See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328578951

Building an Effective Child Protection System in India: Integrating a Rights-

Based Perspective in Social Work Education Within a Strategy of Developing
Professional Association

Article  in  Journal of Human Rights and Social Work · June 2019

DOI: 10.1007/s41134-018-0076-1

CITATIONS READS

3 1,787

4 authors, including:

Gokul Mandayam Archana Mehendale

University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Tata Institute of Social Sciences
5 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS    18 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Gokul Mandayam on 07 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Building an Effective Child Protection
System in India: Integrating a Rights-
Based Perspective in Social Work
Education Within a Strategy of Developing
Professional Association
Karen Smith Rotabi, Gokul Mandayam,
Arlene Manoharan & Archana
Mehendale

Journal of Human Rights and Social

Work

e-ISSN 2365-1792

J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work

DOI 10.1007/s41134-018-0076-1

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
Nature Switzerland AG. This e-offprint is
for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Journal of Human Rights and Social Work
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-018-0076-1

Building an Effective Child Protection System in India: Integrating

a Rights-Based Perspective in Social Work Education Within a Strategy
of Developing Professional Association
Karen Smith Rotabi 1 & Gokul Mandayam 2 & Arlene Manoharan 3 & Archana Mehendale 4

# Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Abstract
The urgent need to strengthen the child protection system in India is presented in the context of the Integrated Child Protection
Scheme and relevant juvenile justice legislation. Although the whole system is discussed, from national to local levels, the
emphasis is on systems development with a comprehensive social work education response. Included are recommendations to
develop a professional association of social work educators and the need for national accreditation of social work education in
India. A multi-system analysis with a child rights orientation of child protection in India is presented. Future steps are recom-
mended including the role of the development sector to help align child protection systems, social work education, and a
professional association.

Keywords Social work education . Child rights . Human rights . Professional association

