Sociological Studies of Children and Youth: Volume 10

This International Volume of Sociological Studies of Children and Youth shows the breadth of empirical research that focuses on children and youth around the world. Across these articles arranged by region, it becomes clear that we assume different ideas about what childhood is even though these are bound by both cultural and structural factors. We often take “children” or “youth” as a definitive given, and then seek to solve their problems or create policies that serve them. Rarely do we have the luxury of actually thinking about the meaning of these two words. This annual volume creates a space for this particular dialogue to take place. Across these research papers, cultural expectations influence how societies view children and how children view themselves. Immigrant children and youth provide particularly interesting insight as they navigate more than one cultural context and varying expectations for children as they negotiate who they are as individuals and children. Structural factors also become salient, as children come from unequal backgrounds and different levels of economic development, and face varying political concerns.

This chapter is about the value and costs of the work of children – to themselves, their families, and their communities. I present a range of situations in which children in Zimbabwe have to work, placing the employment of children in the broader context of children's work. I point to benefits and harm that can accrue to children from their work, paying attention to how the children themselves perceive it. The vignettes I present illustrate the complexity surrounding the work of children, and the need to understand the contexts in which they work before we try to intervene.

When observing the work of Brazilian Sociology and Anthropology, it is apparent that the study of childhood, particularly concerning play and toys, has received little attention. A quick evaluation in this area shows that few existing works appear in the fields of Psychology and Education, the first mostly concerned with the psychology of development and the latter with the question of learning.¹

A good deal of work in demography and sociology has examined the dynamic and complex patterns of the process through which young people move from being dependent on their parents and families to supporting themselves financially and forming their own families. These studies have described, in detail, specific features of many aspects of the transition to adulthood, especially in the European or American context (Corijn & Klijzing, 2001; Hogan & Aston, 1986; Sandefur, Eggerling-Boeck & Park, forthcoming). They have, furthermore, provided us with some explanations of how institutional variations in educational systems, labor markets, or family formation are associated with differences in European and American young people's transitions to adulthood (Breen & Buchmann, 2002; Cook & Furstenberg, 2002; Fussell, 2002a).

The recent wave of immigration to North American society from new source countries challenges old theories of acculturation that were based on European immigration streams that assumed that ethnic retention was generationally conditioned. For Caucasian immigrants, it was assumed that assimilation was linear and that by the third generation, all traces of ethnic origin would be absent, save for a nostalgic interest in quaint and ephemeral aspects of an ethnic past labeled symbolic ethnicity (Child, 1943; Gans, 1979; Rumbaut, 1997; Waters, 1990). Since 1965 in the United States, and 1967 in Canada, changes in immigration policy suggest that alternative assimilation patterns may exist. Whereas previous immigration policy had discouraged non-Caucasian immigration, the new policy brought with it large-scale immigration from Asia in particular which introduced a different element of race into assimilation expectations. For these new immigrants, race continues to be a marker whereby prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination produce assumptions of “foreignness” regardless of generational status (Neckerman, Carter & Lee, 1999; Tuan, 1999).

Childhood sociology as it has evolved from explicit critique of socialization sciences has developed two central concepts: “The child as (competent) actor” and the notion of “generational order.” It is above all the second concept that has not yet been fully dealt with within its sociological context. The term “generational order” is not just supposed to refer to ordered relations between (socially defined) age groups and their members, but also to a social order in general, as it is achieved by the ordered arrangement of age groups. From a historical perspective one can see that those efforts that aim at a disciplined society with small social control expenses do at the latest from the 19th century onwards concentrate on education and a well organized family and thus on a well ordered arrangement of age groups. It is an ordering process towards self-control, towards self-government as the most dense as well as discrete way of government. Until just some years ago such development appeared as an indispensable prerequisite of social order to those sociologists dealing with questions of childhood and growing up – at least as long as they assumed the perspective of socialization theory and sciences. Only the absence or deficiency of such a generational order had any chance to become an important scientific question.

