Summary

Children and Youth

Thursday March 27, 2003 - Breakout

Ottawa research consultant Louise Hanvey discussed the work done so far to measure inclusion and exclusion for children and youth. She argued that future research should:

• Work on the dynamic aspect of inclusion, recognizing that it is a process;
• Focus on a developmental analysis, seeing children in terms of their developmental uniqueness;
• Continue to study young people who are particularly marginalized; and,
• Listen to young people.

Provocateur Katherine Scott of CCSD said it is startling how few analyses listen to the voices of children and youth, adding that the work being done in this area is largely marginalized. “Although it sounds like a reasonable and logical place to start, it’s never the place that we start.”

As an example of a successful research process that was all about the social inclusion of children, she discussed an organization based in County Durham, England, which began by asking children what the relevant issues were for them. The group helped the youth to develop their own research process and engage with local decision-makers. A group of youth was able to research and advocate for a change to local municipal transportation policy, securing funding and a policy amendment to create a concessionary fares system for young people. Other work included developing recreational space and addressing issues of discrimination against young people. Scott said this is a good example of what social inclusion research looks like on the ground.

Participants discussed some of the issues related to children and youth, noting that:

• There is a lot of research already in hand. A key question is how to connect it to the policy process, and to the process of setting an agenda for future research.

• There is a lack of basic data for research on social inclusion.

• Multifaceted, multidisciplinary approaches are needed to complement work done using singular methodologies.

• There is a need for community development, not just research. Organizations operating at the community level have to “twist themselves out of shape” to get funding for projects that focus on the need for community development.

• A number of organizations focus on the issue of the “democratic deficit.” However, youth committees and youth cabinets do not seem representative of all groups and don’t seem to influence government.

• The concept of childhood is a cultural construct that must be critiqued. Many children play an adult role in relation to their parents. Children play caregiver roles and protect their parents from the realities of their experiences. They should be asked how they see themselves, and the distinction between “good” and “bad” kids should be broken down.

• Adults often do not want to hear about the harsher realities of children’s lives and respond with hostility. Organizations should be careful not to create a new vulnerability by exposing these realities.

• In Manitoba, First Nations have engaged in participatory action research. It would be useful to explore ways in which organizations like CCSD and Laidlaw can partner with First Nations organizations in undertaking research. Also, researchers should consider how research is undertaken, and work towards employing Indigenous methodologies.

• For policy people, it would be helpful if information on research analysis was coupled with practical information on innovative approaches used to address the issues. Research organizations could also help policy-makers by developing knowledge management systems that would help them find information more easily.

• A lot of research is being generated by the Aboriginal community, but there is no effective system of archival management. It is crucial to keep track of the work being done.

• Language is always an issue: people have different assumptions about the meanings of words, and need to ensure that they share a common understanding of terms.

• One challenge is for NGOs to come up with innovative proposals that will reach children and parents. There needs to be a way to demystify the process of social inclusion so that people can easily be engaged at their level.

• Little is known about whether children who are excluded grow up to be adults who are excluded—and if not, about the factors and interventions that might make a difference.

• Children dealing with attention deficit issues cannot get access to services without being diagnosed and going through psychiatric services. A child who is diagnosed is often excluded from the normal school developmental context. “The system is structured based on labels, and you don’t get service unless you have the label. This excludes the child in order to include the child.”

• Recreation is a public good, but there is little public investment to ensure access. Recreation can also be seen as a method of social control. A good part of Canada’s national sports policy (which supports excellence) is about winners and losers, which is not inclusive.

• Is social inclusion the right way to proceed? Is it the right approach politically? These are two different questions.

• Good work has been done on social and economic inclusion at the conceptual level, but not on how to operationalize the knowledge. These conversations could have taken place four years ago under the rubric of the social determinants of health. Now, the question is how to build on the work done and turn the corner. An immediate challenge is to move toward concrete solutions, along the lines of safe community spaces for informal recreation and interaction.

• Sometimes you don’t need innovative approaches—sometimes a situation calls for a conservative solution, like ensuring that people have enough money. In designing a research agenda, it would be helpful to acknowledge that “some things are known.” The problem is not the lack of research, but the lack of social policy. Work should be done to differentiate between areas of research that need refinement and those where substantial work needs to be done.

• There might be opportunities to examine inclusion within groups that are excluded from the larger society, such as the Special Olympics.

• “The reality is that it’s going to cost billions and billions of dollars to create a more inclusive society, and therefore it is about structural change.”

Back to Reporting

For more information about the conference, contact:
 
Sarah Zgraggen
The Willow Group
Tel: (613) 722-8796;
Fax: (613) 729-6206;
e-mail: szgraggen@thewillowgroup.com