CHILDREN’S PERSPECTIVE ON FAMILY SEPARATION AND ALTERNATIVE CARE

LIVING
INTRODUCTION
Families play a critical role in society and are of utmost importance. Some of the roles families
play include the provision of basic needs, love and belonging, social identity and means of
socialization of children. Sometimes families are partly or fully unable to perform these roles
especially in the case of family separation. Unfortunately, family separation is a reality that many
families face. It may occur for a variety of reasons, including the processing of immigrants or
refugees, child custody battles, or times of violence or catastrophe. Such separation can have
significant social, psychological, and emotional impacts on the individuals involved. Family
separation occurs when a child's living arrangements with one or both parents are disrupted,
which can happen when a parent is institutionalized, forced to move, or for any number of other
reasons, including being evicted from their home (UNICEF, 2019). (Murphy, 2003) defined
family separation as a situation where children are separated from their parents or primary
caregivers due to various reasons, such as death, divorce, abandonment, migration, and child
protection issues. The development, well-being, and future outcomes of children can suffer
significantly as a result of such separation (Shonkoff et al., 2012).
Historically, family separation has been prevalent, such as when an estimated 50,000 children
were rendered homeless in Europe at the end of World War II (Levison Chiwaula, Rebecca
Dobson, 2014). Similarly, about 22,000 unaccompanied Vietnamese children left the conflict
between 1970 and 1984 and went to neighboring countries. According to Eurostat in 2018,
284,445 unaccompanied minors sought refuge in European Union countries between 2008 and
2017. Moreover, according to a report by the (ACLU, 2018), the Trump administration's "zero
tolerance" approach to unauthorized border crossings resulted in more than 2,500 children being
separated from their parents at the United States-Mexico border between July 2017 and June
2018. As a result of the Trump administration's policies, 628 children were still living apart from
their parents as of August 2021. Furthermore, the United Nations International Children's
Emergency Fund estimated that 13.5 million Nigerian children are out of school, which increases
their vulnerability to family separation and other forms of exploitation. In Ghana, the Statistical
Services reported that there were 3,525 children living in residential care facilities in Ghana in
2017. According to the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey, 7% of children in Ghana
under the age of 18 were not living with their biological parents. However, these statistics do not
differentiate between involuntary and voluntary separation and encompasses a wide range of
living situations. In 2018, American Psychological Association shown that family separation can
have profound and long-lasting impacts on a child's physical, emotional, and psychological well-
being. However, children who are subjected to family separation are frequently given alternative
care options including foster care, residential care centres, and orphanages. Studies have revealed
that institutional care can also have detrimental consequences on a child's development,
including impairments in cognitive, social, and emotional growth (Zeanah et al., 2017).
Although there are other care alternatives available to assist these kids' wellbeing, research has
shown that the quality of care can vary greatly, which can worsen the harm that family separation
does to children’s development (Levison Chiwaula, Rebecca Dobson, 2014). The issue of family
separation and its effects on children's wellness are highlighted by the case of SOS Children's
Village, a global nonprofit organization that offers children who have lost parental care
alternative care options. Millions of children who have experienced family separation have
received support from SOS Children's Village, which has operations in more than 130 countries
(Vrouwenfelder, 2022). Although SOS Children's Village offers a variety of services to promote
children's growth and wellness, such as family strengthening initiatives, the caliber of care
offered in certain locations has come under scrutiny (Levison Chiwaula, Rebecca Dobson, 2014).
According to a 2017 research by O’Connor et al., (2014) children who had experienced parental
separation reported that they had greater rates of anxiety and depression than children who had
not. Another research showed that children felt disconnected from their family members,
particularly their parents, and a sense of loss (Hampton et al., 2021). According to a research by
Knorth et al., (2010) children who had been placed in alternative care desired to be engaged in
choices about their life and felt that their perspectives were frequently disregarded or
disregarded. Similar to this, Olivares et al, (2020) study discovered that children who had
experienced family separation desired to be engaged in choices about their care and felt that their
ideas were usually ignored. Children in alternative care reported using a variety of coping
mechanisms to deal with family separation and living in care, including engaging in hobbies and
activities, talking to their biological family members, and seeking emotional support from
caregivers and peers (Greeson et al., 2011). However, other children also mentioned feeling
alone in the world, being treated unfairly, and having little influence over their life (Noble-Carr
et al., 2017). Despite the difficulties inflicted on by family separation and alternative care, many
children are resilient and able to adjust to their circumstances. Numerous elements that affect
children's capacity to deal with and adjust to family separation and alternative care have been
found through research. This demonstrates how family separation is a widespread problem that
especially impacts children and millions of other people. While in some circumstances it may be
important for a child's safety and wellbeing, it can have a detrimental effect on their physical,
emotional, and psychological development. Institutionalized care, such as that provided in foster
homes or orphanages, may also be damaging to a child's development.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