In the beginning the Philosophers were the ones to school us on how to consider and treat our children. In Plato's Republic, Socrates sketched a place where the nursing and parenting of children is carried out communally (Platone, 1994, p. 172). Not much later, instead, Aristotle claimed that children belong to their own parents inasmuch as they beget them (Aristotele, 1999, pp. 345, 18–24). Much later, first Augustine, then Thomas, and later still Locke and Hobbes, Rousseau and Kant, all had a great deal to say on children and parents, as well as on children's status (Archard, 1993, Chap. 1; Blustein, 1982). The last great master who told us who children are and how they should be treated is perhaps John Stuart Mill: children are immature beings who cannot have the very same rights and liberties as adults (Mill, 1910, p. 73).

One of the most notable breakthroughs in promoting the right of children to be consulted about policies that affect them is the UNCRC (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, General Assembly of the United Nations, 1989). At the time of writing, the UNCRC has been ratified by all but two (Somalia and the USA) member states of United Nations. The Convention was ratified by the United Kingdom in 1991 and according to Daniel and Ivatts (1998, p. 16) “it is arguably the most significant development in United Kingdom policy towards children since 1945.” By ratifying the Convention, governments must take steps to ensure that they meet the standards and principles set out in the various Articles in the Convention and must provide regular reports to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child on its implementation. One of the most significant Articles is Article 12 which specifies that:State Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child (General Assembly of the United Nations, 1989).This Article has found its way into United Kingdom social policy through the introduction of the Children's Act in 1989 (this Act was extended to Northern Ireland in 1995). This provides children in care or children whose parents are going through a divorce some involvement in the decision-making process. The Children's Rights Development Unit which monitors the United Kingdom implementation of the Convention has made Article 12 the primary focus of its work (Shier, 2001). This is partly due to the reaction of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (1995) to the United Kingdom's first report. The Committee identified a number of gaps in the implementation of children's rights particularly in the area of participation rights. Indeed, children's voices remain largely absent in many areas of social policy particularly those relating to education and health (Daniel & Ivatts, 1998). As Hill and Tisdall (1997, p. 256) put it “the rhetoric of children's participation is easier and cheaper than its effective implementation.” Involving children in policy throws up all sorts of issues relating to the participation of children in the decision-making process. What does adopting a child-centred approach to children's role in decision-making entail? How do we ensure that children's views are effectively incorporated in the policy-making arena? How do we find out about the views and perceptions of children in relation to whatever issue is being debated? As Hill and Tisdall (1997) point out, involving children in social policy often gets narrowly translated to listening sympathetically to their views rather than considering them as a social group capable of influencing policy and practice. Yet organisations, which promote the rights of children, such as Save the Children, argue that more meaningful social policies will evolve from taking on board the perspectives of those who are influenced by such policies. One useful model that could be employed to ensure that children effectively participate in research linked to social policy is Hart's ladder of participation (1992). A survey of children's organisations throughout the United Kingdom in their attempts to introduce mechanisms to ensure that their policies and decisions take more account of children's opinions revealed that Hart's model played a significant role in their strategies to involve children in policy related research (Barn & Franklin, 1996). Academic researchers have also utilised Hart's ladder as a framework for advocating approaches to enhance the participation of children in the research process (Landsdown, 1995; Shier, 2001; Verhellen, 1997). The purpose of this paper is to examine the usefulness of Hart's model in involving children in social policy related research concerning the Eleven Plus system in Northern Ireland.

