entitled ‘Enhancing the identification, prosecution and prevention of orphanage trafficking through the legal frameworks of Nepal, 2021

Are children with disabilities worse off than children without disabilities?

The simple answer is yes; children with disabilities are very often hidden. There are few places in Nepal where a child with a disability can for example, get an education and attend the local school. Although around 10%% of children in our county will have a disability, only 1% will get a chance to attend school. The vast majority of these schools are residential schools where children are separated from the families in resource classes or special schools.

Resource Classes in Nepal were launched in the 1990s. They were technically and financially supported by international donors until 2017. The classes house children with special needs, ranging from mild to severe disabilities. There are 380 of these classes spread across the country, each housing between 12 and 15 children, representing some 6,000 of 8,000 children separated from their families; the remaining children are housed at special schools. Characteristic for these children is that they are segregated at a young age, never returning to their homes.

The lack of local I service for children with disabilities is a key factor leading to separation. This exclusion is exacerbated when a child belongs to a disadvantaged group. Some 60% of disabilities are poverty-related and are preventable. Prevention of separation entails also the prevention of disabilities and family strengthening through the development of local health and education services.

In 2022, Tribhuvan University[1] conducted  the Study, “Deinstitutionalization of Children with Disability in Nepal: existing scenario and possible strategies”. It was the first study ever to focus on Resource Classes. The main finding of the study was that children with disabilities do not benefit even educationally from being separated from their families; most children suffer deeply from not being with their families. In addition, resource classes are very costly. They are one of Nepal’s most expensive services, but they are doing more harm than good. Admission to these classes should be stopped and funds should be redirected to municipalities so they can support their citizens. Right now, the size of local budgets directed to support children with disabilities is pathetic, leaving parents with no choice if they want their child to have an education. Parents unknowingly give their children into the care of a system that hurts their children.  

---

[1] Tribhuvan University, national university of Nepal

   RCRD,  Resource Centre for Rehabilitation and Development Nepal