house, street and global society

8/17/2019 House, Street and Global Society

1/15

THE

HOUSE

THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY:

LATIN AMERICAN

FAMILIES

AND CHILDHOOD

IN

THE

TWENTY-FIRST

CENTURY

By

Elizabeth A.

Kuznesof

University

of

Kansas

Since

the colonial

period (1492

to approximately

1826),

children

have consti-

tuted a large

proportion

of

the

population

of

Latin

America,

with

approximately

thirty to fifty

percent

under

age

twenty in the

eighteenth

century. Public

health

campaigns

in the early twentieth

century improved

child

survival rates

and

re-

sulted

in

the

substantial

expansion of

the

proportion

under

age twenty

by

the

1960s.

While

birthrates

have

declined

since

the

9

8

0's

the proportion

of

youth

in Latin America

continues

to exceed

fifty

percent'.

It isnot

surprising

that

chil-

dren

and

adolescents are vital

to

the work

force today,

nor that education

is a

daunting

public burden

all over Latin

America.

Nevertheless, and

in

spite

of

the

fact

that the

family in Latin

America

is con-

sidered

to be of

extreme importance historically

and

in

the present,

children

and

childhood

in Latin

America

have been

notably

absent

from

the

literature.

One

possible explanation

for

the

neglect of childhood

as

a topic

by

Latin American

historians

is

that

colonial Spanish and

Portuguese

law

codes

determined

that

the

care and nurturing of children

were private

functions, and

fell into the

corporate

sphere

of the family.

As a

result,

children

that

appear in historical

documents

were

seldom members of

legitimate

families; most

often they

were children

of

the

popular

classes. Thus,

scholars have

normally discussed

abandoned

and

orphaned

children, children

enlisted

in military

service,

children

thrust into

in-

stitutionalized

workshops

as

apprentices or

caught up in

the criminal

justice

system.

Other

topics

include prescriptive ideas

about children's

upbringing,

and

discussions

of

laws

relating

to

children.

In the nineteenth

and early

twentieth

century

scholars, legislators

and

politicians were also

preoccupied by the

lev-

els

of

infant

and child mortality, child labor, juvenile delinquency, and

issues

related

to public education.

From a historical

and

legal

perspective, the

family in Latin America

is

rep-

resented

consistently

as the fundamental

unit

of

society, and as

an institution

that

is

essentially

patriarchal,

based

on

a system

of monogamous

marriage, and

focused on reproduction.

This

vision isretained

from the sixteenth

to

the

twen-

tieth century

in spite

of the

remarkable diversity

in

family

and household

forms

that existed

in

Latin

America over

time.

The

family

as constructed

through

law

can

be seen

as

the

codification

of an elite

world vision,

concerned

with

the

le-

gality

of

family ties,

with

the

legal

definition of marital and paternal

power,

the

legitimacy

of

offspring, and the

regulation of

family wealth.


2/15

rates

ranged

from

a low

of one to two percent

in

seventeenth-century England

to a

high

of five

to

nine percent

in nineteenth-century

France. In

Latin Amer-

ica, on the

other

hand, out-of-wedlock

births

accounted

for

between

30 and

60

percent

of births

in

most countries between

the sixteenth

and the end of

the

nineteenth centuries.

2

Thus most

children have been

defined

as

in

some

sense

marginal,

and

in

need of social

control by

some

institution.

In a classic

work on

world

patterns in

kinship

W. J. Goode

argued

that ...

wherever

the

economic

system

expands through

industrialization,

family

pat-

terns change.

Extended

kinship

ties

weaken,

lineage

patterns

dissolve, and

a

trend towards

some form

of

the

conjugal

system generally

begins

to appear-

that

is,

the nuclear

family

becomes a

more independent

kinship

unit. ' Goode

referred

to

the conjugal

system both

as an

ideal-something

people

regard

as appropriate

and right-as well

as a reality, something

that is empirically ob-

served.

This vision of weakening kinship

with

global

expansion has

been

con-

tested by

Latin

American scholars from

the humanities

to the

social sciences.

In

the case of

Latin America

it

seems clear that kinship

continues

to be a

central

mode

of

social

interaction and

individual

adaptation to

factors

of modem

life

that might

otherwise

lead to

alienation.

In

this paper

I will

argue

that the

family as

an

institution

in

Latin

America

has

always been vital.

Aggregate

statistical

analysis

fails

to

measure

the adaptive

power of

the family and

kinship to

globalization,

thus putting

many conclusions

based on

such analysis

in doubt

for Latin

America.

Children in

Latin

America

continue

to

utilize

kinship and

family

relations in creative and adaptive

ways

even as they interact

ever

more

strongly

with

the globalized economy.

Global-

ization in Latin

America

also

includes

neoliberalism

and

free trade,

which has

exacerbated

an already

extremely unequal

distribution

of

income.

One

impor-

tant

characteristic

of

that

distribution

is

that

kinship

relations have increasingly

become

segregated

within particular

socio-economic

groups

rather

than

being

distributed

across these

groups

as was the

case historically

until

the twentieth

century.

What

is

the

connection

between

globalization

and

childhood in

Latin

Amer-

ica?

Globalization has

produced

a common vision

of what

the experience

of

childhood should

be,

and what children should

do,

a

kind of

global

morality.

This vision

generally

suggests

that children

should

be protected

from

harsh

knowledge

or experiences,

should

play

and

go

to

school.

International hu-

man

rights

groups

have

actively

protested

that children

have

the

right

to

a

certain experience

of childhood,

a

vision created

from

the

specific

cultural

ex-

perience

of the

US and Western

Europe.

However,

this global

notion really

constitutes an elite

vision, and

does not

coincide

with what

the

experience

of

childhood

has been

in Latin

America,

or

what it

can be

in

practical

terms. Perhaps this

vision

has created

a sense

of

childhood deprivation

among

Latin

American children,

the

sense of a

child-

hood which

was

never

possible

for most

children.