Although there has been much psychological research about children's sibling relations, it has been a neglected area of study in sociology (exceptions are Brannen et al., 2000; Kosonen, 1996; Mauthner, 2002). This paper, based on empirical research on siblings in Scotland, explores the nature of the generational power structure within families from children's perspectives. Childhood is a relational concept which forms part of the generational order. Alanen explains this as “a complex set of social processes through which people become (are constructed as) ‘children’ while other people become (are constructed as) ‘adults’” (2001, pp. 20, 21). Generational processes shape the nature of child-parent relations (Mayall, 2002). Alanen states that:one position (such as the parental position) cannot exist without the other (child) position; also what parenting is – that is, action in the position of a parent – is dependent on its relation to the action “performed” in the child position, and a change in one part is tied to change in the other (Alanen, 2001, p. 19).In other words, child-parent relations are based on the understanding that childhood is relational with parenthood (see also Mayall, 2002). Alanen (2001) argues that the social construction of childhood and adulthood involves a process, including the agency of both children and adults, which she refers to as a set of “practices”:It is through such practices that the two generational categories of children and adults are recurrently produced and therefore they stand in relations of connection and interaction, of interdependence (Alanen, 2001, p. 21).These practices of generationing may be “childing” practices through which people are constructed as children or “adulting” practices through which a distinct adult position is produced. The ways in which children in the present study talked about the differences between their relationships with their parents and their siblings indicated that there are a range of generationing practices that take place within families. They referred to particular kinds of behaviour that were acceptable to engage in with other children (in this case with their siblings) but not with their parents. Overwhelmingly the key issue which children highlighted as distinct between their relations with parents and siblings was the differential nature of power in these relationships. Whilst it is not surprising that children perceive the distribution of power to be more unequal between children and parents than between siblings, the aim of this paper is to explore the nature of this power and how it is experienced from children's point of view. In particular the paper discusses the ways in which children perceive child-parent relations compared with their sibling relationships in relation to the giving and receiving of power within the home.

Adolescents, because of the unique developmental stage they occupy, are particularly sensitive to their socio-cultural environment. Adolescents often define behaviors in light of prevailing attitudes, values, and norms (i.e. culture) established across primary social domains. Specifically, overarching social structures (e.g. economic, political, religious, etc.), working through the local landscape (e.g. neighborhood, school, peer networks, and family), play a vital role in shaping adolescent development and influencing psychological, behavioral, and social outcomes (Arnett & Arnett-Jensen, 1994; Greenberger et al., 2000; Grob et al., 1996; McArdle et al., 2000). For youth, definitions of normative behavior vary, yet socio-cultural context continues to be important in defining who they are and what they do. Culture defines accepted standards of behavior, lifestyles, and life chances. As such, socio-cultural influences have been particularly strong predictors of health-compromising behaviors for this population subgroup (Fitzpatrick, 1997; Fitzpatrick & LaGory, 2000; Gibbons et al., 1995; Graham et al., 1991).

What kinds of changes do mentoring programs initiate for children and their schools? According to a study by Public/Private Ventures which specializes in social policy, just under half of mentoring programs are based at a particular site (Herrera, 1999). Schools are the most common site recognized. Schools purchase the mentoring program examined in the study to follow. Adults work with children primarily on academic activities and they are paid to do so. The school pays half of the cost of the NSCC (National School and Community Corp) program and federal funds provide the remaining support. Herrera (1999, p. 11) has argued the most direct benefit of school-based programs is the mentor's integration into the school environment and the role of advocate that the mentor can play. Advocacy has been recognized as the critical task performed by mentors. As advocate, mentors develop a relationship with a child, which advances youth development and deters youth detrimental behavior (Herrera, 1999). This singular relationship, the advocate mentor and child, is challenged by research that follows. The advocate mentor recognizes a socialization model used in studying children that assumes the mentor as the active role taker shaping the child as passive recipient of mentoring. This model relies on an adult perspective, assuming the child to be an empty vessel serving as clay to be shaped (Waksler, 1994). Waksler (1994) has criticized this model, arguing that children must be taken seriously as a topic of study – not as objects of socialization. The interpretive model of childhood development by contrast is more useful for examining the data gathered in the following study. Rather than focus on the advocate mentor in relationship with a child, the interpretive model recognizes the child as actor and highlights the range of peer relationships sponsored through mentoring activities. This collective view as contrasted with the singular relationship assumes a different perspective on childhood development.

The study of war has generally been neglected in sociology, with much of the discussion focusing around military spending or the organization of the military rather than war per se. Sociologists have critiqued and investigated the military-industrial complex (Mills, 1959), investigated morale in military units (Durkheim, 1951; Stouffer & DeVinney, 1955), and studied the socialization of soldiers (Cockerham & Cohen, 1980). However, the direct examination of war has been relatively rare. When war has been examined, sociological research has focused on the causes of war, often discussing the preconditions of revolutions (Goldstone, Gurr & Moshiri, 1991; Skopol, 1979), or the reasons for military interventions by core countries in the peripheral countries of the world system (Kowalewski, 1991). Examinations of the sociological impact of war on civilian populations have been even rarer.