Article 19 (1) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights
of the Child, 1989 (CRC), ratified by India in 1992, places an
obligation on States Parties to Btake all appropriate legislative,
administrative, social and educational measures to protect the
child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or
abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploi-
tation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s),
* Karen Smith Rotabi
krotabi@csumb.edu
Gokul Mandayam
gokulman@buffalo.edu
Arlene Manoharan
arlenemanoharan.ccl@gmail.com
Archana Mehendale
archana.mehendale@tiss.edu
1
Department of Social Work, California State University-Monterey
Bay, 100 Campus Center, Valley Hall B-102, Seaside, CA 93955,
USA
2
Clinical Associate Professor School of Social Work, University at
Buffalo, 622 Baldy Hall, Amherst, NY 14260, USA
3
Child Protection Consultant, Bangalore, India
4
Centre for Education Innovation and Action Research Tata Institute
of Social Sciences, Sion-Trombay Road, Mumbai 400088, India
legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the
child.^ Further, as per sub clause (2), states parties are also
obligated to ensure, as appropriate, that protective measures
include Beffective procedures for the establishment of social
programs to provide necessary support for the child and for
those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms
of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, inves-
tigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child mal-
treatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judi-
cial involvement.^ Additionally, Article 3(3), obligates States
Parties to ensure that Bthe institutions, services and facilities
responsible for the care or protection of children shall conform
with the standards established by competent authorities, par-
ticularly in the areas of safety, health, in the number and suit-
ability of their staff, as well as competent supervision.^
A range of Constitutional provisions and a plethora of child
protection-related domestic laws provide a fairly robust legal
framework for the protection of children in India, towards
fulfillment of this vision. However, the effective protection
of children and the fulfillment of these legal obligations re-
quire Badministrative,^ Bsocial,^ and Beducational^ measures
to be taken; Bsocial programs^ to be in place; Bstandards^ to
be set; and Bcompetent supervision^ provided. For all this to
be meaningfully achieved from a rights-based perspective,
three significant systemic and transformative changes need
to be made: (a) the state needs to be made more accountable
to all children, particularly child victims and those at risk of
 Author's personal copy
harm; (b) civil society (including children) needs to be galva-
nized into deeper levels of awareness and action on child
rights and the role of the state; and (c) professionalization
and customization of the social service workforce trained in
child protection. This third change is significant, as it is likely
to play a key role not only in effecting the first two, but also in
enabling the realization of the Constitution goals and the
CRC’s vision for India’s children.
This article introduces the existing state system for child
protection in India while highlighting major roles that social
workers play under one of the key child protection legislations
as well as the key child protection scheme that supports its
implementation, explores the role of social work education in
meeting the emerging child protection needs, and proposes a
roadmap for building an effective child protection workforce
in India. It begins with a brief outline of the child protection
system and a history of social work education in India, includ-
ing the gaps in the current education system. The article con-
cludes with recommendations for strengthening the child pro-
tection system at the national level. Specifically, recommen-
dations for social work education, training, and professional
engagement with the child protection system are proposed.
Method
This article is based on data collected for a consulting project
with UNICEF focused on assessment of child protection work-
force needs, combined with insights of the authors who have
been engaged in contributing to the strengthening of the child
protection system in India. To begin, (1) an extensive literature
review was undertaken within a desk review process to include
the social work education and training, legal analysis and other
contextual factors as presented here. Then, based on a conve-
nience sample developed by UNICEF officials in 2015, (2) key
informant interviews were conducted with over 100 individuals
representing government, nongovernment, and development
sector actors in the cities of New Delhi (23 interviews),
Mumbai (21 interviews), and Pune (30 interviews) as well as
other locations in the states of Bihar (12 interviews) and Odisha
(15 interviews). Finally, (3) the third and fourth authors have
been active actors in child protection systems strengthening
through research, teaching, training, and advocacy. Each of them
have attended well over 100 meetings on issues related to child
protection and education respectively at local and national level,
and bring rich work experience related to the intersections be-
tween social work, education systems, and key laws related to
child protection in India. While this experience was not docu-
mented as ethnographic method, these authors provide a partic-
ipatory perspective in the research. Finally, all of the authors
bring extensive background related to social work education
and training, including lived experience in India, as well as other
Asian countries (in the case of the first and second authors).
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
Key informant interviews focused on mapping the child pro-
tection system with an orientation to strengthening and
supporting child protection activities at the community level.
Interviews were semi-structured and focused on areas of the
key informant experience, such as engagement of Childline as
a national telephone response system that can mobilize govern-
ment and non-government actors at the local level for child
abuse and exploitation crisis scenarios. In the case of
Childline, the perspective of the national director helped to set
an early framework for thinking about how the child protection
system functions nationally with an emphasis on their telephone
response system. Each key informant interviewed, at various
levels of engagement in the child protection system, responded
to as key informants with their perspective from their position
within the broad system, providing unique perspectives.
Also, social work educators were interviewed in all loca-
tions, except Pune, for their perspectives on child protection
issues and to capture the insights of experts on how to improve
systems of care from the social work education lens. Social
workers engaged directly with families, at the local level, were
also interviewed for practice insight. Finally, legal scholars
and those working directly with children in review of cases
were consulted for their inputs on needs to strengthen and
support child protection systems.
In the case of the interviews conducted, field notes were
written by the principal investigator and that documentation of
the interviews were not transcribed verbatim. Field notes were
then analyzed for thematically without the use of computer
software. Rather, the themes were coded manually and those
themes are presented broadly in the findings.
Findings: The Child Protection System
in India—Implications for Professional Social
Workers
India is a vast country with 29 states and 7 union territories, and a
population of over 1.3 billion people that includes 19% of the
world’s child population (Singh 2013). The Report of a
Conference held in India on BA Better Way to Protect All
Children - The Theory and Practice of Child Protection
Systems,^ provides a definition of Bchild protection system^ as
BCertain formal and informal structures, functions and capacities
that have been assembled to prevent and respond to violence,
abuse, neglect and exploitation of children,^ and also lists the key
components of a child protection system—Bhuman resources,
finance, laws and policies, governance, monitoring and data col-
lection as well as protection and response services and care man-
agement. It also includes different actors – children, families,
communities, those working at subnational or national level
and those working internationally. Most important are the rela-
tionships and interactions between and among these components
and these actors within the system. It is the outcomes of these
 Author's personal copy