In Latin

America

family

and

sometimes

the only

institutions

86

journal

of

social

history

summer

2 5


3/15

THE HOUSE, THE STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

The

dichotomy

between the

public

and the

private or

the

corporate view

of

the family as an autonomous

political

realm

has been eloquently described by

Roberto

da

Matta as the realms of the

house and

the

street. These

realms de-

scribe

the

geography

of

honor

and

morality

in

Brazil

and in Latin America.

The

house

is associated

with

family,

honor,

order, marriage,

safety, private

power and

cleanliness.

The street symbolizes

anarchy, vagrancy, disorder, danger,

disgrace,

illegitimacy

and vulnerability to

the

vagaries

of impersonal

public

authority.

In

general

it can be said that an

association

with the street is a threat to

family

honor,

the cornerstone of

order

in Brazilian law.

The

house

is

also

especially

associated

with

the

honest

or good woman and

mother and

the

protection of

children within the

family

4

. Global society and

its

incursions

into

the realm of

private

affairs

thus intrinsically

would seem to threaten the family. At

the

same

time it can be

argued

that

for

many popular

families

in

Latin America

the

family

and kinship have also

come to occupy

the street, even as

they

grapple with

the

consequences of

globalization.

It also

seems important to distinguish

the relationship

of

kinship to child-

hood

and

globalization

from

the

history

of good

mothering.

5

Shorter claimed

that Good mothering is

an invention

of

modernization. In traditional society,

mothers viewed the development and

happiness

of

infants

younger

than

two

with

indifference. In modern society,

they

place the welfare of

their

small

chil-

dren above all else.

6

There are serious problems

with

this

interpretation, bu t

more

importantly, I

consider

it better

not to engage

the

question of

parental

in-

difference

to children in this paper. Nancy Scheper-Hughes

book:

Death

Without

Weeping:

The iolence

of Everyday Life in Brazil

eloquently

discusses the context

of

grinding

poverty

and government neglect

of

desperate social

problems that

explains attitudes taken by

mothers in modem-day

Brazil.

7

The

question I wish

to engage

is

the question

of

the continued

importance

or

decline of

the

kinship

system

as

an

important basis for

social relationships and

creation of life opportu-

nities for

children in the context

of increasingly

globalized societies in

modem

Latin America. I am

less interested in looking

at

sentiments

than

I am

at

the

functionality of family

and kinship for children.

As a historian I also want to point out that globalization

is to

some

degree

an expansion and acceleration

of a process

that has

been going

on

world-wide

since

about the

thirteenth

century

with the commercial revolution.

However,

the process which

involves

growing interconnectedness in

economic, cultural

and

political

life affects

people in different parts of

the

world

at different times.

I. The

Family and

Kinship in

Latin America:

The

centrality of the

family

and kinship

to

Latin

American culture and so-

ciety

is generally

recognized by scholars and non-scholars

alike.

Manuel Car-

los

and

Lois

Sellers

in

a classic

article

affirmed:

The

importance of

familial

networks

of

nuclear and extended

kin

in

providing support

to the individual's

86


4/15

speaking

of

twentieth-century

Brazil,

argued

that

For

a

great many

contempo-

rary

religious

authorities

as

well

as

political

and professional

elites,

the

relation-

ship

was simple

... the

family

[was]

the basis

of the

nation.

9

Comment on

the

relationship of

the

elite

family

and elite

family

networks to

political structure

and

control

of

economic

resources

in

non-scholarly

publications

constituted

an

important

political

and

literary

theme in

several

Latin American

countries

from

the time

such

publications

began

to appear.

In

the

eighteenth

and

nineteenth

centuries

this preoccupation

was best

expressed

by the

enormous

production

of

genealogies

and

family

histories.

In

religious

and

legal terms

the Latin

American

family

system

was

primarily

based

on European

categories.

Kinship was

bilateral, with

kin

counted

from

both

the

maternal

and

paternal

sides.

It

was also

widely

extended,

with

kinship recog-

nized

to the

seventh

or tenth

degree.

Ritual

kinship (compadrio)

has

substantial

importance

both

for recognition

of reciprocal

obligations

and

as

a category

that

required

church

dispensation

for marriage

to

take

place.

It

could

also be

used

to

reinforce

a kin relationship,

or

to formalize

a

patron-client

relationship

and

was

highly

significant

as

a

means

of

expanding

the

kindred

on

an

interclass

basis.1

0

The

first

major academic

influence

in

Latin American

family

history

was

Gilberto

Freyre's

1933

depiction

of

the

large

extended

family with

slaves and

de-

pendents

situated on

a

self-sufficient

sugar plantation

in sixteenth-century

Per-

nambuco,

Brazil.

This

vivid

portrait made

it

clear

the Portuguese

family

was the

dominant

institution

in

Brazil

for colonization,

government,

education,

main-

tenance of

order and economic

investment.

Freyre's

emphasis

on

the

childhood

experiences

of

slave

and

free children

on the

plantation

gained

little

attention

from

scholars

until

recently.

Freyre's

discussion

raised

questions

in

areas perti-

nent

for

a

history of

childhood

and globalization.

Some

of

these

are the

areas

of

private

vs. public

power

and implications

of race

for

family

relations.

A paral-

lel

focus on

kinship

for

indigenous

families

among

anthropologists

in the

1930s

through

1950s

resulted

in

community

studies

of

traditional

peasant

villages

in

Latin

America.

12

Several

of

these forecast

a

decline

in kinship

as

a

factor

in

social

relations

with the

advance

of modernization.