Only three decades ago, many demographers believed that the nuclear family – married adults and their biological children – was the modal family structure toward which all societies would rapidly converge (e.g. Goode, 1970). Indeed, during the two decades following World War II, marriage and childbearing in most Western nations tended to: (1) occur early in adulthood; (2) follow a predictable sequence; and (3) be tightly coupled. That is, young couples first married, and then quickly began having children. Over the past few decades in many Western countries, however, marriage and fertility have been increasingly delayed to later adulthood and decoupled from one another, such that the sequence and timing of partnership formation and childbearing have changed dramatically. As a result, most Western nations have experienced increasing rates of out-of-wedlock and out-of-partnership fertility and nonmarital cohabitation¹ (as well as divorce) (Goldscheider et al., 2001; Haskey, 2001; Hoem & Hoem, 1988; Kiernan, 2001; Martin & Bumpass, 1989; Murphy, 2000; Noack, 2001; Ostner, 2001; Prinz, 1995; Toulemon, 1997). The pace of change has been so swift that in the preface to the second edition of Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, Cherlin (1992, p. vii) remarks that only ten years after the publication of the first edition a more appropriate title to the book might have been Cohabitation, Marriage, Divorce, More Cohabitation, and Probably Remarriage.

Carles Alsinet is Professor of Social Psychology in the Faculty of Pedagogy and Psychology at the University of Lleida, Spain. His primary research interests are on children's rights and children's well-being.Loretta E. Bass is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at the University of Oklahoma. She focuses her research on children and stratification issues, and completes research in West Africa and the U.S. She recently completed a book, Child Labor in Sub-Saharan Africa, (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2004) which offers a window on the lives of Africa's child workers drawing on research and demographic data from 43 countries. Dr. Bass’ research has appeared in Population Research and Policy Review, Political Behavior, Anthropology of Work Review, and the International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy.Michael F. C. Bourdillon was born in Africa and has spent most of his life in Zimbabwe. He is a social anthropologist, who has taught for over 25 years in the Department of Sociology, University of Zimbabwe. He has researched and published extensively on African religion. In recent years, his focus has turned to disadvantaged children in Zimbabwe. Apart from his academic work, he has long worked with an organization supporting street children in Harare. He has also cooperated with Save the Children Alliance, facilitating the establishment of a movement of working children in that country.Doris Bühler-Niederberger is Professor in Sociology at the University of Wuppertal, Germany. Several of her recent research projects have concerned childhood as a domain of professional, moral and political interest and images of childhood and children in public and professional debates. Her teaching and research interests are mainly focused on the sociology of private life and on private strategies of production and reproduction of social status and social order.Suellen Butler is currently the College Program Head of Urban Education (URBCC) and soon will be the coordinator of the Elementary Education in Multicultural Settings (ELEDM) program at Penn State Delaware County. Dr. Butler's contribution to this volume explores the activities and practices of the National School and Community Corp (NSCC), an AMERICORP school-based mentoring program in Philadelphia. Dr. Butler examines in what ways these school-based mentoring programs impact the childhood experiences of children and their schools.Steve Carlton-Ford is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Cincinnati, and an affiliate with the Department of Sociology's Kunz Center for the Study of Work and Family. His research examines both the impact of war on children's life chances and the effect of chronic childhood illness (particularly epilepsy) on family relationships and children's well being. He currently edits Sociological Focus, the journal of the North Central Sociological Association.Ferran Casas is Senior Professor of Social Psychology in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Girona, Spain. He is Director of the Research Institute on Quality of Life. He is author of many books and articles on children's rights. His main topics of research are well-being and quality of life, children's rights and intergenerational relationships.Verna Chow has training in neuropsychology and is a researcher at the University of Calgary. Verna Chow's and Dr. Hiller's contribution to this volume stems from a mutual interest in second-generation immigrants and their adaptation to Canadian Society, which officially proclaims itself as multicultural.Laura Daniel received a FAPESP Award as a student at Sao Paulo State University (UNESP) – Marilia, for researching “Toys and Games: Childhood in the Parque das Nações