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
interactions that comprise the system^ (UNICEF, UNHCR, Save
the Children and World Vision 2013). However, institutions,
standards, regulation, and funding are also essential components,
and together they all create enabling structures and environments
which prevent and reduce risks faced by children; protects chil-
dren from harm; addresses harm when it occurs; facilitates the
realization of children’s rights; and empowers children to reach
their fullest potential and live a life of dignity.
The child protection system in India consists of a complex
web of all these components. The Ministry of Women and Child
Development (MWCD), the nodal Ministry responsible for child
protection at the national level, has notified numerous policies,
laws, and schemes for children. In 2009, it set forth a vision to
strengthen child protection on a national scale, by launching the
Integrated Child Protection Scheme, (ICPS) (Ministry of
Women and Child Development 2009). This scheme was sub-
sequently revised in 2014 and is currently again under review. It
aims to create a protective environment for children and man-
dates that government and non-government systems must con-
verge towards development of new community-based interven-
tions for addressing child abuse and exploitation (Ministry of
Women and Child Development 2009). It covers a wide range
of vulnerable children, including children in need of care and
protection by the state, children in conflict with the law, and
children in contact with law—as victims or witnesses or any
other circumstances. The scheme originally provided financial
support for implementation of the erstwhile Juvenile Justice Care
and Protection of Children Act of 2000, and now supports the
new Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Act of
2015, (JJ Act 2015). Under the ICPS, the state government
was to establish a State Child Protection Society (SCPS) in all
states and District Child Protection Units (DCPUs) in all dis-
tricts, envisaged as the fundamental units for implementation
of the scheme at state and district level, respectively
(Chapter 3, ICPS, p. 13). The DCPU and SCPS have now been
elevated to being statutory bodies that each state government is
obligated to establish under the Government of India 2015
(Section 106). Moreover, Section 2(26), Government of India
2015 defines the DCPU as the Bfocal point to ensure the imple-
mentation of this Act and other child protection measures in the
district,^ and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Model Rules, 2016 (JJ Model Rules 2016), framed
under this Act provides 26 specific and one additional broad
enabling child protection function that the DCPU has to perform.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its con-
cluding observations to the third and fourth India Country
Report submitted by India as part of its obligations under
Article 44 of the CRC (UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child (CRC), Concluding observations on the consolidated
third and fourth periodic reports of India, 13 June 2014, CRC/
C/IND/CO/3-4), however, raised concerns about inadequate
budgetary allocations, mismanagement of allocated resources,
and lack of monitoring and evaluation systems (Clause 17).
The Committee recommended that resource allocations to social
sectors, in particular, education, health, and child protection, be
enhanced (Recommendation 18a). It further recommended
strengthening existing child protection systems, including the
Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) and providing ade-
quate and systematic training in children’s rights to all profes-
sionals working with children (Recommendation 26).
Highlighting the need to respect children’s views, the
Committee recommended that children’s right to be heard in
relevant legal proceedings be protected and appropriate systems
and/or procedures for social workers and courts to comply with
the principle be established (Recommendation 38a).
At the domestic level, judgements by the courts have helped
to ensure that rights of children are protected. For example, in
Sampurna Behura vs. Union of India, (Item 1501, 2018), the
Supreme Court identified the SCPSs and the DCPUs as having
Ban enormous responsibility in ensuring that the JJ Act is effec-
tively implemented.^ At another level, High Court Committees
on Juvenile Justice (HC-JJCs) were established to monitor the
functioning of the juvenile justice system, identify gaps and make
recommendations to address them, a development triggered by
resolutions adopted during Conferences of Chief Justices held in
2006 and 2009 (agenda items 22 and 17 respectively). A
Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice (SCC-JJ) was
also subsequently established with a single sitting Supreme
Court judge in 2013 towards the same end, and recently expand-
ed to include a second sitting judge of the apex court, demon-
strating the importance currently being given to matters related to
children in India. This SCC-JJ has galvanized all stakeholders to
work in mission mode to work in convergence and achieve
Constitutional guarantees made to children, organizing three
rounds of regional and national level consultations since 2015,
on the effective implementation of the JJ Act and related child
protection themes—and the fourth round is currently in progress.
Consolidated reports of all these three consultations highlight that
stakeholders have recognized how critical it is for the state to
ensure adequate and trained child protection functionaries for
effective child protection. The Babsence of adequate and trained
child protection workforce beyond the district level and at the
village and grassroots level constricts outreach,^ was specifically
listed as one of the key challenges with regard to availability of
infrastructure and adequate resources in several States in the third
rou nd (Con solidated Report of Reg ional Rou nd
Table Consultations, organized by The Supreme Court
Committee on Juvenile Justice, supported by UNICEF 2017).
The report of the second round highlighted that the absence of
requisite trained staff hinders rehabilitation, de-motivates chil-
dren, and has a serious bearing on the meaningful preparation
of the ICP and follow-ups on progress (Consolidated Report of
Regional Round Table Consultations, organized by The
Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice, supported by
UNICEF 2016). In this round, the Joint Secretary, MWCD,
Government of India also acknowledged this as a major problem
 Author's personal copy
and reported that the Ministry is exploring possibilities of link-
ages with various training institutes, as well as with Departments
of Social Work by way of student internships to help in service
delivery and capacity augmentation.
Laws and schemes for children in India provide numerous
spaces for professionally trained social workers to perform a
range of functions in the child protection system. A brief over-
view of key provisions in the JJ Act, 2015 and JJ Model Rules,
2016 provides insight into these roles, and also highlights key
concerns about the social work profession in the country. Rule
2(1)(xviii), JJ Model Rules, 2016 provides a legal definition for
the term Bsocial worker,^—Ba person with a postgraduate degree
in social work, sociology, psychology, or child development, or
a graduate with minimum 7 years of experience in child edu-
cation and development or protection issues…….for preparing
social investigation report or individual care plan of the child,
child study report, home study report of prospective adoptive
parent or foster parents, rendering post-adoption services, and
performing any other functions as assigned to such person
under the Act or these rules,^ (emphasis added). The definition
provides a wide array of roles that a social worker may perform
under the JJ Act, 2015 and JJ Model Rules, 2016, implying
also that such social workers can either be appointed as proba-
tion officers, caseworkers, child welfare officers or counselors,
or, engaged to perform other functions including those per-
formed by a Bpsycho-social worker,^ Bmental health expert,^
Bspecialized trainer,^ or Bchild participation expert,^—terms
used in the law but not defined. Social workers can also be
appointed as members of the state or district level Inspection
Committees (Section 41(2), JJ Act, 2015). Additionally, the
DCPU, which comprises of 13 functionaries including a dis-
trict child protection officer, social workers, outreach workers,
and protection officers (Chapter 3, clause 2.2, p. 16, ICPS), is
expected to perform 21 child protection functions (Chapter 2,
clause 2.1, pp. 14–16), while interfacing with the various au-