II

History

of Childhood

in

Latin

America:

The

very

definition

of

childhood

in Latin

America

evolved

over

time

through

a

continuous

dialogue

concerning

the

duties

and

responsibilities

of

parents

and

children

toward

each

other,

and the

responsibilities

of

the

State

toward

chil-

dren.

13

In the

colonial

period

the parent/child

relationship

was seen

as

an

aspect

of the

corporate

family,

embedded

in

the

patriarchal

property

rights

of

legally

constituted

families.

At that

time

focus

was

on the

parental

obligations

of

early

childhood

up to

age

seven,

the

age

of

reason.

The

first

period

from

birth

to age

three

was

designated infancy and distinguished

by

the

child being sustained by

human

milk,

either

from

the

mother

or

a wet

nurse.

Children

were generally

left

862

journal

of social

history

summer 2005


5/15

THE HOUSE, THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

whether the child was of legitimate or illegitimate birth. The father had the legal

right

ofpatriapotestad,

which

included the obligations

to feed, clothe, discipline,

educate, select

occupations, and sanction the

marital

plans

of children. In re-

turn,

children

were

to

obey

parents

and

work

without

wages.

In

order to

have

a legal heir,

fathers

had to acknowledge

paternity;

otherwise the single

mother

had

to

support

children

alone, though mothers were denied

the

legal

rights of

p tri

potestad. Fathers

who felt little obligation to children

existed

at

all

levels.

During the

colonial

period

orphaned

children

were usually

the responsibility of

grandparents

or

their

parents' siblings.

Abandoned

children, estimated between

ten and

twenty-five

percent of births in the eighteenth

century,

were

also cared

for by

families.

From

age seven the child

was

seen

as having reason and

as morally responsi-

ble

for his or her acts. The child

was required to

study,

work, confess and follow

the rituals of

Catholicism. Girls

were

expected to be

modest.

At age seven the

little boy

could go

to

primary school or

work for a salary in somebody's house

while he

learned

a skill or profession. The

little girl at that age began to help with

domestic tasks,

learn

to sew and do

embroidery, and very rarely might learn to

read and write

by

a cleric

or

teacher.

Until

age

ten children could

not

be

legally

punished for

crimes. Families

assumed

any penalties

for crime. After

age ten

girls and boys had to sleep separately.

According to colonial law, girls could be

married at twelve; boys at fourteen.

After age

seven a

child's

labor

was

believed to have

value,

and judges empha-

sized

the

rights

of an

orphaned child

from

age

seven to receive

a salary

from

a

tutor, and not to

be

exploited for free labor. However, there

was no real discus-

sion about what

kind

of work was appropriate for that

age,

or how many hours

the

child should work. In

the eighteenth century

the

state

began

to exert

influ-

ence

as levels of

child abandonment grew.

In the nineteenth

century mothers

began to argue

for

child

custody and to be awarded p tri potestad,

usually with

little

success.

In

the late

eighteenth

and early

nineteenth

centuries

we see the emergence

of

an

ethic

of protection of

children,

including adolescents, with an emphasis

on their

fragility and assumed

innocence,

as well as the

importance

of

educa-

tion.

Early

nineteenth-century

governments began to assist

abandoned

children

through orphanages

and poor houses, though

many beneficent

societies were as-

sociated with

the Catholic Church or lay brotherhoods. In

Mexico, families in

hard

times

would sometimes

abandon

a child

for some weeks or

months at

an orphanage, and then

reclaim

the

child

when the family had more resources.

For older

children,

orphanages

often functioned

as workhouses

where

children

remained

until

they

were

sent out

for

foster

care,

often

as

servants.

14

The concept of

adolescence

and

a specific notion of

how

children ages

twelve

through

nineteen

should

be

treated

were linked to the

dramatic

economic

and

social

developments in late

nineteenth

century

Latin

America.

These

devel-

opments

extended

life expectancy and created

expanded

employment

oppor-

863


6/15

nal

consciousness

intent on the

prevention and punishment

of

crime.

An

ideol-

ogy focused

on

children's

protection

was transformed

into

a

preoccupation

with

order

and social

control. Nineteenth-century

legislation

very

often targeted

the

social

control of

abandoned or orphaned

children,

since unruly vagrant

youths

were seen

as

potentially dangerous

to

society. In

Brazil,

the

child

began

to be

referred

to

as a minor,

with

the

latter term carrying

an implication

of

danger

and a tendency

toward

crime. The

Brazilian

Criminal

Code of

1830

determined

that a

child

between seven

and

fourteen could

be sent

to jail

if

the

judge

deter-

mined

that

the child

understood his

or her

crime. Otherwise

the

child was

sent

to

a

juvenile

correction

house

to age seventeen.

Similarly,

the

Criminal

Code

of

1890

emphasized

responsibility

as

related

to a consciousness

of

duty, right

and

wrong,

and the ability

to

appreciate

the

consequences

of

acts. This

kind

of

emphasis

implicitly

argued that

schooling

rather than

age

determined

the level

of

a child's responsibility.

Until

the first

decades

of the

twentieth

century

the

definition

of education

was essentially

identical

with that of

work .

Much

education

took

the

form

of apprenticeship

or

some

kind

of

specific

job.

For

adolescents

in the

lower

classes

this

education was

often provided

through

a

kind of child-circulation,

in which young

people

from

poorer families

were

sent

to

serve in

the homes

or businesses

of more

elite families.

By the

early

twenti-

eth century

efforts

were made

to limit

the

types and hours

of

labor for

children

under

fourteen,

and

to specifically

reinforce formal

education

for

children.

The

1890 code

in

Brazil

specified

that

children

under

nine were

mentally

incapable

of criminal behavior; those between

nine

and fourteen could be jailed

if

they

understood

their

crime.