PSYCO-SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT THEORY

This is a psychoanalytic theory that identifies eight stages that any healthy individual must go
through from childhood to late adulthood (Samsanovich, 2021). This theory propounded by Erik
and Juan Erikson argues that the results, both negative and positive that accrue from each stage
of development affect the individual in the rest of the developmental stages that follow. For
instance, if a child placed in alternative care feels insecure in the early childhood stage, the
insecurity is likely to enlarge as he develops. This theory is relevant to the topic at hand because
it serves as the basis for the protection of children from the negative impacts of family
separation. This is due to the fact that if the children continue to experience these negative
impacts, the impacts are likely to influence their behavior in later stages of growth and
development. The Psycho-social development theory highlights the importance of creating a
sense of identity, especially throughout adolescence. Children in residential alternative care who
may struggle with their sense of identity as a result of experiencing family separation may find
this to be of special relevance. Also, the theory acknowledges the value of social interactions and
how they affect a person's growth(Erikson, 1968). In the context of residential alternative care, a
child's social connections with parents and family members can be extremely important to their
wellbeing. However, the effect of trauma on a child's development is not specifically addressed
by the theory. Psychosocial development theory might not adequately represent the intricate
relationship between trauma and development in residential alternative care children who may
have encountered traumatic situations (Brennan & Houde, 2017). Moreover, the theory was
developed based on a Western perspective and may not fully consider cultural factors that
influence the development of children in different contexts.

RESEARCH METHODS
The study was conducted at the SOS Children's Village, Kumasi. SOS Children's Village has four
(4) locations in Ghana in the following places: Tamale, Asiakwa, Tema, and Kumasi. However,
for the purpose of this study, the area of focus was the Kumasi location. Kumasi is the capital of
the Ashanti region of Ghana, with a projected population of 3.348 million(Ghana Statistical
Service, 2021) and an area of 254km², making it the second-largest metropolitan city in Ghana.
The Kumasi location of the SOS Children's Village is situated in the Asokore Mampong
township, which serves as the capital of the Asokore Mampong municipal assembly. The
municipality has an estimated population of 191,402 (GSS, 2019) and covers an area of 24km².
The selection of the Kumasi location of the SOS Children's Village as the area of study was
based on factors such as accessibility, proximity, its location within a metropolitan area, and its
suitability to the topic under investigation. The SOS Children's Village provides a home for
approximately 120 children and 30 caretakers.
The study focused on the perspectives of children about family separation and living in
alternative care, The target population for this study was the beneficiaries (children in alternative
care) at the center who were above three (3) years of age and had speech, understanding, and
perceiving abilities. The total population of the children was about 120. The choice of this
population was based on the fact that the children who faced these problems themselves could
provide more accurate reports and verify whether organizational policies and systems were
actually being implemented.

RESEARCH APPROAH
A qualitative study was chosen as it allowed for gaining descriptive insights into the perspectives
of children and for developing a more nuanced understanding of the complexities of family
separation and the placement of children into residential alternative care. The research design
took the form of a case study. A case study involved an in-depth investigation into a person, a
group of individuals, or a unit, with the intention of drawing generalizations to other units
(Gustafsson, 2017). The reason for choosing a case study was because it entailed a thorough
investigation that made use of various data sources and research techniques in an effort to
comprehend the dynamics and complexity of the case being studied. The study adopted a
qualitative approach to select thirty participants (children in alternative care) using the simple
random sampling method. The Simple random sampling method was used because it ensured
that the results were approximate to what would have been obtained if the entire population had
been included in the study (Arnab, 2017).
DATA COLLECTION
The primary sources of data were the main means of gathering data for this study. An interview
guide was used to collect data from children and caregivers. Interviews provided a means to
delve into the experiences and perspectives of children in residential alternative care. By
interviewing children from SOS Children's Village, insights were gained into their emotions,
ambitions, and challenges (Weil et al., 2015). In addition to interviews, observation was also
employed to identify aspects that might not be captured during interviews. Organized
observations within SOS Children's Village were utilized to evaluate various facets of the living
environment and interactions between caregivers and children (Knorth et al., 2010). The
cleanliness of the living spaces, the availability of essentials like food, clothing, and shelter, and
the overall atmosphere within the residential care setting were all subjects of observation. Before
proceeding to the field, permission letters were sent to the organization to facilitate access to the
children and caretakers who would be the respondents. Subsequently, the organization might
have requested that you read and sign a code of conduct to regulate your behavior towards the
children. Once these procedures were fulfilled, the data collection process was initiated.

DATA ANALYSIS
Collected data was subsequently analyzed qualitatively through the accurate transcription of
interviews and the grouping of participants' responses into themes. This analysis aimed to
determine the perspectives of children about living in alternative care about family separation. A
narrative qualitative analysis was used to dissect the findings of the study based on the themes
that emerged from the interviews after assembling the data. This analysis helped in creating
verbatim transcriptions of narrative interviews, understanding, and encapsulating the participants'
human experiences. The responses obtained during interviews were grouped under their
respective questions on the interview guide. For this study, an inductive thematic analysis was
employed. Inductive thematic analysis is a method of analyzing qualitative data that involves
deriving meaning and creating themes from data without any preconceptions (Crabtree & Miller,
1999)
This type of analysis enabled the themes to emerge from the collected data on their own. It
involved a thorough examination of the data to identify trends, ideas, and themes without any
preconceived notions or beliefs. After transcribing, the transcripts were reviewed. The data was
then meticulously coded, with meaningful segments identified and descriptive codes assigned.
After coding, the codes were studied, and related concepts were organized to create tentative
themes. These themes were iteratively analyzed to refine and clarify them. This iterative process
was repeated until the final themes were identified and supported by relevant examples and
statistics. Ethical concerns were addressed in this form of study because it was more direct with
the participants. Permission, knowledge, confidentiality, and anonymity were all considered.
FINDINGS
SOCIO- DEMOGRAPHIC OF RESPONDENTS
GENDER DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS

A) CHILDREN
VARIABLE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Male 10 50%
Female 10 50%

The number of male or female respondents (Children) is reported in the above table. An equal
number of both sexes was interviewed to give an unbiased view of how both sexes experience
family separation and living in alternative care.