thorities, functionaries, and non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) who are part of the child protection system. These
varied functions necessitate that the DCPU staff be equipped
with a range of social work skills, including case work,
counseling, and preparation of the Social Investigation
Reports and Individual Care Plans that inform the inquiries
and binding orders that are to be passed by the multi-
disciplinary Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs) and Child Welfare
Committees (CWCs) on matters concerning children in con-
flict with law (Section 8(1), JJ Act, 2015) and children in need
of care and protection (Section 29(1), JJ Act, 2015), respec-
tively, in the best interest of children under this Act. DCPU
members also need social planning and macro practice skills
for responding effectively within a community-based frame-
work for social change. This particular orientation to macro
engagement is critical to meet the child protection goals, given
the sheer magnitude of the problem and the need for a coordi-
nated and effective community response. It must be noted,
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
however, that these DCPU positions are most often contractual
and poorly remunerated, which disincentivizes the entry and
retention of professional social work graduates in the child
protection sector.
There are other vital social work roles that are to be per-
formed under the JJ Act, 2015 as part of the child protection
system. The State Government is required to establish a State
level Selection Committee (Rules 87 and 88, JJ Model Rules
2016) which comprises a retired High Court judge, and a
representative from the nodal Department not below the rank
of Director, along with other members, including social
workers working in NGOs (Rule 87(1)(iii) and (v), JJ Model
Rules 2016) and Faculty of Social Work (sub clause (iv) of the
same rule). This Committee is required to evaluate and select
persons to be appointed as members of the CWCs and JJBs.
Social workers could bring their expertise on children and
child rights to inform these decisions which have a significant
impact on the quality of child protection services provided
under the JJ Act, 2015 and the ICPS.
In this regard, the qualification criteria for selection as a
member of the JJB has been laid down in Section 4 (3) JJ Act,
2015, (as explicitly explained in the rule defining Bsocial
worker^ referred to above), which are—Bactively involved in
health, education, or welfare activities pertaining to children for
at least 7 years or is a practicing professional with a degree in
child psychology, psychiatry, sociology, or law,^ which ironical-
ly does not include a degree in social work. While this flexibility
and ambiguity in the eligibility criteria for appointing social
workers to this important judicial body may seem questionable
at one level, a plausible explanation would be the lack of social
work professionals graduating in the country, particularly spe-
cializing in issues concerning children or child protection.
Furthermore, even in cases where professionally trained so-
cial workers have applied to be members of the CWCs or/and
JJBs, the experience of one of the authors of this article, who has
served several terms as a member of the Selection Committee in
one State, confirms the lack of relevant knowledge, skills, and
preparation of such candidates to perform complex judicial
functions in the child protection system. Stakeholders across
the board, including the Principal Magistrates of the JJBs who
are judicial officers, have expressed similar concerns about the
inability of the social worker members of the JJBs to bring the
required domain knowledge and skills while performing their
roles and functions. The dearth of customized capacity building
programs for the JJBs; the lack of standardization of profession-
al social work training or specialization in child protection; the
legal restriction on a social worker member being appointed for
more than two terms (Rule 5(2), JJ Model Rules 2016); and the
absence of a well-defined career trajectory for social workers in
child protection, may all contribute to this situation. This can
perhaps also be attributed to the fact that child protection is yet
to be comprehensively mainstreamed into the social work cur-
riculum in India.
 Author's personal copy
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
As is evident from all of the above, onerous responsibilities
have been placed on social workers in the child protection
sector in India, particularly under the JJ Act 2015, the JJ
Model Rules 2016 and the ICPS. However, there are major
concerns about professional social work in India, some of
which are vividly conveyed through the legal definition of
Bsocial worker^ itself. These include the lack of appreciation
for professional social work training, the absence of an accred-
itation system for trained social workers, and the fact that
persons with domain expertise other than social work are con-
sidered competent enough to perform specialized social work
roles, and that too with very vulnerable children in the child
protection system, with little or no Bcompetent supervision.^
In the following section, the authors look at the long-standing
history of social work education in India and the gaps in the
education of social workers. In conclusion, they make recom-
mendations for building an effective child protection system in
India by integrating a rights perspective in social work education.
History of Social Work Education in India
The development of social work education in India dates back to
1936 when the Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work
was established (later renamed the Tata Institute of Social
Sciences in 1944 and popularly known by its acronym TISS;
Bose 1992). This early program initially offered a 2-year gradu-
ate program in social services administration, expanding to other
areas of specialty in the 1940s as the school grew. In the 1940s,
enrollment was relatively small—especially considering India’s
massive population (365 million at the time)—and reportedly
had only 160 students enrolled by the end of the 1940s (Bose
1992). However, there was significant growth in social work
education in the 1950s, and by the end of that decade, there were
14 graduate and 3 undergraduate schools of social work nation-
ally, with an annual number of approximately 500 students. An
important milestone was achieved in 1962 with the establish-
ment of the first doctoral program in social work in Lucknow
(Bose 1992). Significant growth in this advanced curriculum
occurred with at least four doctoral programs being initiated in
the 1960s (Pathare 2014). Since then, there has been significant
growth in all major social work programs in the country.
Overall, during the 1960s, social work education was rapidly
emerging and the distribution of schools of social work across
the country was uneven—the geographic location of schools
was not defined by the need for social work training, but rather
there was over-representation in urban areas (Bose 1992). Social
work academia adopted an urban-centric curriculum with a fo-
cus on mitigating the problems of urban India, as opposed to the
issues of the semi-urban and rural poor engaged in agriculture
and other forms of livelihood (Adaikalam 2014). As a result,
there was limited outreach to locations that had pressing prob-
lems related to rural poverty, an increase of highly marginalized
population groups including tribals, and a lack of attention to a
range of problems experienced in underserved areas.
In terms of academic inputs and curriculum design, social
work education in India at that time drew ideas from the West
for academic training purposes (Adaikalam 2014). In this era,
faculty members of social work were teaching in professional
programs with little practice experience, their own training
being in sociology, rural development, psychology, and other
social sciences (Bose 1992). Notable limitations to these early
programs included not just a heavy theory-versus-practice fo-
cus within the classroom, but also field practicums that were
not yet comprehensively conceptualized. Another problem
was limited employment opportunities, as the profession was
not truly embraced, especially by the Government of India at
this time (Bose 1992).
By the end of the 1980s, social work education grew expo-
nentially. There were 14 institutions providing programs at the
bachelor of social work level (BSW), 42 schools offering the
master’s degree of social work (MSW), and 24 offering doctor-
al programs (Bose 1992) by the early 1990s. Bose (1992) of-
fered critical analysis that there was a growing Btendency to-