High

child

mortality

in

the

late nineteenth

and

early twentieth

centuries

helped

to

return

the

discussion

somewhat

to

questions

of

child

protection,

though

the

criminal

potential

of unruly

children

continued

to

preoccupy

ju-

rists.

Legislators

refocused

on

childhood

as

the

key to the

future .

Intellectuals

spoke

of

investing

in children,

and

argued

that society

was

protected

through

the

protection

of

children.

Nevertheless,

in Brazil

and

Chile,

special

juvenile

justice

systems

were created

in

the 1920's

to

deal

with

minors.

Although

legislators wished

to rehabilitate

delinquent children,

they did

not

make education

a

priority because they

saw

education

as

a

dangerous

weapon.

It

was recognized

that education

was

an

an-

tidote

for criminality;

a

minimal

education

was desirable

to make

minors

into

useful

workers.

Legislators

debated

the challenge

of how

to

create

an

educated

population

that would

also

be

docile

and

hardworking.

Because

the laws

focused

on

marginal

children,

legislators

did

not

consider

developing

a national

policy

of

quality

education

accessible

to

all.

Children

continued

at

the

margins

in

terms

of

social policy,

still seen

as a threat to law

and order.

Mandatory

schooling

for

children

ages

seven to

fourteen

was

instituted

in

most

of Latin

America in

the

first

decades

of

the twentieth

century,

though

so-

cial control

of

an otherwise

disruptive

population

was

a

major

incentive.

In

addi-

journal

of social history

summer 5

8


7/15

THE

HOUSE,

THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

strategies.

Observers

in

several

Latin

American

countries

argue

that

childhood

as

a stage

of

life

is denied

to

a

large

proportion

of

their children;

however,

it

might

be more

accurate

to say

that

the

childhood

experienced

by poor children

is

distinct

from

that

of the

elite.

Two measures

since

the

return to

civilian

rule

in Brazil

have changed

at least

the rhetoric

of

Brazil's

approach

to

children.

Brazil's

1988

constitution

specifi-

cally

guarantees

the protection

of child

and adolescent

rights in article

227.

In

addition

the Child

and

Adolescent

Statute

of 1990

replaced

the

previous ju-

venile

criminal

code

(Codigo

de

Menores)

to specify

that

children's

rights to

a dignified

life

should

be upheld.

In philosophical

terms this

would

imply

that

children

had

ceased to be

viewed

as

a danger

to society

and

the object

of state

intervention,

and

instead

would

be seen

as subjects

and

citizens

with

rights

to

be

defended.

15

II

Latin

American

family

and

kinship

system

is

adaptable

and

continues

strong even

with

globalization:

The

forcefulness

of

family

and kinship

relations

in Latin

America

cannot

be

measured

by ordinary

statistical

means. While

focus

on studies

of the

US

and

Europe

led

researchers

to anticipate

the

decline

of the

family

and kinship

in

the

Latin

American

context

with

modernization,

scholars

beginning

in

the

19

5

0s

have

actually

found

the opposite.

Historical

data on

the

Latin American

family

and kinship

system testify

to its

ability to adapt

to

circumstances.

For

example,

in

spite

of the extended

kinship

networks

and

recognition

of family

ties for

a broad

group

of individuals,

analy-

sis

of

household

data from

censuses

of

the eighteenth

and nineteenth

centuries

clearly

demonstrate

that the

average household

in

Latin America

was small

and

predominantly

nuclear

in

nature.

16

Furthermore

the

data

indicate

that the

ex-

pansion

of

the

urban

market

resulted

in an

increase

in household

size

as well

as

important changes

in household

composition

based

on

productive

needs.

17

For

example

a substantial

expansion

in

the

category

of agregado,

or

added

on

dependent

members,

in

urban

Sao

Paulo

households

from

4.7 percent

in

1765

to

26

percent in

1836

indicates

the

adaptability of

the

household and kinship

network

to

increasing

commercialization.

1 8

In the

eighteenth

century

the

aver-

age

age of

agregados

was under

10 years,

whereas

by

1802

the age

composition

was

overwhelmingly

between

the

ages of 11

and 29.

Oscar Lewis

was one

of the

first

to

observe that

aggregate

date

concealed

the

importance

of

the

family

as a building

unit between

the individual

and society,

and

to

begin to

investigate

the

strength

of

the

Mexican

family

under

conditions

of

change.1

9

Charles

Wagley

similarly

concluded

that

There

is a

growing

body

of evidence

that

kinship

relations

and

awareness

of kinship

need

not

disappear

with

industrialization

and

urbanization

there

is every

reason

to

believe that,

especially

in those

cultures

where the

tradition

of familism

has

been

strong,

such

as Brazil

and

other

countries

of

Latin America,

kinship

will

continue

to play

an

865


8/15

as

voluntary

associations

and

even

businesses

will

operate

to reinforce

kinship

ties

2

l.

IV.

Globalization

Theory

Argues

the

Weakening

of

Latin

American

Kinship

and

the

Family

With

Modernization:

The

vision

of the

decline

of

the family

in

Latin

America

coupled

with

that

of

the victimized

and/or

deviant

child

is

one

that

did

not

develop

as

an

indepen-

dent

phenomenon

within

Latin

America.

Like

so

many

other

aspects

of

modem

life

these

ideas

were

substantially

imported

from

industrial

societies.

As Jo

Boy-

den observed,

[these

ideas]

provided

a focal

point

for

the

development

of both

human

rights

legislation

at the

international

level

and social

policy

at

the

na-

tional

level

in

a wide

range

of

countries.

It has

been

the

explicit

goal of

children's

rights

specialists

to

crystallize

in

international

law a

universal

system

of rights

for

the

child

based

on

these

norms

of childhood.

The

present United

Nations

Convention

on the

Rights

of

the

Child

comes

closer

to

this

goal

than

any pre-

vious

international

instrument.