AGE DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS

A) CHILDREN
VARIABLES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
11 1 5%
12 2 10%
13 3 15%
15 9 45%
16 2 10%
17 2 10%
18 1 5%

RELIGION OF RESPONDENTS
VARIABLES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGES
Christian 9 90%
None 1 10%
NATIONALITY OF RESPONDENTS DISTRIBUTION
VARIABLES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Ghanaian 19 95%
Togolese 1 5%

EDUCATION LEVEL OF PERSPECTIVES DISTRIBUTION

A) CHILDREN
VARIABLES FREQUENCY PERCENTAGES
BASIC 5 2 10%
BASIC 6 5 25%
JHS 1 1 5%
JHS 2 3 15%
JHS 3 8 40%
SHS 1 1 5%

SETTLEMENT AND ADAPTATION.

This section details our findings on the perspective of children toward their settling in in the
alternative care centre, adapting and making of adjustments to fit inti life in alternative care
centres.
It was found through the interviews that while a number of children perceived that they had
settled into the alternative care environment and were now functioning effectively due to their
extended stay in the village, others also perceived that due to their shorter period of stay in the
village, they had not yet settled down and gotten used to life in alternative care and were as a
result not able to cope or adapt with and to the new care environment as such affecting their
effective functioning in the new environment. . When asked if they had settled in the alternative
care environment this is what one child had to say;
“I have been here for 13 years and Uncle, me I’m okay, because I see everyone as my sibling
and we have bonded so I see everyone as my relative” …. (participant 1)
Another child also said;
“I don't feel happy because I have not gotten used to the place” …… (Participant 9)

We also found that though some children perceived that they were happy with their new
surroundings and adapting to sharing facilities and resources with other children previously
unknown to them, other children on the other hand, were unenthusiastic and uncomfortable with
sharing personal space, resources and facilities with other children they saw as unknown to them.
Subsequent findings also showed that the children who perceived that they were restricted in the
care environment said they had settled and adapted less better than those who felt they were
unrestricted since the former could not adapt due to the tension they felt due to the supposed
restrictions. Similarly, most children who were privy to the circumstances surrounding their
admission into alternative care showed that they had settled better because they knew the
purpose their admission into the village sought to serve and tended to adapt more quickly to
achieve these desired ends than those who did not know the reason for their admission into
alternative care. Such children were mostly glad of their admission into alternative care since it
served as an escape route from poverty, abuse and neglect.
It was also found that some respondents indicated that since they were allowed to go home
during vacations in order to see their families, they were not unhappy and thus could adapt and
settle in with the prospective hope of being reunited with friends and family in their former home
locations after a while. For instance, this is what a child had to say on the subject matter;
“Now I’m used to it so its normal. I will go home again during vacation” …. (Participant 4)

Others mentioned that they were exhilarated about being admitted into alternative care since it
afforded them the opportunity to reunite with their siblings and other family who had been
placed in alternative care in the same centres earlier. Such children who said they had met their
siblings in the alternative care centre or been admitted together into the centre said they adapted
better than those who had no biological siblings in the same alternative care centre.
A child also had said it by putting it this way;
“yes I was happy because I was going to meet my siblings” …. (Participant 6)

FAMILY SEPARATION.
This section seeks to explore the views children who live in alternative care centres have about
their separation from family. Most of the children interviewed indicated that they were unhappy
about being separated from their families and their subsequent admission into alternative care.
This was because they claimed to feel abandoned and rejected by their families due to their
separation from them. Others also felt sad because they felt deprived of growing up in the normal
family setting with their biological family and felt robbed of the opportunity to experience the
familial love they had seen other children experience. Concerning this one child made the
following contribution;
“In school, when the children from outside who don't live in the village come, they talk about
their parents and I can't share in their experience and conversation. You just feel bad for not
living with your parents” …. (Participant 8)
A number of children indicated that they felt sad because they could not connect with their
families properly and bond with them due to their periods of separation from the family. This
finding applied to most of the respondents who had been separated from their families at a very
young age when they were infants and toddlers. These melancholic feelings often led them to
display negative behaviors such as fits of anger, deliberate troublemaking, moodiness and
disrespect towards other children and caregivers. Some children also indicated that they felt
happy at being separated from their family because being in alternative care released them from
restrictions they faced due to living with family such as stringent rules and regulations, inability
of the family to provide their basic needs and support their educational attainment. Children who
reported to have suffered from abuse, neglect and poverty were elated to have been separated
from their family because the separation and their subsequent placement into alternative care
gave them an opportunity to have their needs provided in an enabling environment.
“Tweaa, in my house dier you won’t get the things they give us here because there’s little money”
…. (Participant 7)

Others felt elated at the prospect of meeting new friends and people in the alternative care
environment. Though the above set of children reported to be happy, they indicated that they felt
a tinge of sadness sometimes when they saw children who lived with their family. However,
there were some others who knew the deplorable conditions in their former home and yet still
felt sad about being separated from family felt relieved when friends and family from their
former home locations came to visit them because it enabled them to fairly bridge the gap of
separation that existed.
NEEDS PROVISION.
This section seeks to highlight the opinion of children in alternative care about the provision of
their needs.
Almost all the children interviewed indicated that all their needs were provided in alternative
care and given the needed urgency. They mentioned needs such as food, clothing, shelter and
educational resources. However, a few children indicated that some of their needs, specifically,
educational materials were sometimes not provided on time due to the absence of the staff in
charge of the provision of those materials and their engagement elsewhere. At times this led to
the inability of such children to participate in assignments and tasks given to them as
homework’s and out of classroom activities.