ward the academization of social work education^ and Bthere is
little difference between these programs and the other social
sciences^ (p. 75). In other words, social work education resem-
bled an applied sociology or psychology program, rather than
the discipline being honored as a unique professional field that
required specialized practice skills and competencies.
Furthermore, with the central government’s focus on urban-
centric economic planning, higher education in India and social
work education in particular saw academic institutions
established mostly in urban areas (Desai and Narayan 1998 as
cited in Adaikalam 2014). In the 1990s, the structural adjust-
ment programs helped the exponential growth of privately
funded social work institutions in the industrial belt cities like
Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Chennai, thereby relegat-
ing social work education largely to the western and southern
parts of the country (Adaikalam 2014).
The Committee on Social Work Education in India found
that the growth in the discipline was Blopsided,^ as there was a
misdirected focus on graduate education rather than an em-
phasis on front-line work at the BSW and lower levels (2-year
programs—associate degrees) where Bthe bulk of workers
were required^ (as cited by Bose 1992, p. 75). Furthermore,
BSW-trained professionals experienced problems in finding
employment—simply put, the government sector did not val-
ue the BSW or associate degrees—rather, there was a bias
towards short-term technical training programs to meet the
need of front-line work (Bose 1992). The underestimation of
the BSW degree persists today, even though this level of ed-
ucation holds potential for effective training of front-line
workers, especially for the child protection workforce.
Although changes have occurred in recent years, both in
significant curriculum advances as well as the geographic
 Author's personal copy
diffusion of the discipline nationally, problems persist in many
of the small schools operating throughout the country. Some
of these schools simply do not have adequate faculty members
trained in social work, and there is a tendency towards
employing instructors with training in psychology and sociol-
ogy in underserved areas of India. There are obvious limita-
tions to this outdated approach to social work education, in
which non-social work academics attempt to teach a practice
discipline with inadequate professional experience and curric-
ulum knowledge. The resulting problems are not unlike
Bose’s observation in the 1990s, and coursework looks more
like applied sociology, rather than a competency-based curric-
ulum with core domain knowledge, attitudes, and skills.
Nonetheless, there has been rapid and exponential growth
in social work programs across the country. In 2003, it was
estimated that there were 260 institutions offering social work
programs. By the year 2013, it was estimated that there were
650 such programs—although this is only an estimate as there
is no comprehensive listing or registration of these programs
(Pathare 2014). This lack of documentation of the number of
professional social work programs highlights the need for a
national coordinating body for professional social work edu-
cation. The standards of, or core competencies for, social work
education along with a model curriculum has been defined by
the University Grants Commission (UGC) in consultation
with universities offering social work programs and not by
an accredited body of professional social workers. The UGC
is a statutory body established under the Ministry of Human
Resources Development, Government of India, with the man-
date of providing funds and for coordinating, determining, and
maintaining of standards in institutions of higher education.
There is no government-approved system for licensure of so-
cial workers or accreditation of networks and associations of
trained social workers. In other words, there is a lack of in-
volvement of professional organizations in regulation and
governance of social work education. Furthermore, such or-
ganizations are not involved in planning for human resource
requirements of the social sector, specifically in the child pro-
tection services arena. These organizations currently contribute
to the growth of the profession largely through networking and
building communities of practice. It should be noted that pro-
fessional social work associations currently active at the national
and state levels having academic and practice-based identities
include the Indian Society of Professional Social Work
(ISPSW), the National Association of Professional Social
Workers in India (NAPSWI), and the Indian Association of
Trained Social Workers, working at the national level. The
Kerala Association of Professional Social Workers, the
Karnataka Association of Professional Social Workers,
and the Bombay Association of Trained Social Workers
(BATSW) work at the state level. Also, important to note
is the now inactive Association of Schools of Social Work
in India (AASWI).
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
Universities offering social work programs have been
consulted by the UGC on matters pertaining to curriculum
standards and the status of the profession. The process to set
up a National Network of Schools of Social Work for quality
enhancement of social work education in India was initiated in
2005 by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), wherein a
national steering committee of social work educators was
formed to review the status of social work education in the
country with the support of the UGC. While this initiative was
temporarily suspended as the result of a change of leadership
in the UGC, it was revived through the initiation of zonal
meetings that regularly brought together social work educa-
tors from various departments and colleges based in different
states of the country. These zonal meetings, along with nation-
al level consultation, were intended to launch a national net-
work of social work educational institutions, a central
governing body to enhance the quality of social work educa-
tion in India. In 2004–2005, professional standards for educa-
tion were formulated and published by the National
Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), with the fol-
lowing goals (Alphonse, George, and Moffatt 2008, p. 149):
& Promotion of human dignity and human rights, democrat-
ic participation of people, peaceful, and collaborative so-
cial relationships.
& Challenges to the unequal relationships and marginaliza-
tion of people due to sex, age, ethnicity, caste, and creed.
& Work towards democratization and socioeconomic politi-
cal systems by empowering people and building their ca-
pacity to bargain for basic rights and essential resources.
& Training in culturally sensitive practice in relation to
problem-solving skills, research, advocacy, disaster miti-
gation and management, conflict resolution, policy formu-
lation, and organizational management.
It should be noted that these goals, published by NAAC,
are not competency based—rather, they are broad statements
without delineated practice behaviors. Furthermore, Alphonse
et al. (2008) have criticized these goals for not integrating
aspects of globalization in India, particularly labor, agricul-
ture, and migration. Ignoring the challenging societal pres-
sures in India and the reality of family life in a dynamic social
context with significant problems related to poverty, has ob-
vious limitations in terms of developing a vibrant social work
curriculum that is rooted in protection of child rights.
The Need for Integration of Human Rights
Content in Social Work Education
According to the global definition of social work, it Bis a
practice-based profession and an academic discipline that pro-
motes social change and development, social cohesion, and the
 Author's personal copy
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
empowerment and liberation of people. Principles of social
justice, human rights, collective responsibility, and respect for
diversities are central to social work^ . BUnderpinned by the-
ories of social work, social sciences, humanities, and indige-
nous knowledges, social work engages people and structures to
address life challenges and enhance well-being^ International
Federation of Social Workers and International Association of
Schools of Social Work (IASSW), 2014, para. 2. The
International Association of Schools of Social Work
(IASSW) and the International Federation of Social Workers
(IFSW) have acknowledged that social work is an academic
and professional discipline that is rooted in a human rights
perspective both in theory and practice, by officially endorsing