At

the

national

level,

child

welfare

has

been

a

major

pretext

for

state

manipulation

of

the

affairs

of

family

and

community.

22

These

efforts

tend

to

see

childhood

as

a

fixed

notion

and not

to appreciate

the

importance

of

culture within

society.

Research

in sociology

and

social

anthro-

pology

suggests

that

childhood

is

a social

construct

which

depends

critically

on

culture

and

historical

context.

This

narrow

global

definition

of

childhood

and

what is

appropriate

to

childhood

very

likely

has

had

an

important

role

in the

common

conclusion

that

kinship

and

the

family

in Latin

America

have

declined

with

globalization.

Several

scholars

have

argued

that

the

strength

of

kinship

ideologies,

networks

and

alliances

in

Latin

America

has

been

underestimated.

They

suggest

that

a

de-

cline

in traditional

values

and

networks

is

often

matched

by

the

appearance

of

new

alliances

and innovative

survival

strategies.

23

For

example,

a report

from

the

Centre

for

Social

Development

and

Humanitarian

Affairs

stated:

The

de-

velopment

process,

in particular,

seems

to

produce

changes

in

family

roles

and

functions

that

may,

on

the

one

hand,

be

associated

with

the

breakdown

of

the

family

and

may,

on

the other,

promote resilience and

flexibility

in adapting

to

new

circumstances

and

may

even

foster

the

change

process

itself. 24

V Children

in

Latin

America

continue

to

utilize

Kinship

and

Family

Rela-

tions

in

creative

and

adaptive

ways

even

as they

interact

ever

more

strongly

with

the

Globalized

Economy:

In many

ways

the

starkest

example

of the

impact

of

globalization

on

children

in

Latin

America

is

the

growing

number

of

so-called

street

children.

An

issue

in

this

debate

is

the

way

in

which these

children

have

been

defined

in the

media

and

by

international

agencies,

as

well

as

the

assumption

that

they

are

a

homo-

geneous

group

in

their

family

relationships

and

life

experience.

According

to

866

journal of social

history

summer 5


9/15

THE

HOUSE,

THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

damaged, unable to

form relationships

as

the children

that they

are, and

defi-

nitely

destined

for

emotional,

social

and

economic

failure

as the

adults

they

• ill

become

2

5

This

definition

does

not

include

the common

assumption

that

street

children

are

involved

with

drugs

and

crime

and

that

they

are entirely

unattached

to any

kind

of

family

structure,

assumptions

that

permeate

attitudes

about

street

children

in Brazil.

Tobias

Hecht

comments:

One

common

trait

of

the talk

about

street

children

is its homogeneity.

At

the beginning

of the

1990s

it seemed

that

conference

papers,

brochures,

and

leisure

magazine

articles

about

street

children

were

guided by

a

loosely

agreed-upon

recipe.

The

staple

ingredients

included

a

definition

of

the

'problem,'

a

pinch

of

history,

a

sprig

of

statistics

about

the

siz

of the

population,

a

dash

on

drugs

and

stealing,

and

a

final

shake

in

the

form

of

suggestions

for

policy

makers.

26

An

additional

characteristic

of sireet

children

is

that they

are

labeled

marginals

(marginais),

meaning

that they

are

living

at

the

edges

or

on

the

margins

of

society

and

that

they bring danger

and

crim-

inal

behavior.

Increasingly

as

the

centers

of modem

Latin

American

cities

are

beautified,

privatized

and

generally

cleaned

up,

the

presence

of

poor,

barefoot,

ragged

children

is

viewed

as illegitimate.

As

Scheper-Hughes

says in her

quest

to

determine

Is

any

kid on

the street

without

an

adult

a 'street

kid?': Street

children

are

simply

poor

children

in

the

wrong

place.

She argues

that

a kind

of

symbolic

apartheid

exists

in

the

urban

cities

of Brazil.

2

7

These

poor

and

possibly

homeless

children

are

a

growing

presence

in

cities

all

over

Latin

America.

They

have

received

international

attention

from

human

rights

agencies

focused

on issues

from child

abuse

to

child

labor and

education.

The

movie

Pixote:

the

l w

of

the

we kest (1980;

1981

outside

Brazil)

focused on

the

violent and

violated

lives

of

Brazilian

children;

it

became

a commercial

suc-

cess

outside

of

Brazil

and internationalized

the idea

that

millions

of poor

and

homeless

Brazilian

children

live

in the

streets

by

violent

means,

and

are

them-

selves

abused

and

murdered

by

police

and

death

squads.

A

number

of

scholars

have

studied

these

children

in a

number

of

countries

in Latin

America.

Studies

of

street

children

usually

include

a

discussion

of how

many

exist

and

exactly

who

they

are.

There

ismuch

controversy

on

this subject.

Clearly

street

children

are much

more

common

in

large

urban

areas. While

about

40%

of the

homeless in

Sao

Paulo

and

Rio

de

Janeiro

were

recent

migrants

in

the

1990's,

60% were

natives

of the

area.

The

homeless

population

in

Sao

Paulo

doubled

between

1991

and

1998.

Also,

the

statistics

on

the proportion

of

children

under

18

among

the

homeless

varied

from

40-60%.

Estimates

of

street

children

in

Brazil

vary

from 7,000

to

7,000,000,

depending

upon

the source

and

how

they

are

defined.

Tobias

Hecht

has suggested

a

figure

of 39,000,

based

on

a ratio

of

115

children

living

in

the street

for

each

1 million

urban

residents.

28

In this section

Iwill argue

that

kinship

and

family

continue

to

be an

important

source

of

identity

and

support

for

most street

children,

and

also

that

the

street

children

usually provide

important

resources

for

their

families.

In most

of Latin

America

there

is

a

substantial

difference

between

the

ideal family

structure

and

what

actually

constitutes

a

family.