Favela,” which was supervised by Dr. Ethel Volfzon Kosminsky. She is currently a Social Sciences Master's degree student at the same university in Brazil, researching children and gender.Fabio Ferrucci is an Associate Professor of Sociology of Culture and Sociology of Education at the Faculty of Human Sciences of the University of Molise (Italy). His research focuses on the family, social policy and non-profit sector. He is the author of several articles on childhood and family policies in Italy.Cristina Figuer holds a Master's in Psychology and is currently a doctoral student in the Psychology and Quality of Life Program and researcher of the Institute on Quality of Life at the University of Girona, Spain.Kevin M. Fitzpatrick is a Professor of Sociology at the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. His primary research focus is on health-compromising behavior among children and adolescents. In addition, he continues his work examining the role of environments and their impact on the mental health and well-being of homeless, youth, and other high-risk populations.Mònica González holds a Master's in Psychology and is currently a doctoral student in the Psychology and Quality of Life Program and researcher of the Institute on Quality of Life at the University of Girona, Spain.Daniela Grignoli is a Researcher at the Department of Economics, Management and Social Sciences of the University of Molise (Italy). She teaches Sociological Methodology and conducts research on children and new technologies.Mireia Gusó holds a Master's in Economics and is currently a researcher of the Institute on Quality of Life at the University of Girona, Spain.Patrick Heuveline is Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago, and Research Associate at the Population Research Center, NORC and the University of Chicago. His research centers on the family as an adaptive institution and its key role in linking macro-level changes and individual behaviors. He is currently studying the consequences of mortality change in Cambodia and in high HIV-prevalence populations in Southern Africa. In addition, he is launching an international study of the effects of the relationship between the family and the State on youth well being across Western countries.Harry H. Hiller is Professor of Sociology at the University of Calgary. His specialization is dealing with macro-level questions about Canadian Society and he is the author of Canadian Society: A Macro Analysis (Prentice-Hall, numerous editions). Dr. Hiller's and Verna Chow's contribution to this volume stems from a mutual interest in second-generation immigrants and their adaptation to Canadian Society, which officially proclaims itself as multicultural.David A. Kinney received his Ph.D. in Sociology from Indiana University-Bloomington and did post-doctoral work at the University of Chicago. He is currently Associate Professor of Sociology at Central Michigan University and an affiliate faculty member at the Center for the Ethnography of Everyday Life at the University of Michigan. In addition to being the current Co-Series Editor of the Sociological Studies of Children and Youth with Katherine Brown Rosier, his publications have appeared in Sociology of Education, Youth and Society, Personal Relationships During Adolescence (Sage), and New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development (Jossey-Bass). He is currently conducting ethnographic research with children and their parents in a study of how families manage work, home life, and children's activity involvement in a fast-paced society.Ethel Volfzon Kosminsky, Professor of Sociology at Sao Paulo State University (UNESP) – Marilia, has been a recipient of research grants from the Brazilian organization CNPq and was a Fulbright grantee in the U.S. in 1995. Chair of the Graduate Program of Social Sciences at UNESP-Marilia from 2000 to 2004, she currently leads the Center of Studies of Children and Adolescents at UNESP-Marilia, and the Network for the Study of Latin American Children and Youth.Madeleine Leonard is a Reader in Sociology at the School of Sociology and Social Policy, Queen's University, Belfast. Her research interests fall within the broad remit of the “new sociology” of childhood and she has conducted research with children on a wide range of topics including their experiences of poverty, their experiences of paid employment and their participation in domestic labor within the household. Her current research concerns Protestant and Catholic children growing up along one of the most contentious peace-lines in Belfast and the research examines children's roles as political actors in Northern Irish society.Antonio Mancini is a Junior Researcher at the Department of Economics, Management and Social Sciences of the University of Molise (Italy). He is the author of several articles on children's rights. He has also co-edited a book about the rights of the children.Hyunjoon Park is a Doctoral Candidate in Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research focuses on the process of transition to adulthood, particularly among young people in East Asia, across several dimensions including educational and occupational attainment. Currently, he