Watching children grow to become successful, responsible adults is most parents dream. Out of 400 million world's child population 40% of children are in India^.Recently the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 has come into force on 1st of April 2010. Every child has now a right to free and compulsory education. Many other rights to protect the children have been enforced for the betterment of the children. Despite of the adequate legislations there are still lacunas in executing child rights¹.Every child has the right to live happily and protected. The family and parents are the first line protection for the children². The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines basic rights of children covering multiple needs and issues. India is a party to the United Nations declaration on the Rights of the Child 1959. Accordingly, it adopted a National Policy on Children in 1974. The policy reaffirmed the constitutional provisions for adequate services to children, both before and after birth and through the period of growth to ensure their full physical, mental and social development^.The Plans gives special consideration to children in difficult circumstances and aims at providing a framework, for actualization of the objectives of the Convention in the Indian context. Millions of children are not fully protected. Many of them deal with violence, abuse, neglect, exploitation, exclusion and/or discrimination every day. Such violations limit their chances of surviving, growing, developing and pursuing their dreams³.The health of the future generation depends on what today’s children consume as food, medicine and tonics and what goods they use.

A survey report by UNICEF on the state of the world’s children under the title “Childhood under Threat”, speaking about India, states that millions of Indian children are equally deprived of their rights to survival, health, nutrition, education and safe drinking water. It is reported that 63 per cent of them go to bed hungry and 53 per cent suffer from chronic malnutrition³.

Each country and region has tensions between children’s rights and other competing values, all of which have implications for the wellbeing of children⁴.

This may be why Akinwumi, 2009 believes that there are various legal impediments in the practical implementation of the Act since it has been legislated in various countries as some of the provision do not agree with some cultural values⁵.One such impediment may be the awareness and attitude of parents towards the existing child’s rights.

Olumodeji, 2008 supported the view that child welfare matters should be issues of urgent concern in any society⁶.

It is yet to be known whether the efforts aimed at protecting the rights of children made by the country at both the international and domestic levels have started to have any impact. This issue could be best handled by knowing whether the parent’s are aware of the Child’s Rights? And what kind of attitude does they posses regarding the Child’s Rights? In the light of this, a research survey was designed to find out the parents awareness and attitude towards the Child’s rights.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

This was a descriptive study conducted on parents attending outpatient department of a tertiary care centre between April and May 2012. Researcher used a random number table to recruit hundred and six participants. Study criteria included the following (a) either male or female (b) willing to participate. Subjects meeting these criteria were interviewed after providing written consent.

Data Collection Instruments

Instrument used in this study included the following. :

1. Socio demographic data

Socio demographic data information collected included age, gender, education, religion, education, employment, monthly income, participation in any public awareness program related to Children’s Rights, Awareness about child help-line and source of information regarding Children’s Rights.

2. Needs Assessment Questionnaire

Researcher developed this Questionnaire based on the Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child (UDRC; United Nations, 1959) and a review of the literature. The instrument included 35 items (including negatively worded) in four dimensions: health, education, equality, and protection. This section used a 4 point (ordinal) scale rated from 0 (never) to 3 (always).There was no correct or incorrect answers. Subjects were informed that each question required a response.

The 10 items in the health needs dimension focused mainly on Convention on the rights of the child, Article 24 .which assess the child rights to a standard of living and includes food, clothing and housing (e.g safe drinking water, lighting and electricity).

The nine items in education needs dimension focused mainly on Convention on the rights of the child, Article 28 (“All children have the right to a primary education, which should be free”) and 29 (“Children’s education should develop each child’s personality, talents and abilities to the fullest”).This dimensions evaluated such educational needs as school environment helps to maintain discipline practices and eliminate physical or mental violence, abuse or neglect and encourage children to respect others, human rights and their own and other cultures.

The six items in equality needs dimension focused mainly on Convention on the rights of the child, Article 2 (“No child should be treated unfairly on any basis”) and asses the subjects’ equality rights with regard to being forced to participate in a religious rituals speak a definite language and other discriminating activities such gender discrimination⁷.

The ten items in protection needs dimension focused mainly on Convention on the rights of the child, Article 4, 16, 19, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 37. This dimensions mainly assessed the right to protection, right to privacy, right to protection from all forms of violence, child labour, drug abuse, sexual exploitation and detention and punishments.