the significance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(Nadkarni and Sinha 2016).
Today’s world is increasingly witnessing the violation of
human rights for different population groups for various rea-
sons, including negative outcomes of liberalization and glob-
alization that focus more on economic prosperity rather than
the enhancement of human well-being. This is particularly true
in countries like India where government funding for health,
education, and social services has been dwindling drastically,
and crimes against children and child rights violations have
only increased despite the robust legal framework, a strong
judiciary and human rights institutions like the National
Commission for Children (NCPCR) and the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) who have a duty to protect the
rights of children. This is particularly because children consti-
tute a group of people that remains one of the most vulnerable
throughout India today (Nadkarni and Sinha 2016).
The social work profession in India has been slow to em-
brace a human rights perspective in practice. Over the past two
decades, social work education has been part of an evolution-
ary process, from a remedial and rehabilitative (Western) mod-
el of social work, to being more pertinent to the indigenous
needs that warrant a focus on social development and change
(Nadkarni and Sinha 2016). Over the years, social work aca-
demic institutions in India have slowly begun to incorporate a
human rights perspective in their curriculum and also initiate
policy changes to protect children’s rights and promote the
rights to education, health, and livelihood (Nadkarni 2013,
p. 4). While institutions like TISS have been at the forefront
in embedding human rights perspectives in their teaching and
field practicum modalities, other social work colleges and
schools in the country are lagging behind.
In terms of a first step for training future social work pro-
fessionals in human rights, social work educational institu-
tions in India ought to become models of incorporating human
rights in teaching social work practice to its students. It is
imperative that in these institutions, social work practice
methods be taught in a way that integrates a commitment to
human rights as part of social work practice. Panicker (1998),
as cited in Nadkarni and Sinha (2016), underscores the
importance for social workers to incorporate the child rights
perspective in a more holistic manner with planning and
implementing child welfare interventions for children.
Education of Social Workers for the Child
Protection Workforce
Reynaert et al. (2010) highlight the incorporation of children’s
rights as an integral component of social work practice. They
assert that educating social workers on child rights is self-
reflective and that it underscores the nexus between the social
work profession and the larger society. Educating social
workers on child rights is a futile exercise if social work edu-
cators do not comprehensively consider the meaning and val-
ue of human rights of a child in any society. Including child
rights in social work academic training emphasizes the need
for social workers to understand the conditions under which
child rights are violated and analyze where these conditions
are located within the social and political milieu (Reynaert
et al. 2010). Therefore, incorporating a child rights perspective
for all aspects of social work practice, particularly advocacy
social action and social planning, is critical in realizing the
goals of social work as a discipline.
In the Indian context, the UGC has so far constituted three
Review Committees on Social Work Education. The first
Committee was set up in 1960 and the second in 1975. The
reports of these Committees had little or no reference to the
integration of child rights and child protection in the curricu-
lum, perhaps because of the low attention given to the child
protection concerns during those decades. The overall ap-
proach and thrust of work was not rights-based, and thus the
subject of child rights was not included in the curriculum. The
third Review Committee was constituted in 1997–1998, and
even though the official report of the review is not available,
the report of the BCurricular Reframe Exercise^ provides the
curricular outlines that were suggested by the Committee. The
curricular framework that was suggested was based on a mix
of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary and a curriculum-
integrated approach (UGC n.d.). Recognizing social work as
a practice profession, the curriculum frame prescribed four
domains: core domain, supportive domain, interdisciplinary
domain, and elective content. The curriculum did offer a
course on the topic of children in difficult circumstances for
specialization/concentration for graduate students, but the de-
tails of the course content were not included in the report. The
suggested optional course on the topic of the legal system in
India mentioned child rights, but did not indicate how it would
prepare students to work in child protection settings.
To meet the growing need for child protection services and
effectively sustaining them, the education and training of child
protection workforce is crucial (Better Care Network and
Global Social Service Workforce Alliance 2015). However,
 Author's personal copy
systematic education and training in child protection has been
weak at the national level. To address the workforce chal-
lenges and meet the needs of the child protection sector, we
argue that social work education requires transformation,
starting with nationally prescribed curricular guidelines that
mandate holistic integration of child protection within social
work education, one that prepares graduates with knowledge,
skills, and values to meaningfully contribute to the sector.
On a positive note, in India, there is a new and emergent
emphasis in social work education on child rights and child
protection social work over the past decade under the leader-
ship of TISS. Keeping with the changing contextual require-
ments, TISS changed from a welfare approach to a develop-
ment and rights-based approach between 2004 and 2006 and
started offering an MA in social work with children and fam-
ilies instead of its former specialization in family and child
welfare. TISS also initiated an online MSW program—acces-
sible throughout India—with a specialization in child rights
and child protection. As of mid-2015, TISS began a vocation-
al diploma in child rights/protection, and this particular pro-
gram is being diffused across the country in multiple locations
and in partnership with other schools that deliver a manualized
curriculum at the local level. For this vocational program,
TISS is the degree-granting institution, thereby enabling
high-quality education to be available throughout the country
(Personal communication, Dean of Vocational Education
Neela Dabir, September 2015). This outreach model serves
areas of the country that have historically had limited oppor-
tunities for social work education and training, such as the
state of Bihar. One of the key strengths is the opportunity to
study social work in areas that have been traditionally under-
served in India. Although these two developments are major
steps forward in creating models of education and in develop-
ing a pool of professionally trained practitioners in child pro-
tection, the sustainability of these courses and their alignment
with the dynamic and emerging requirements of child protec-
tion sector remain critical challenges.
The Role of Professional Associations
in Integrating Child Protection in Social Work
Education
Nationally, the state of social work education in India is at a
critical juncture. The professional programs offered vary in
their levels of quality. There are no agreed-upon standards of
curriculum and field practicum requirements. Furthermore,
there is a lack of human resource planning in terms of nation-
ally assessing the requirements of the social sector, including
that of the child protection sector, and developing correspond-
ing curricula, educational resources, and research that will
contribute to developing a pool of graduates who are
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
professionally competent to address the growing demands of
the child protection sector.
Globally, associations of social work have been powerful
organizations that advocate for the development and promo-
tion of the profession in general, as well as set codes of ethics
and other standards of practice (Payne 2002). Internationally,
this effort has been led by the International Federation of Social
Workers (IFSW) and the International Association of Schools
of Social Work, which has adopted a global definition of social