“Our new creative Art teacher has given us work to do and also the office needs to give us some
tools and equipment for the work but anytime we go to the office they are not around so it slows
down our studies and skills and we are supposed to submit the work as soon as possible and if
we don’t we will be punished” …… (Participant 19) One child observed.

TREATMENT IN ALTERNATIVE CARE.

This section seeks to explain the opinions the children interviewed hold on how they are treated
in alternative care regarding the rules and regulations the organization of alternative care runs on
and the methods of punishment which serve as penalties for the infraction of these rules and
regulations.
While some children responded that living in alternative care had enabled them to become
disciplined due to the systematic rules and regulations, others felt that the rules and regulations
were too strict and numerous which led to feelings of restriction. A child had this to say:
“(Silence) The rules are too much. You have to ask permission when going out. There are certain
things you would like to buy without your mum seeing but here, you have to write it for her to
approve before you will be allowed.” (Participant 3)

Concerning the methods of punishment, most children indicated that they disliked the methods
of punishment, both formal and informal. Common mentions among the formal punishments
were corporal punishment, being reported to the office staff, denial of certain resources and the
informal, public criticism which included verbal abuse(insults) and being given the silent
treatment by caregivers. Two children had this to say concerning the above:

“Uncle, they don’t give us meat when we do something wrong” … (Participant 6)

“I don’t like it here, I want to go back home… the children and some of the care takers insult
me” …… (Participant 15)

KNOWLEDGE OF REASONS FOR PLACEMENT INTO ALTERNATIVE CARE.

This section examines the knowledge children have concerning the reasons for which they were
placed into alternative care. Mansourian, 2020 states that family separation from children can be
attributed to a large number of factors. These factors can be grouped into voluntary and
involuntary factors of family separation with the involuntary ones including abduction, orphaned
children, runaways, lost or children removed in their best interest and placed in alternative care
(Cohen, 1992). Most children interviewed indicated that they knew the reasons for which they
were placed in alternative care. One female child expressed herself like this;
“Money issues, even though I was young then, my parents told me” ……. (Participant 8)
A significant number of children also indicated that they did not know the reasons for which
they had been placed into alternative care.
“I don’t know. I was just there and they told me to pack my things and come here” ….
(Participant 4)
Among this category of those who did not know were those who did not care to know the
circumstances surrounding their admission into alternative care and those who has asked
caregivers or their family but has been denied the information. This is what one child had to say
“I was young when they brought me here. they didn’t give me any reason as to why they were
bringing me here and I haven’t asked them because. I don’t care” ………. (Participant 14)
It was found that most children who were placed into alternative care at young ages (infants and
toddlers) were mostly not privy to the circumstances surrounding their placement into alternative
care while those who has been placed in alternative care in childhood staged where they could
perceive their surroundings were privy to the reasons why they were brought into alternative
care. The common reasons for placement into alternative care stated by the children interviewed
include: poverty, abuse by parents, neglect, imprisonment of parents, migration of parents and
missing and found children.

IMPACT OF LIVING IN ALTERNATIVE CARE ON THE WELLBEING OF CHILDREN.

This objective aims at understanding the effects (both positive and negative) that living in
alternative care has on the wellbeing of children.

PROVISION OF NEEDS.
This section explores the impact that living in alternative care has on the wellbeing of children.
The respondents (both children and caretakers) indicated that the needs of the children were
provided for with the needed urgency and this impacted their wellbeing positively. Respondents
asserted that living in alternative care held prospects of improved health for most children since
they had access to resources to improve their health and healthcare. A participant mentioned that,
“Oww, the needs they are being provided like, good health, education … (Participant 2)

The availability of treatment by certified medical personnel also served to improve the health of
the children in alternative care as opposed to the usual self-medication done in most homes. They
added that living in alternative care afforded many children an opportunity to access quality
education which they would not have had access to had they remained in their former homes.
The provision of these needs led to the physical, psychological and social wellbeing of these
children.

4.3.2. PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT OF LIVING IN ALTERNATIVE CARE ON THE

WELLBEING OF CHILDREN.
This section explores the impact that living in alternative care has on the psychological wellbeing
of children.
A significant number of children indicated that the care they received in alternative care centres
helped them heal and recover from abuses that they had gone through and left them traumatized
before being placed in alternative care. Others also indicated that the systems and programs put
in place in the alternative care centre led to an increase in their mental capacities through
broadening of their scopes and teaching of skills. From one participant

“It is very important because it increases our mental capacity” …… (Participant 10)

A number of respondents indicated that the counselling sessions with the professional in the
alternative care centre improved the psychological wellbeing of the children as the counselling
helped provide them with interventions for the solution. of problems instead of internalizing
those problems. A number of the children interviewed explained that the thought of them being
rejected by their families caused them to brood in sadness over their predicament thus taking a
toll on their mental health. This feeling sometimes led them to close up and become unable to
relate well and share their problems with other people. Some respondents added that they went
through the mental agony of not knowing their biological family, thus leading to restlessness.