3. Modified Children’s Right Attitude Scale by Rogers and Wrightsman, 1978.

This modified questionnaire asks for the opinions about children's rights among the subjects. The instrument was modified to suit Indian context with regard to Children’s rights while retaining the essence of questions⁷. Items 5, 6,11,12,13, 18, 23, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32, 34, 38-40 were modified. For example, the researcher modified the original question “Decisions about a child's medical treatment should be made by the child even if the child's life is at stake” to read “Decisions about a child's medical treatment should be made by parent’s in all the situations when a child is sick”. The researcher framed some more questions focusing in the dimensions of right to protection, right to privacy, right to protection from all forms of violence, child labour, drug abuse, sexual exploitation and detention and punishments and comprised a total of 170 attitude statements. A three point rating scale 1(restrictive), 2 (neutral) and 3 (permissive) was used for rating. Restrictive attitude means parent’s are least bothered about the Children's Rights, neutral attitude means parent’s either welcome or nor bother about Children's Rights and permissive attitude means parent’s are very concern and they step forward to know about the Children's Rights. The above mentioned instruments were developed in the English language, as study was undertaken at a tertiary care center where people from different cultures, languages and traditions come for the treatment and represent their communities. Hence, researchers decided to administer the structured questionnaire in a face- to- face interview format.

Instrument Validity and Reliability

Nine experts from diverse fields including nursing, pediatrics, child psychology, Child Rights Activists and statistics validated the tool. A revised version was modified to incorporate the experts’ suggestions. A test retest method assessed reliability. The researcher administered the instrument on 16 parents in similar settings over a two week period and found the study feasible with necessary modifications. The reliability coefficient for the final version of the structured questionnaire was established and found to be r =0.96.

The primary author used face-to-face interviews conducted in a private room at the tertiary care center outpatient department with approximately 45 minutes required to complete each questionnaire. After the data collection the researchers conducted group education sessions for family members on Children’s Rights. The researchers felt that educating the parents and family members may help in protecting children’s rights.

Ethical Consideration

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the ethics committee of the concern hospital. Written consent was obtained from the participants and they were given freedom to quit the study. Participants’ confidentially was respected.

Statistical Analysis

Responses of the negatively coded items were reversed before data analysis. The data were analyzed using SPSS Version 16 and the results were presented in narratives and tables. Descriptive (frequency and percentage) and inferential statistics were used to interpret the data. Categories with insufficient numbers were combined when performing chi-square analysis.

RESULTS:

Section -I Demographic characteristics

The samples comprised 106 parents, of whom 36.79% subjects belonged to the age group of 30-40 years, 80.91% of them were females. Most of the subjects (94.33%) were Hindus and 0.94% were Christians. Slightly more than half (74.52%) of the subjects had higher secondary education while 5.66% had secondary education and 48.12% had primary education. Similarly, majority (83.01%) of the subjects were employed. 38.68% subjects belonged to above poverty line (In the present study, as per the hospital policy, where the present study was conducted, Below Poverty Line (BPL) was considered, when the participants family source of income was below 1700Rs/month (approximately 37$ per month) and above that is considered as Above Poverty Line (APL). This criterion goes per with World Bank poverty estimate). A larger number subjects (93.40%) had never participated in any knowledge program regarding children’s rights and 91.51% of the subjects had no experience related to children’s rights issues. Majority of the subjects (96.22 %) were unaware about child help-line.46.22% subjects had mentioned newspaper as the source of information regarding Children’s Rights

Table -1 Frequency and Percentage distribution of Overall level of Knowledge of Parent’s regarding Children’s Rights.

n =106

Level of Knowledge

Range of score

Frequency

Percentage

Poor

Average

Good

1 - 11

12 - 23

24 - 35

00.94

81.14

17.92

Table -2 Frequency and Percentage distribution of overall Attitude of Parent’s regarding Children’s Rights. n =106

Level of Knowledge

Range of score

Frequency

Percentage

Restrictive

Neutral

Permissive

1 - 57

58 - 113

114 - 170

Nil

69.81

30.19

Table 1and 2 shows overall knowledge and attitude responses to health, education, equality, and protection needs dimensions of the needs assessment questionnaire revealed that majority of the parents (81.14%) had average knowledge in all the dimensions regarding Children’s Rights, where 17.92% of the parent’s had good knowledge and 00.94% had poor knowledge regarding Children’s Rights. And study revealed that majority of the parent’s (69.81%) had neutral attitude regarding Children's Rights followed by 30.19% had permissive attitude and none of the parent’s were having restrictive attitude regarding Children's Rights.

The coefficient of correlation among overall scores of knowledge and attitude was found to be statistically significant and the correlation was found to be r = 0.50 at p < 0.05, indicating positive relationship between knowledge and attitudes of parent’s regarding Children's Rights.

Further the association of the overall knowledge and attitude scores of parent’s with selected variables was determined, a statistically significant association was found between men and women (χ²= 9.65, p < 0.05), on the statement “Children should have the right to quality child care” (χ²= 10.66, p < 0.05) .

The findings also revealed that more above median as compared to females, which indicates that the males have better knowledge than females regarding Children's Rights. Attitude level was also found to be significantly associated with gender (χ²= 10.66, p < 0.05), where males score higher than females. And none of the other sample characteristics were significantly associated.