work with a human rights orientation (International Federation
of Social Workers and International Association of Schools of
Social Work 2014). These international organizations are sen-
sitive to the need to adapt the social work practice definition to
contextual issues while taking a generalist position in terms of
social work practice. For instance, IFSW develops resources
and makes periodic position statements on specific issues and
global social problems such as disaster management and hu-
man rights issues that are often emergent, such as the refugee
resettlement crisis and other social problems in which social
workers may play key leadership and direct practice roles.
IFSW also promotes the development of national associa-
tions of social work. These national associations, when func-
tional, often act in training oversight (certification of training),
setting continuing education expectations and activities na-
tionwide; work of the organization includes consulting with
government and other organizations as needed, including col-
laboration on social services training initiatives. When a na-
tional association is operational, conferences on social work
are one of the clear activity areas and outputs, and sometimes
these meetings are held in coordination with IFSW with inter-
national delegates attending as both participants and speakers.
Another natural outgrowth of associations of social work are
the establishment of guidelines for social work education, in
some cases including rigorous accreditation standards.
Social work associations exist in India both at national and
state levels with varying degrees of functionality, but a profes-
sional accrediting body for schools of social work does not
currently exist. Overall, the associational activity that exists
appears sporadic and lacking in a strategic approach to en-
gagement in macro-change strategies on a national scale.
Even with concerted efforts to bring together educators in
social work for a common vision, a range of objective educa-
tional standards/competencies have yet to emerge in India
(Personal communication, Vimla Nadkarni, TISS Emeritus
Professor and President of the International Association of
Schools of Social Work September 2015). While one can the-
orize a number of reasons for this failure to develop accredi-
tation standards and programming requirements thus far, the
sheer size of India and number of schools of social work most
certainly play a significant role in this gap. However, as the
social workforce is expanding in India, particularly with re-
gard to child protection, the need to elevate the status of social
work education nationally is obvious. At this juncture, it is
 Author's personal copy
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
essential for the profession to develop standards of care with
core competencies that are reflective of the social problems/
child human rights issues and multiple social, economic, and
other factors in the social ecology and policy realities of India.
Recommendations for Social Work Education,
Training, and Professional Engagement
with a Child Protection System
The authors have identified the following areas as focal points
for social work education and its interface with a child protec-
tion system. A core part of the recommendations is that a
national association of social work educators in India must
be established to lead and govern the following policies.
Development of Educational Standards
in a Competency-Based Approach
BIn 2004, representatives of schools of social work in India
fleshed out minimum standards for social work education on
behalf of the National Assessment and Accreditation Council
(NAAC) that resulted in the formulation of goals for social
work education in the country,^ one of which includes
Bpromoting the values of human dignity, human rights, demo-
cratic participation of people, peaceful, and collaborative social
relationships^ (Nadkarni and Sinha 2016, p. 13). It is crucial
that these standards need to be built upon with a competency-
based approach to practice behaviors and other models, such as
the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) in the USA.
The CSWE may provide a starting point for the ways in which
competencies have been written and implemented nationally in
a large country with many schools and departments of social
work. Although the CSWE competencies are not child protec-
tion specific, the manner and method in which the competen-
cies framework has been developed in the USA is a worthy
model to at least understand. The authors are not advocating a
copy of that model, given that the contextual factors related to
child protection as well as status of social work profession in
India are different from that in the USA. We suggest that a look
at what has been accomplished thus far elsewhere, as a starting
point. Then, building out competencies that are oriented to
India’s specific issues, to include a social development model,
is critical in realizing child protection goals (Singh 2013).
India-Specific Textbooks and Other Teaching
and Learning Resources
One key concern that has been voiced repeatedly by Indian
social workers and other scholars is the need to indigenize
social work education (Tatsuru 2014)—that is, stop the over-
reliance on textbooks and other resources from the West (par-
ticularly the USA) and build upon decades of Indian knowl-
edge for innovative curriculum (Gray et al. 2010; Singh et al.
2011). Social work education needs to address the challenge
of making the profession relevant to the context and contem-
porary situation in the country (Singh 2015). This assertion is
made based on the use of a curriculum that emphasizes indi-
vidualism rather than collectivist realities that undermine cul-
turally relevant practice (Singh et al. 2011). Fundamentally,
using Western concepts and remedial social work approaches
(e.g., individualistic social casework oriented to correction of
personal problems) along with limited research in and applica-
tion of social development has been a problem in the diffusion
of Western social work educational resources to countries like
India. The American influence on social work education has
undermined the importance of social and economic develop-
ment, social action, and the promotion of preventive services
that is desperately needed in India today (Singh 2015).
Furthermore, the failure of the USA to ratify the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child means that many of the
social work textbooks from that country are lacking in appro-
priate rights-based content. Because US textbooks are common-
ly used, this fact of limited child rights information, combined
with case examples that do not effectively capture the low-re-
source/social ecology, the policy environment or the rights of
children enshrined in the domestic legal regime governing chil-
dren in India, is a serious problem that must not be overlooked.
A specific topic of high importance at this juncture is a
forensic social work textbook and trained faculty as well as
collaborative partnerships with government and other relevant
bodies, in order to help contextualize the practice of social
work at the district level and enable professional engagement
with law while working with other stakeholders in a legal
context. Social work professionals need to be prepared to en-
gage with child rights law and legal systems, be appointed to
bodies such as the JJBs, CWCs, Inspection Committees, or
Selection Committees, deal with matters concerning children,
initiate and contribute to the filing of Public Interest
Litigation, (i.e., litigation in the interest of the wider public,
initiated by someone other than the aggrieved person such as a
spirited citizen) as well as advocacy and media engagement on
child protection, all of which contribute to enabling justice for
children, and in making the state accountable to children and
their families.
The Need to Develop an India-Specific Code
of Ethics and Principles
In addition, recently underscored is the need for a code of ethics
and indigenized ethical standards in India (Reamer and
Nimmagadda 2015). Fundamentally, this is not just a need in
India, but is a common concern around the world (Gray et al.
 Author's personal copy
2010). While the IFSW and IASSW provide a statement of
ethical principles, given India’s long history of social work prac-
tice and education, it is surprising that an India-specific code or
principles have not been developed building upon the IFSW and
IASSW framework. One of the underlying reasons for a failure
to develop a code of ethics/principles is directly related to lim-
ited activity in social work associations on a national basis.