SOCIAL IMPACT OF LIVING IN ALTERNATIVE CARE ON THE WELLBEING OF

CHILDREN.
This section covers the effects that being placed in alternative care has on the social wellbeing of
children.
A number of children revealed that living in alternative care had helped them to build their
social connections with other children and caretakers in the care community for which reason
they had a greater number of friends than before. This helped them to have access to people they
are able to share their growth, experience and problems with. For instance, a child with 7 years’
experience had to say this in response;
“My social relationships have improved because I have a lot of friends and I've learnt to relate
well with them. Even though we sometimes have disagreements, we get on well.
(Coughs) “…… (Participant 7)

Also, due to living in alternative care, a number of children revealed that they had learnt social
skills such as becoming sociable, tolerance, teamwork and sharing resources with others around
them. A participant mentioned that,
‘I wasn’t going out so I had no friends’ (Participant 4)
Above all, most children were glad to be in the enabling environment that the alternative care
environment provided for their growth and development which they would not have had access
to, had they been in their former home. On the contrary, some children admitted that being in an
alternative care environment sometimes led to their being judged unfairly by the children who
did not live in alternative care and sometimes by their caregivers. This, they said, was due to the
fact that the afore mentioned groups of people had lumped those children together with prejudice
and regarded them stereotypically, thus preventing them from identifying and treating the
children by their unique selves and identities. One child argued that this unfair judgement made
her unable to try her best in most aspects because she felt her judgement was pre-determined
irrespective of how she behaved. A child had this to say,

” Apart from sometimes being judged unfairly by the children who don’t live here, I don't see any
negative outcome. Being judged makes me feel like living up to the judgement because they
already see me as bad, I can’t really try my best” …. (Participant 8)
Again upon interaction with caretakers, it was mentioned that done children learnt negative
behaviours from other children despite the efforts of caretakers to curtail such acts and that some
children influenced or allowed themselves to be influenced into negative behaviors such as theft
and drug abuse. One caregiver commented that,
“Some too learn negative behaviors like one child taught another child how to smoke and others
too resort to stealing” …. (Caregiver 2)
The children also mentioned that they had little or no knowledge about their biological families
causing them to feel socially detached and lost, especially when they went home for vacations. A
participant stated that,

“Oh I don’t know where my biological dad is but I stay with my step dad now” .. (Participant 3)

Caretakers also reported that some children misbehaved unduly due to the non-presence of their
family. Some children felt that the caretakers were not their biological parts, they have in no
place to guide and correct them.
Despite all these, the caretakers reliably informed us that some children surmounted all these
challenges and became self-actualized by rising to the pinnacle of their career and becoming
professionals in their chosen fields.

EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF LIVING IN CARE ON THE WELLBEING OF CHILDREN LIVING

IN ALTERNATIVE CARE.
This section aims at exploring the impact of living in care on the wellbeing of children living in
alternative care. Research shows that children who experience family separation often have
negative emotional effects, such as despair, rage, and confusion. Similar research states that
children expressed feeling disconnected from their family members, particularly their parents,
and a sense of loss (Hampton et al., 2021).
 A number of respondents acknowledged that some children had difficulty in regulating their
emotions because despite the fact that they were happy though a bit apprehensive, they were
nevertheless sad at being taken into alternative care because they were separated from their
families. The caregivers reported that some children had attachment problems and related
complications such as mistrust, low self-esteem and confidence due to their separation from
family. With respect to feelings of belongingness, some children felt that being in an
environment with other children facing similar circumstances made them feel belonged, others
felt that they could not identify with the children in the alternative care centres and did not feel
belonged.

SYSTEMS AND PROGRAMS PUT IN PLACE TO ASSIST CHILDREN WHO RESIDE IN

ALTERNATIVE CARE.
This section discussed the various interventions (systems and programs) the alternative care
environment has put in place to assist children living in alternative care.
SYSTEMS AND PROGRAMS FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT.
This section looks at the systems and programs that help the children living in alternative care to
perceive that they are cared for, has assistance available and a supportive social network. It was
found that the organization had formulated a Child Rights Club to teach the children about their
rights and the various processes to go through should they witness an infringement on their
rights. The Youth in the alternative care environment are also taken through various development
programs such as Sexual reproductive health rights and sex education by the Planned Parenthood
Association of Ghana(PPAG) and the Youth Action Movement (YAM), KNUST to enable them
become adept on issues of sexuality and how to boost their reproductive health. Concerning a
caregiver this made the following contribution;

“The Sexual Reproductive Health Rights Training held by PPAG help them benefit in that
regard” ……. (Caregiver 4)
Life skills workshops are also being also held frequently to give the children skills and hacks to
boost their resilience and survival. Examples these programs as revealed per interview were
financial literacy programs and soft skills training. A child said,
“I don't normally attend the programs because most of them are organized for the youth. But a
workshop on savings was done and we were all encouraged to save our monies for the future”
…. (Participant 8)

Boost camps are also organized for junior, senior high and university graduates to enlighten
them and equip them for the next stage of life and to enable them develop five and ten year plans
for subsequent phases of growth and development. Each child is also allowed to develop
spiritually in the own religion by the implementation of a policy where children go outside the
children's village to worship.
Counselling sessions are also available to help children who need it and caretakers inclusive.
Policy workshops are held for both caretakers and children to brief them on the policies put in
place for their wellbeing and to admonish caregivers abide by these policies. Above all, children
are given family -like care.