While

the nuclear

family

iswidely

seen

as

8


10/15

consciousness

to the

attitudes

of

working-class

Mexicans

to changes

in gen-

der

relations

and

family

structure

in Mexico.

Gramsci

defines this

as

those

who

simultaneously

hold

uncritically

to

ideas

and practices

inherited

from

the

past

while

they

also develop

new

ways

of

thinking

and

doing

based

on the

practical

transformations

of

the

real

world

in

which they

are

constantly

engaged.

29

This

would

seem

an

excellent

description

of

how

most

Latin

Americans

adhere

to

tra-

ditional

ideas

about the

family

even

as

they

are

forced

by circumstances

to adapt

family

structure

and

roles

to increasingly

difficult

economic

circumstances

and

changing

ideologies

of

the

family.

This

contradiction

does

not

mean,

however,

that the effort

to maintain

kinship

and

family

relations

along

with

commitment

to that

family

has

evaporated.

It means

rather

that

those

relations

are

constantly

in flux.

In

his

insightful

book

on

street

children

in Recife,

Brazil,

Hecht

argues,

De-

spite alarmist media

reports,

nearly

all

children

in

Brazil grow

up

in homes

and

never

spend

a night

on

the

pavement.

It is

against

this

backdrop

of

'home

children'

that

street

children

are defined,

define

themselves,

and

become

social

agents.

30

Hecht

contends

that

in

the

Northeast

there

are

two

competing

con-

texts

for

childhood:

nurtured

childhood

and

nurturing

childhood.

The

nurtured

children

are

rich, the

ultimate

consumers,

unexpected

to

engage

in

produc-

tive

activity.

The

nurturing

children

are

the

poor, expected

from

an

early

age

to

contribute

to

the

production

and

income

of

the

household.

And

the

chil-

dren

see

supporting

their

mothers

and

nurturing

the

household

as

a

virtue.

3

1

This

perspective,

which

also is

in

agreement

with

historical

perspectives

on

the

significance

of

child labor in

the

family

economy of poor

Brazilians,

pro-

vides

an

important

insight

into

the

activities

of

street

children

and

how

they

see themselves

32

.

In

many

lower-class

Latin

American

families

the

mother

is the

focal

point in

family

relations.

That

is,

regardless

of

whether

a

man is

absent

or

present

in the

household,

women

constitute

the

emotional

and

often

the

financial

support

for

the

family.

In

part

this is

because

of

the

ubiquity

of female-headed

households

and

informal

sexual

unions

among

the

lower

classes.

In

most

cases

children

who

live

on

the

street

leave

home

gradually

as changes

take

place

in

their

home

en-

vironment. No

sudden

abandonment

takes

place.

3

3

Often

the

changes

in the

home

involve

the

introduction

of

a

new

stepfather

and a real

lack

of

sleeping

space.

Children

are

often

sent

out

to the

street

in

search

of

resources

to

bring

home.

Sometimes

they

come

up

empty

handed

and

are

afraid

to go

home

that

night.

Often

children

have

to travel

long

distances

with

multiple

forms

of trans-

portation

to

go

between

the

area

they

hope

to

find

work

in and

their

family.

At

times

the

effort

and money

to

go

home

seem

too

much.

In many

cases

the

sleep-

ing

arrangements

on

the

street

are

little

different

from

what

they

face

in

the

shack

or

shanty

town

in

which

their

family

is

living.

Sometimes

the

prospect

of

eating

is

better

on

the

street

than

with

their

family.

When

children

are asked

why

they

are

living

on

the

streets, many

say

they are

working

to

help

out

their

family.

This

conclusion

emerged

from

a study

of

street

summer 2 5

journal

of social

history


11/15

THE

HOUSE,

THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

I bring it home

to her,

to

my

whole family.

Even

if

there's nothing

left

over for

me,

I

share. I've

pushed

a

cart

around

[to

collect

bottles,

cans,

cardboard,

and

other

items

to sell].

I've

gone out

into

the street

to beg.

I've

begged

lots of

times.

Hecht

writes

that

he

believes

Eufarasio's

explanation

...

was a

description

of

what

he

thought

he

ought

to

be doing

rather

than

of what

he

in

fact

would

ha

bitually

do,

for,

to

the

best

of

my

knowledge,

he

never

returned

home

at

all

while

I was

doing

fieldwork

in

Brazil. '

3

5

On

the

other

hand

Hecht

quotes a

mother

of

a

dozen

children

saying

My

luck

in life

is

my

children,

who

bring

me

money

and

food.

I can't

work

with

so many

little

ones

around.

Where

would

I be

without

them?

And

another

mother

explains

that

she

lost

her

house

after

the death

of

her

son

Alexandre

who

usually

slept

a

couple

nights

a

week

in

the streets,

but

had

regularly

brought

money

home

to

his

mother

3

6

.

While

children

have

worked

in

the

streets

of

Latin America

as long

as

there

have been streets,

the

consciousness

of

street

children

as

a

fearsome,

violent

group

emerged

in the modem

era.

The rapid

pace

of

urbanization

in

Latin

Amer-

ica

since

1950

was

provoked

in part

by

the

consolidation

of

rural

properties

for

agro-business

along with

the

promise

of a

better

life

and

abundant

work

in

ser-

vice

and

construction

work.

However,

Government

authorities

did not

at

the

same

time

attend

to

expanded

urban

needs

for

popular

housing,

minimum

wages,

medical

care

and

education.

The

epidemic

of

children

in

the

streets

isa

symp-

tom

of this larger

unsolved

social

problem.

Children

are

in

the

streets

because

of

insufficient

resources

at home,

nowhere

to

sleep,

not

enough

to eat,

no money

to pay

for

necessities.