is working on a dissertation project that compares the effects of family and school on educational achievement among 15-year olds in 30 countries using the PISA data. Recent publications include “Age and Self-Rated Health in Korea: A Research Note” (Social Forces, forthcoming) and “Racial/Ethnic Differences in Voluntary and Involuntary Job Mobility among Young Men” (with Gary Sandefur, Social Science Research, 2003).Bettina F. Piko, M.D., Ph.D., graduated from medical school in 1991, then started her career in the field of public health. In the meantime, she earned an M.A. degree in sociology and a Ph.D. in health psychology and behavioral sciences. Currently she is an associate professor of behavioral sciences at the University of Szeged Hungary, and her research activities embrace research topics from psychosocial youth development, substance use and problem behavior, up to psychosocial work environment, social support and societal stress.Samantha Punch is a Lecturer in Sociology in the Department of Applied Social Science at Stirling University. She recently completed a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship during which time she conducted a study of children's experiences of sibling relationships and birth order in the U.K. Prior to this, she worked with Roger Fuller, Christine Hallett and Cathy Murray on the project “Young People and Welfare: Negotiating Pathways” which explored Scottish children's problems and their coping strategies, as part of the ESRC's Children 5–16 Programme. Her doctoral research included two years of ethnographic fieldwork on rural childhoods in Bolivia where she investigated the ways in which children and young people negotiate their autonomy at home, school, work and play.Marina Rago is a Junior Researcher at the Department of Economics, Management and Social Sciences of the University of Molise (Italy). She is currently involved in research projects on the implementation of children's rights.Katherine Brown Rosier is currently Associate Professor of Sociology at Central Michigan University. She published Mothering Inner-City Children in 2000 with Rutgers University Press and is currently the Co-Series Editor of the Sociological Studies of Children and Youth with David Kinney. Other publications have appeared in The Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Human Development, The Journal of Comparative Family Studies, and several other journals and edited volumes. While continuing to write on experiences of low-income African-American children and families, she is also conducting research and writing a book with colleague Scott L. Feld on Louisiana's Covenant Marriage.Carles Rostan is Professor of Developmental Psychology in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Girona, Spain and researcher of the Institute on Quality of Life. His primary research interests are on children's development and children's rights.Marta Sadurní is Professor of Developmental Psychology in the Faculty of Education and Psychology at the University of Girona, Spain. She is researcher of the Institute on Quality of Life. Her primary research interests are on children's development and children's rights.Gary D. Sandefur is Professor of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His publications include Growing Up with a Single Parent (Harvard University Press, 1994) with Sara McLanahan, “What Happens after the High School Years among Young Persons with Disabilities,” Social Forces, 82 (2003), 803–832 with Thomas Wells and Dennis Hogan, and “Off to a Good Start? Postsecondary Education and Early Adult Life,” in Richard Settersten, Frank Furstenberg, and Ruben Rumbaut (Eds), On the Frontier of Adulthood: Theory, Research, and Public Policy, University of Chicago Press, forthcoming with Jennifer Eggerling-Boeck and Hyunjoon Park. He is currently working on quantitative and qualitative analyses of the transition to adulthood in the United States and other countries.Angelo Saporiti is Professor of Sociology at the Faculty of Economics of the University of Molise (Italy). Dr. Saporiti also teaches Social Ethics, and is the author of books and articles on children's rights. Angelo Saporiti is involved in various research international networks on childhood sociology and children's rights.Jeffrey M. Timberlake is Assistant Professor of Sociology and Research Associate at the Kunz Center for the Study of Work and Family at the University of Cincinnati. He primarily studies the causes and consequences of urban inequality, particularly race-ethnic residential segregation. Current projects include analyzing data from the 1970 to 2001 Panel Study of Income Dynamics and the 1970 to 2000 U.S. Censuses to estimate racial inequality in children's neighborhood socioeconomic status. In addition to his work with Patrick Heuveline on comparative family demography, he is also conducting several studies of race-ethnic attitudes in America.Darlene Romania Wright is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Birmingham-Southern College. Her primary research interests pertain to adolescent health-compromising behavior. Her current research is on the effects of social capital on violent behavior among secondary school students.