DISCUSSION:

This study examines the knowledge and attitude of parents on children’s rights and correlates the findings. The present study also has certain limitations such as the study was restricted to the parent’s who attended outpatient department at a tertiary care centre and smaller sample size made it difficult to generalize the findings.Prospective longitudinal research is vital to examine the awareness of children's rights.Future research should focus on larger sample size and qualitative approach for depth understanding of children's rights issues. Despite these limitations, our study also has several strengths such as creating awareness among the parent’s and their relatives regarding children's rights. Further, it contains interesting findings from developing countries perspective, which will be of use to both researchers and clinicians.

This study found that 81.14% of parent’s had average knowledge regarding children’s rights but at the same time majority of the parent’s had neutral attitude towards children's rights. This could be that they have heard about the Act but have not really known the contents of the Act. It is interesting to know that 80.91% of the study participants were females and it reflects on the knowledge and attitude scores. This could be because in Indian society men are more likely to face the community than women when exercising social rights. In developing countries like India, it is critical to examine factors that prevent women from accessing children’s rights. For instance women may be unable to take a decision related to her child care because her in-laws and husband make most of the child rearing decisions and forbid her to involve in her child care activities directly. Findings from a recent study conducted by Deb, Sibnath Mathews and Ben, 2012, concurred with these findings⁸. And it is also noted that in previous studies fathers had slightly more knowledge than the mothers⁸.In this study except gender other socio demographic data such as age, education, religion, education, employment, monthly income, participation in any public awareness program related to Children’s Rights, Awareness about child help-line and source of information regarding Children’s Rights had no significant difference and association with the study findings. But a positive correlation was found between knowledge (mean = 20.92, SD = 3.37) and attitude (mean =107.77, SD =10.10) scores of parent’s regarding children's rights. Thus it could be concluded that the attitude of parent’s towards Children's Rights changes with increase in knowledge.

Pais and Bissell (2006) opined that development of effective coordinating mechanisms to promote concerted effort by relevant government bodies is very important. They also emphasized the need for greater coordination across ministries and between levels of government if the knowledge and awareness of Child Rights Act is to be achieved at the grass roots⁹. In support of the above idea Akinwumi, 2009 said that the failure to create awareness and implement the Child’s Rights Act effectively and to curb the violation of child rights can be traced to the failure of a country to educate her citizens on human rights generally and child rights specifically¹⁰.

CONCLUSION:

Although this is a small-scale study with severe limitations with regard to generalization of the findings, it is nevertheless useful, as starting point in the discourse to help parents to gain adequate knowledge and attitude towards Child’s Rights Act. Although knowledge and attitude of children's rights are increasing around the world but still there is much more rhetoric paid to their value than genuine enforcement especially in developing countries like India. Therefore a lot still needs to be done so that we do not just pay lip service to the implementation of the Act. Currently this appears to be the case because according to reports there appears to be insignificant difference on the lives of the children in the various states before and after the passage of the bill as against the highly anticipated gains that motivated the introduction of the Act. As primary health care providers in the community, nurses are in good position to help and advocate on Child’s Rights at both family and community levels.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST:

The authors report no conflicts of interest in designing, researching or drafting this article. The authors alone are responsible for the content and presentation. Other parts of the associated thesis are under review for publication in other journals.

AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION:

Data was collected by Primary author. All authors made a substantial contribution to conception and design of the study and were involved in drafting and reviewing the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

The authors thank the participants for their valuable contributions and the blind reviewers for their constructive suggestions.

REFERENCES:

1. Prathiksa Sharma. All India education Survey: Available from URL:http://www.smile india.com/ volumes ands and issues/ 2002/vol-5-issue-2.

2. Carl M. Rogers and Lawrence S. Wrightsman Nurturance or self-determination? Journal of Social Issues. 34(2); 1978:59-67.

3. Carolyn Barratt, Nand. Criminal and Penal Law Procedure. UNICEF, India.2010.

4. Reading R, Bissell S, Goldhagen J, Harwin J, Masson J, Moynihan S, Parton N, Pais MS, Thoburn J. Promotion of children’s rights and prevention of child maltreatment. Lancet. 2009:332–343.

5. Akinwumi OS. Legal impediments on the practical implementation of the Child Right Act 2009. Int. J. Legal Information.37 (3); 2009:16-20.

6. Olumodeji EO. Theoretical issues in Child's Rights. Journal of social issues. 21(4); 2008: 41-49.

7. Rogers, C. M., and Wrightsman, L. S. Attitudes toward children's rights. Children andSociety, Spain.1978.

8. Deb, Sibnath; Mathews, Ben. Child Rights and Parental attitude. The International Journal of Children's Rights. 20(2); 2012: 241-264.

9. Pais MS, Bissell S. Overview and implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Lancet.2006: 689–690.

10. Akinwumi OS. Legal impediments on the practical implementation of the Child Right Act 2009. Int. J. Legal Information.37 (3); 2009:16-20.

Received on 20.02.2013 Modified on 22.03.2013

Asian J. Nur. Edu. and Research 3(2): April.-June 2013; Page 56-60