The

streets

of

the

wealthy

are

seen

as

a

resource

rich

en-

vironment

where

children

can

effectively

find

money and

food

to take

home

to

their

families

or to

care

for

themselves.

Either

way

it

is

a

way

of

helping

their

mother.

Reformers

often

see

mandatory

education

as

a

solution

to

the situation

of

street

children.

However,

this

is

hazardous.

As

Hecht

affirms: Efforts

at

prevent-

ing

children

from

working

in

the

street

threaten

the

position

of

poor

urban

chil-

dren

within

the home.

The

more

difficult

it

is for children

to bring

in resources

to

households

that

not

only

desperately

need

the fruits

of child

labor

but

morally

expect

them,

the

more

vulnerable

the

child's

status

becomes....

Declaring

the

street

out

of

bounds

will

only

make

the

home

less

viable.

37

VI.

Conclusion:

There

is

no

question

that

globalization

has

affected

children

and

families

in

Latin

America.

Neoliberal

reforms

have

generally

resulted

in the

restriction

of

social

programs

that

support

education,

welfare,

housing,

and

medical

care

in

Latin America.

This

result

effectively

further

worsens

the

already

extremely

negative

distribution

of

income

in

Latin

American

countries.

Western

ideas

of

childhood

as a

carefree

time

of life

characterized

by

play, a

stable

home

situa-

tion,

the

consumption of expensive

toys

and

travel,

and an education

would

be

reserved

to

the

wealthy.

The

tendency

to

blame

the

irresponsibility

of

families

or

9


12/15

perience

is

socially

constructed

and exists

differently

in

different

contexts

and

also

for

different

classes

of

children.

Nevertheless

it is

inaccurate

to

say

that globalization

has

resulted

in

the

dis-

appearance

in

ties

of

kinship

or

the

weakening

of

the

family

as

a

mechanism

of social

interaction

and

support.

The

Latin American

family

is

a

highly

flexi-

ble

structure

that adapts

quickly

and

effectively

to social

and

economic

change.

Those

adaptaiions

are

not

easily

detected

through

ordinary

statistical

means.

Structures

of

dependence

and

reciprocity

operate

to support

and

sustain

children

in

the

wake

of

economic

crisis,

marital

strife,

and

parental

death

or disappear-

ance. Children

in

popular

classes

in

Latin

America

often

have several

mothers

during

the

time

they are

growing

up. Children

of the

popular

classes

need

their

parents,

but

the

parents

also

very

much

depend

upon

their

children

for

economic

support

and

other

services.

The

majority

of

so-called

street

children

are

working

in

the

street to bring

resources

to

their

families.

Globalization has certainly

had

a

role

in

limiting

the ability

of

popular

families

in

Latin

America

to participate

in

the

formal

economy,

but

it has

not

destroyed

the

family.

Center

of

Latin

American

Studies

Lawrence,

KS

66045-7574

ENDNOTES

1.

Nicolas Sanchez-Albomoz,

The Population

of

Latin America:

A

History

(Berkeley,

1974),

115

and

203.

2.

Peter

Laslett,

Karla

Osterveen,

and

Richard

M.Smith

(eds).

Bastardy

and

its Com-

parative

History

(Cambridge,

1980),

17. Elizabeth

Kuznesof,

Sexual

Politics,

Race

and

Bastard-Bearing

in

Nineteenth-Century

Brazil:

A

Question

of

Culture

or

Power?

Jour-

nal

of

Family

History

16:3

(1991):

241-60.

Nara

Milanich,

Historical

Perspectives

on

Illegitimacy

and

Illegitimates

in

Latin

America

in

Minor

Omissions:

Children

in

Latin

American

History

and

Society

edited

by

Tobias

Hecht

(Madison,

2002),

72-101

3.

Goode,

World

Changes

in Family

Patterns

in

Goody,

371.

4.

Roberto

da

Matta,

A

casae

a

rua:

espaco

cidadania,

mulher

emorte

no

Brasil

(Rio

de

Janeiro,

1987),

31-69.

5.

E.

Shorter,

The

Making

of

th

Modern

Family

(London,

1976),

pp.

11

170,

192-96.

Also

see

the

discussion

in

Hugh

Cunningham,

Children

and Childhood

in

Western

Society

since

1500

(London,

1995),

8-15.

6.

Shorter.

7.

Nancy

Scheper-Hughes,

Death

Without

Weeping:

The

Violence

of Everyday

Life

in

Brazil

(Berkeley,

1992).

journal

of social

history

summer 2005

70


13/15

THE

HOUSE,

THE

STREET,

GLOBAL

SOCIETY

9.

Sueann

Caulfield,

In Defense

of

Honor:

Sexual

Morality,

Modernity,

and

Nation

in

Early

Twentieth-Century

Brazil

(Durham,

2000),

4.

10.

Elizabeth

Kuznesof

and

Robert

Oppenheimer,

The

Family

and

Society

in Nine-

teenth-Century Latin

America:

An

Historiographical

Introduction

in

Journal of

Family

History

10:3 (1985),

215-234.

11.

Gilberto

Freyre,

The

Masters and

the

Slaves:

A Study

in the

Development

of Brazilian

Civilization

(New York,

1967: English

language

reprint).

12. Oscar

Lewis,

Life in

a Mexican

Village:

Tepoztlan

Restudied

(Urbana,

1951).

Marvin

Harris,

Town

and

Country in

Brazil

(New

York,

1956).

Robert Redfield,

The Folkculture

of

Yucatan

(Chicago,

1941).

13.

Elizabeth

A.

Kuznesof,

Legal

and Religious

Rights

and

Responsibilities

of

Brazilian

Childhood:

A

History

(1500-1937),

Populagdo

e

Familia

5

(2003):

255-272;

Fernando

Torres

Londono,

A

Origem

do

Conceito

Menor

in Mary

del

Priore

(Org),

Historia

da

Crianca

no Brasil

(Sao

Paulo,

1991),

129-145.