RECREATIONAL SYSTEMS AND PROGRAMS

It was found that the children had multiple avenues for recreation and that most children were
increasingly elated at those avenues. Common among the recreational systems and programs
were the play soccer programs, Clubs such as drama, singing, sports, acts and painting clubs to
horn the skills of the children, excursions to expose them to the rich tourist sites in Ghana for
relaxation purposes and occasional games between themselves and children in other institutions.
A caregiver had this to say,
“they organize excursions for us. Recently we went to Lake Bosomtwe, the whole village. We
were driven there by the KUMACA bus. Every house has a stipulated time and budget for the
children to be sent us to enjoy” …. ( Participant 5)

VOCATIONAL SKILLS.
Both caregivers and children revealed that the children were taken through a number of activities
and training to help develop a wide range of skills to either become their source of livelihood or
an extra source of income. Among the vocational skills trainings, they mentioned are cooking
workshops, bead making classes, sewing classes, painting lessons and debate workshop. A child
also said,
“(coughs)We do bead making tutorials, cooking classes, play soccer programs” ....
(Participant 7)
The SOS Children’s Village, Kumasi runs a project called NOBU (No business as usual) which
involves training beneficiaries either with vocational skills such as sewing or braiding hair and
setting them up with business capital upon completion or with employability skills by offering
them employment links and opportunities to enable them earn their livelihood.

DICUSSIONS
The purpose of this study was to explore the perspectives of children of family separation and
living in residential alternative care centers.
With reference to the perspective of children living in residential alternative care about family
separation, participants specifically revealed that they saw alternative care as a barrier that
separated them from their families and indicated that they were mostly unhappy about the
separation even though it afforded them many benefits. This finding is in consistence with a
study conducted by (Saarnik et al., 2023) which revealed that though children benefit from
alternative care they are usually unhappy about being separated from their families.
REFERENCES

ACLU. (2018). HERE ’ S HOW WE ARE FIGHTING BACK. 6.

Amerijckx, G., & Humblet, P. C. (2014). Child Well-Being: What Does It Mean? Children and

Society, 28(5), 404–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12003

Arnab, R. (2017). Simple Random Sampling. Survey Sampling Theory and Applications, 51–88.

https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-811848-1.00003-0

Biehal, N., Sinclair, I., & Wade, J. (2015). Reunifying abused or neglected children: Decision-

making and outcomes. In Child Abuse and Neglect (Vol. 49).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.04.014
Biemba, G. (2010). The Scale , Scope and Impact of Alternative Care for OVC in Developing

Countries. Development, 29.

Bisht, R. (2008). Who is A Child?: The Adults’ Perspective within Adult-Child Relationship in

India. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 2(2), 151–172.

https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.v2i2.24

Blandin, K. (2013). Temperament and typology. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 58(1), 118–

136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5922.2013.02020.x

Boru, T. (2018). CHAPTER FIVE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 5 . 1 .

Introduction. CHAPTER FIVE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 5.1.

Introduction, December, 41. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21467.62242

Brennan, J. F., & Houde, K. A. (2017). History and Systems of Psychology. History and Systems

of Psychology, 20. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316827178

Caldwell, G. G. (1982). Department of Health and Human Services. 199–200.

https://doi.org/10.3109/9780824706081.045

Canterberry, M., & Gillath, O. (2012). Attachment and Caregiving. The Wiley-Blackwell

Handbook of Couples and Family Relationships, January, 207–219.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444354119.ch14

Carson, R., Dunstan, E., Dunstan, J., Roopani, D., Australian Institute of Family Studies., &

Australia. Attorney-General’s Department. (2018). Children and young people in separated

families : family law system experiences and needs.

Chaitkin, S., Cantwell, N., Gale, C., Milligan, I., Flagothier, C., O’Kane, C., & Connelly, G.
 (2017). Towards the right care for children. https://doi.org/10.2841/069502

Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2013). how_child_welfare_works.pdf (p. 9).

Cohen, G. J. (1992). Psychosocial intervention [6]. Pediatrics, 89(1), 170.

https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.89.1.170

Courtney, M. E., & Dworsky, A. (2006). Early outcomes for young adults transitioning from out-

of-home care in the USA. Child and Family Social Work, 11(3), 209–219.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2006.00433.x

Crabtree, B., & Miller, W. (1999). A template approach to text analysis: Developing and using

codebooks. Doing Qualitative Research, 163–177.

