INSTITUTIONALIZED CHILD CARE IN URBAN SOUTH AFRICA

“We prefer to take in the children who are younger,” mentioned Pastor Mike. “At
that age, we have more of a chance to intervene with the traumas that they face. It
becomes a bigger challenge to do that once they’re older, and then that may invite the
risk of a child who is a danger to the others. We aren’t a center that is particularly
equipped to handle that. Of course, this is simply a preference and not a policy. Each case
is different, and I wouldn’t want to do things like divide siblings if I have the choice.”
This is one outlook of Pastor Mike’s that differs from many conventions common in
Western approaches to institutionalized care. His offering of institutionalized care affords
an opportunity to work with kids prior to the manifestation of oppositional behavior,
instead of as a last resort after such behaviors have been established, as is the case in
U.S.-based residential care..
The preference was consistent with Pastor Mike’s concern, particularly with the
amount of children under the care of the center. A setting that houses fifty children does
not serve as an especially ideal place to handle more intensive traumas of children later in
life.
Within the context of this center, early childhood acts as a useful lens in
understanding the implications of a traumatic past, a trait shared to some extent by
virtually all of the children at the center. I employed a variety of tactics to learn more–
interviews with the care center’s staff, in particular, Pastor Mike and the center’s social
worker Nancy Mudau who tend to be the most involved with the initial intake of new
children. I also asked some of the older youth, including ones who had aged out of the
center, for their perspectives on their early early years.
Some of my most valuable insights ultimately came from the youngest children
75