14.

Silvia

Marina

Arrom, Containing

the

Poor:

The

Mexico

City

Poor

House,

1774 1871

(Durham,

NC,

2000)

89.

15.

Ronald

E.

Ahnen,

Democracy

and

Homelessness

in Brazil

in

International

Perspec-

tives

on Homelessness

(Westport,

2001),

249.

16.

In

my

1986

study

of Sao

Paulo

the mean

household

size for

the free

population

var-

ied

between

4.05

in

1765

to 3.76 in

1836.

Donald

Ramos

found

a

range

of 5 2

to 13.1

for

households

(including

slaves)

in Minas

Gerais,

Brazil

in 1804-38.

The

Iguape

census

of

1835

(which

isa sugar

producing

region

in Northeastern

Brazil

and

includes

slaves)

pro-

duced

a 7.59

average

household

size. Elizabeth

Anne Kuznesof,

Household

Economy

and

Urban

Development:

Sao Paulo

1765

to 1836

(Boulder,

1986),

155-156.

Donald

Ramos,

City

and

Country: The

Family

in Minas

Gerais,

1804-1838 Journal

of Family

History

3:4

(1978),

364.

Arlene

J. Diaz and

Jeff

Stewart,

Occupational

Class

and

Female-Headed

Households

in Santiago

Maior

Do

Iguape,

Brazil, 1835

Journal

of Family

History

16:3

(1991),

average

based

on data

cited

on page

302.

This also

agrees

with

Peter

Laslett's

findings

in the

edited

collection

Household

and

Family

in Past

Time

(Cambridge,

1972).

17.

Kuznesof,

Household

Economy,

7.

18.

Elizabeth

Kuznesof,

The

Puzzling

Contradictions

of Child

Labor,

Unemployment

and Education

in Brazil

Journal

of Family History

23:3 (1998),

229.

19.

Oscar

Lewis,

An

Anthropological

Approach

to

Family

Studies

American

Journal

of Sociology

55(1950):

5:468-475

and Urbanization

Without

Breakdown:

A

Case

Study

Scientific

Monthly:

75

(1952):

31 40.

20.

Charles

Wagley,

Luso-Brazilian

Kinship

Patterns:

The

Persistence

of a

Cultural

Tradition in

Politics

of

Change in

Latin America,

edited

by

J.

Mayer

and

R.

Weatherhead

(New

York,

1964),

188-89.

8


14/15

1978).

Janice

Perlman,

The Myth of

Marginality:

Urban Poverty and

Politics

in Rio dejaneiro

(Berkeley,

1976).

22. Jo

Boyden,

Childhood

and

the Policy

Makers: A Comparative

Perspective

on the

Globalization

of Ch ildhood,

Constructing and

Reconstructing Childhood:

Contemporary

Is-

sues in the Sociological

Study

of

Childhood

edited by Allison

James and

Alan

Prout

(London,

1990), 191.

23.

S

Lobo,

A

House

of My Own:

Social

Organization

in

the Squatter

Settlements

of

Lima,

Peru

(Tucson,

AZ,

1982).

24.

The Family: Models for

Providing Comprehensive

Services

for

Family

and

Child Welfare

(New

York, UN Department

of

International

Economic and Social

Affairs,

November

1,1984),

2.

25.

Judith

Ennew, Parentless

Friends:

A

Cross-Cultural

Examination of Networks

Among

Street Children and

Street Youth,

in Social

Networks

and

Social

Support in Child-

hood and Adolescence

edited

by

Frank

Nestmann

and

Klaus Hurrelmann

(Berlin,

1994),

409-410.

26.

Tobias Hecht At

Home

in the

Street: Street

Children

of NortheastBrazil

(Cambridge,

1998), 4.

27. Nancy Scheper-Hughes

and

Daniel

Hoffman,

Brazilian Apartheid:

Street

Kids

and

the Struggle

for Urban

Space

in Small

Wars: The Cultural

Politicsof

Childhood

edited

by

Nancy

Scheper-Hughes and

Carolyn

Sargent

(Berkeley,

1998), 358.

28.

Ahnen

Democracy

and

Homelessness

241

and

244;

Hecht, At

Home

101.

29.

Matthew

C. Gutmann

Mamitis

and

the

Traumas of Development

in

a

Colonia

Popular of

Mexico City in Small

Wars, 133.

Antonio

Gramsci,

Selections

from

the

Prison

Notebooks

Ed. Q Hoare and

G.N.

Smith

(New

York,

1971), 333

as

cited

by

Gutmann.

30. Hecht

At Home,

78.

31. Ibid.

80-81.

32.

Kuznesof,

Puzzling Contradictions ,

229-236.

33.

Lewis

Aptekar,

Street-Children

of Cali

(Durham,

NC 1988);

Patricia

C. Marquez,

The

Street

s

My

Home:

Youth

and Violence

in

Caracas

(Stanford,

1999).

Tobias

Hecht,

At

Home

(Cambridge,

1998).

34. Thomas

Sanders,

Brazilian street

children:

Part

I:

who

they are UFSI Reports

(In-

dianapolis,

1987), 7.

35. Hecht At

home, 81-82.

36. Ibid.

82

and

88.

37. Hecht,

At Home,

198.

journal

of social history

summer 2005


15/15

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: The House, the Street, Global Society: Latin American

Families and Childhood in the Twenty-First Century

SOURCE: J Soc Hist 38 no4 Summ 2005

WN: 0519602152003

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it

is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in

violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher:

http://www.hss.cmu.edu/jsh/indices.asp

Copyright 1982-2005 The H.W. Wilson Company. All rights reserved.

house, street and global society

Documents