Deblinger, E., Cohen, J. A., & Mannarino, A. P. (2012). Introduction. Trauma-Focused CBT for

Children and Adolescents: Treatment Applications, 1–26. www.guilford.com/p/cohen2

Dowling, M. (2014). Emotional wellbeing. Supporting Children’s Learning in the Early Years,

72, 219. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350088665.ch-010

Edmondson, D., Biehal, N., Ellison, S., Baker, C., & Sinclair, I. (2010). Belonging and

Permanence: Outcomes in Long-Term Foster Care and Adoption, Nina Biehal, Sarah

Ellison, Claire Baker and Ian Sinclair,. March, 809–811.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, & crisis. Identity, Youth, & Crisis, 338.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Identity_Youth_and_Crisis.html?

id=v3XWH2PDLewC

Evans, G. W. (2021). The Physical Context of Child Development. Current Directions in

Psychological Science, 30(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420980719

Garcia Quiroga, M., & Hamilton-Giachritsis, C. (2016). Attachment Styles in Children Living in

Alternative Care: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Child and Youth Care Forum,

45(4), 625–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-015-9342-x

Gateway, C. W. I. (2022). Kinship Care and the Child Welfare System. May, 1–15.

Geen, R. (2004). The Evolution of Kinship Care. The Future of Children, 14(1), 131–150.

Ghana Statistical Service. (2021). GHANA 2021 POPULATION AND HOUSING CENSUS

GENERAL REPORT VOLUME 3K. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar,

6(November), 81.

Gindling, T., & Poggio, S. (2021). The Effect of Family Separation and Reunification on the

Educational Success of Immigrant Children in the United States. SSRN Electronic Journal,

45. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1595528

Government of Ghana. (2014). Government of Ghana Child and Family Welfare Policy. Child

and Family Welfare Policy, 23. http://www.ovcghana.org/ChildFamily_Welfare.html

Government of Ghana, & UNESCO. (2016). The Children’s Act, 1998. Library & Information

Update, 4(9), 32–33.

http://uml.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=lxh&AN=18379009&site=ehost-live

Grandgirard, J., Poinsot, D., Krespi, L., Nénon, J. P., & Cortesero, A. M. (2002). Costs of

secondary parasitism in the facultative hyperparasitoid Pachycrepoideus dubius: Does host

size matter? Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 103(3), 239–248.

https://doi.org/10.1023/A
Greeson, J. K. P., Briggs, E. C., Kisiel, C. L., Layne, C. M., Ake, G. S., Ko, S. J., Gerrity, E. T.,

Steinberg, A. M., Howard, M. L., Pynoos, R. S., & Fairbank, J. A. (2011). Complex trauma

and mental health in children and adolescents placed in foster care: Findings from the

national child traumatic stress network. Child Welfare, 90(6), 91–108.

GSS. (2019). Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey 2017/2018: Snapshots of key findings. Ghana

Statistical Service. https://www.unicef.org/about/annualreport/files/Ghana-2019-COAR.pdf

Gubar, M. (2005). The Victorian Child, c. 1837-1901. 1–6.

http://www.representingchildhood.pitt.edu/pdf/victorian_child.pdf

Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: A comparative study.

Academy of Business, Engineering and Science Halmstad University, Sweden, 1–15.

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1064378%0Ahttp://www.diva-

portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1064378/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Hampton, K., Raker, E., Habbach, H., Deda, L. C., Heisler, M., & Mishori, R. (2021). The

psychological effects of forced family separation on asylum-seeking children and parents at

the US-Mexico border: A qualitative analysis of medico-legal documents. PLoS ONE, 16(11

November), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259576

HARDY, C. (2001). Attachment theory. Occupational Therapy for Child and Adolescent Mental

Health, 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-443-06134-9.50010-3

Johnson, P., Thorngren, J. M., & Smith, A. J. (2001). Parental divorce and family functioning:

Effects on differentiation levels of young adults. The Family Journal, 9(3), 265–272.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480701093005
Kasim, H., & Antwi, S. K. (2015). Qualitative and quantitative research paradigms in business

research: A philosophical reflection. European Journal of Business and

ManagementOnline), 7(3), 217–225.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hamza-Kasim/publication/295087782_Qualitative_an

d_Quantitative_Research_Paradigms_in_Business_Research_A_Philosophical_Reflection/

links/56c7587108ae5488f0d2cd62/Qualitative-and-Quantitative-Research-Paradigms-in-

Busine

Knorth, E. J., Harder, A. T., Huyghen, A. M. N., Kalverboer, M. E., & Zandberg, T. (2010).

Residential youth care and treatment research: Care workers as key factor in outcomes?

International Journal of Child and Family Welfare, 13(1–2), 49–67.

Kumar, S. (2018). Analysis in a Business Research. Journal of General Management Research,

5(2), 70–82.

Levison Chiwaula, Rebecca Dobson, S. E. (2014). Drumming Together.

Micheal Tarren Sweeny. (2016). and Monitoring for Children in Care.

Murphy, S. D. (2003). Transboundary Abduction as a Violation of International Law. American

Journal of International Law, 97(4), 983–984. https://doi.org/10.2307/3133701

Nabavi, R. T. (2014). Research Method & Design. October, 37.

Noble-Carr, D., Mcarthur, M., & Moore, T. (2017). Children’s experiences of domestic and

family violence: Findings from a meta-synthesis . Canberra: Institute of Child Protection

Studies Australian Catholic University, April. www.acu.edu.au/icps

O’Connor, E., McCormack, T., & Feeney, A. (2014). Do children who experience regret make
 better decisions? A developmental study of the behavioral consequences of regret. Child

Development, 85(5), 16. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12253

Olivares, M. (2023). The Trauma of the Family Separation Policy on Migrant Children (2017–

2022). Laws, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/laws12010017

Ooms, T. (1995). Taking Families Seriously: Family Impact Analysis as an Essential Policy Tool.

Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars, 27. https://www.purdue.edu/hhs/hdfs/fii/wp-

content/uploads/2015/06/pf_fis02suppreport1.pdf

Prevention, C. A., Act, T., Act, C. R., Abuse, C., Reauthorization, A., Tribes, I., Abuse, C., Act,

T., Office, G. P., & Opportunities, A. (2019). About CAPTA : A Legislative History.

1974(February), 1–3.

Ridout, B., Fletcher, J., Smith-Merry, J., Collyer, B., Dalgleish, J., & Campbell, A. (2023). A

National Survey of Children’s Experiences of Parental Separation and Support Needs in

Australia. Youth and Society, 55(3), 494–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X211061172

Saarnik, H., Sindi, I., & Toros, K. (2023). ‘Well, the Child Can’t Choose, Right?’: Foster

Children’s Participation Experiences of Child Protection Removal Practices. Child and

Adolescent Social Work Journal, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-022-00911-y

Samsanovich, A. (2021). Theory and Diversity: a Descriptive Study of Erikson’S Psychosocial

Development Stages. SCUBS Scholar Works, 1–48.

https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/1230

save the children. (2009). Revitalizing Newborn and Child Survival. 28.

Sayeed, S. A. (2021). Children Living in Residential Care in Ghana: Findings from a survey of
 wellbeing. Ghana Statistical Service. https://www.unicef.org/ghana/reports/children-living-

residential-care-ghana-findings-survey-well-being

Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., McGuinn, L., Pascoe, J.,

Wood, D. L., High, P. C., Donoghue, E., Fussell, J. J., Gleason, M. M., Jaudes, P. K., Jones,

V. F., Rubin, D. M., Schulte, E. E., Macias, M. M., Bridgemohan, C., Fussell, J., … Wegner,

L. M. (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics,

129(1). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-2663

Shukla, S. (2020). PROBABILITY SAMPLING METHOD 1. June.

Singh, A. S., Masuku, M. B., & Department. (2011). Sampling techniques & determination of

sample size in applied statistics research. Inwood Magazine, II(96), 32–33.

Sinha, A., & Sinhat, A. (2022). Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of

A Lineage of Family Separation A Lineage of Family Separation.

Smith, A. B., Taylor, N. J., & Tapp, P. (2003). Rethinking children’s involvement in decision-

making after parental separation. Childhood, 10(2), 201–216.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568203010002006

Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (2017). Attachment as an Organizational Construct. Interpersonal

Development, 109–124. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351153683-5

Theses, E., Turner, T., & Burton, S. (2023). Placement instability and its effects on the mental

health of foster youth.

Thompson, L. J., Glewen, K. L., Elmore, R. W., Rees, J., Pokal, S., & Hitt, B. D. (2019). Farmers

as researchers: In-depth interviews to discern participant motivation and impact. Agronomy

 Journal, 111(6), 2670–2680. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.09.0626

Todres, J., & Fink, D. V. (2020). The trauma of trump’s family separation and child detention

actions: A children’s rights perspective. Washington Law Review, 95(1), 377–427.

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3481435

UNHCR. (2021). Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2020. UNHCR Global Trends, 72.

https://www.unhcr.org/60b638e37/unhcr-global-trends-2020

UNICEF. (2009). The State of World’s Children 2009. In Vacuum (Issue 1).

UNICEF. (2019). For Every Child, Every Right: The Convention on the Rights of the Child at a

crossroads. https://www.unicef.org/sites/default/files/2019-11/Convention-rights-child-at-

crossroads-2019_1.pdf

Uprichard, E. (2008). Children as “being and becomings”: Children, childhood and temporality.

Children and Society, 22(4), 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2007.00110.x

Vrouwenfelder, D. C. G. and E. (2022). Applying SAFe. 1–2.

Wei, H. S., & Jonson-Reid, M. (2011). Friends can hurt you: Examining the coexistence of

friendship and bullying among early adolescents. School Psychology International, 32(3),

244–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034311402310

Weil, L. G., Lemer, C., Webb, E., & Hargreaves, D. S. (2015). The voices of children and young

people in health: Where are we now? Archives of Disease in Childhood, 100(10), 915–917.

https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2014-307492

Wicaksana, A., & Rachman, T. (2018). What is a child. In Angewandte Chemie International

Edition, 6(11), 951–952. (Vol. 3, Issue 1). https://medium.com/@arifwicaksanaa/pengertian-

 use-case-a7e576e1b6bf

Zeanah, C. H., Humphreys, K. L., Fox, N. A., & Nelson, C. A. (2017). Alternatives for

abandoned children: insights from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project. Current

Opinion in Psychology, 15, 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.02.024

Zerbe, R. O., Plotnick, R. D., Kessler, R. C., Pecora, P. J., Hiripi, E., O’Brien, K., Williams, J.,

English, D., & White, J. (2009). Benefits and costs of intensive foster care services: The

casey family programscompared to state services. Contemporary Economic Policy, 27(3),

308–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2008.00136.x

Zinn, A. (2009). Foster family characteristics, kinship, and permanence. Social Service Review,

83(2), 185–219. https://doi.org/10.1086/600828