A general code of ethics/principles must be expanded upon
with guidance on how to implement it with children and fam-
ilies as they interface with child protection systems. Particular
attention should be paid to children in conflict with the law
and children in need of care and protection by the state, in-
cluding children in alternative care. These children are partic-
ularly vulnerable, and developing clear guidance for handling
these cases through an ethically grounded rights-based ap-
proach is essential for protecting and realizing their rights.
For example, child adoption is a specific area for very clear
ethical conduct that is congruent with national adoption laws
that have been designed to preserve family life and avoid
unnecessary child removals, including illicit adoptions that
result from pressure related to child sales (Rotabi and
Bromfield 2017).
The Development of a Leadership Institute
for Child Protection Social Workers
By leveraging the presence of existing educational and train-
ing institutions, mobilizing government resources available
for training and continuing education and inviting donor agen-
cies such as UNICEF that work on child protection and child
rights, a standing child protection leadership institute should
be developed such that an array of short-term and long-term
trainings can be developed and delivered, including a
residency-based training format for those engaged in child
protection management, particularly DCPU Officers. Of par-
ticular concern for training is strategic and social planning,
advanced need-assessment skills, facilitating the participatory
aspect in this evaluation process, and the collaborative skills
necessary for working in multi-disciplinary teams, including
task group facilitation.
In such an institute, refresher courses for social work fac-
ulty as well as law schools and allied disciplines (psychology,
psychiatry, etc.) can be provided in alignment across the pro-
fessions. Within such a structure, the social work faculty can
be trained in child rights law and the law faculty can be trained
in understanding interdisciplinary work and the positive out-
comes for children. Other opportunities to build collaborative
teamwork within a mutual framework of understanding can be
created in an institute setting. Inclusive of developing team-
work strategies would be an opportunity to strengthen Block
and Village Child Protection Committees in order to realize
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
local systems building and ultimately, a more responsive
community.
Convene a National Conference on Social
Work Education and Child Protection
on a Regular Basis
A national meeting on social work education tied into a na-
tional child protection conference should take place on at least
a semi-annual basis, if not annually. The conference should be
underwritten by the child protection development sector such
that the cost of participation is minimal for each attendee. The
national meeting can occur in the days after the child protec-
tion conference—potentially, a 3-day child protection confer-
ence covering an array of research and practice topics can be
implemented with a 2-day follow-up conference for social
work educators. For the main child protection conference,
customized training sessions can be provided to the various
stakeholders in the child protection system with an emphasis
on DCPU workers as well as CWC and JJB members, social
work members of Inspection Committees or Selection
Committees, etc.
For the social work educators meeting, it is important that it
not be just a movement towards standardization of social work
education with a competencies orientation; such a gathering of
educators needs to also be viewed as a valuable opportunity
for promoting research in child protection. Not only can
higher standards of research ethics be promoted there, it can
potentially trigger an exploration of past and future research
on child protection. Research collaboration can be discussed
and even negotiated as a result of a productive meeting, a
discourse can include how data are collected and shared
among child protection functionaries, and how colleges and
universities may begin to more effectively engage in data col-
lection and analysis for mutual benefit.
The Development of a National Research
Agenda Focused on Child Rights and Systems
of Care
Supporting schools of social work to develop research and
generate evidence for the development of sound policies and
care systems, on a national level, is essential. As part of such
an initiative, a focus should be on high standards of research
and ethics at not just the Ph.D. level, but also research projects
carried out by the range of students engaged in field-based
learning. Particularly important are techniques of engaging
with children as well as marginalized groups in research, in-
cluding participatory action research techniques. When these
approaches to the science of social work are strengthened,
evidence-based policy and programming in India will
 Author's personal copy
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
naturally emerge—one that will then also contribute to more
informed formulation of laws relating to child protection. In
this process, a national repository on data related to current,
past, and future research on child protection can be collected
and shared among child protection functionaries, as well as
colleges and universities to support a national research
agenda.
Conclusion
We have presented the above recommendations in response to
an urgent need to build child protection systems at all levels of
society, including the local level where children and their
families may be supported in the context of a vibrant com-
munity response to child rights. A human rights-based ap-
proach to child protection would require firstly, an integra-
tion of human rights and child protection within social work
education, so as to prepare graduates with the required com-
petencies to practice effectively within the child protection
sector; secondly, building of synergies across social work
professional associations, child protection specialists, and
social work educators so as to strengthen the interlinkages
between practice theory and also respond to the emerging
needs of the sector, and thirdly, creating a long-term, sus-
tainable pathways whereby human rights-based approaches
inform policy, practice, and education on social work in the
child protection sector. There is a clear need to strengthen
social work education to meet this end, with an orientation
to rights-based approaches to social change. In order to sup-
port change in social work education, we strongly advocate
for professional oversight, particularly the development of
an accreditation system along with the development of an
India-specific code of ethics within a professional associa-
tion. This latter and critical issue, a code of ethics, is best
situated in coalescing the energies of the various associa-
tions of social work existent throughout the country and
perhaps a national social work educators association that
has adequate support for functioning—financial and oth-
er—can lead the charge to provide a collaborative frame-
work to accomplish this task. As these systems converge,
there is a need to re-examine human resource planning for
child protection and the role of social workers, including
long-term visioning that may assist in building sustainable
linkages between social work education, child protection
systems, and professional organizations, in order to realize
the goal of a robust cadre of professionally trained child
protection workforce. Finally, progress at the university lev-
el of social work education has largely been our focus of
analysis and recommendations target that aspect of system
strengthening, inclusive of the importance of professional
association. However, we recognize that developing oppor-
tunities for increasing the capacities of the paraprofessional
workforce is essential to truly strengthen the child protec-
tion system. We recognize that this is a limitation of our
discussion and we welcome the conversation and even de-
bates that this article inspires—inclusive of the need to in-
clude planning for paraprofessional training that will re-
quire creative ideas and renewed energy for supporting this
critical aspect of care. In fact, it is our hope that this article is
a catalyst for critical discourse and new strategic planning to
realize greater efficiency and effectiveness in India’s child
protection system.
References
Adaikalam, F. V. (2014). Contextualizing social work education in India.
Alternatives. Cuadernos deTrabajo Social [Social Works Notebooks],
21(21), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.14198/ALTERN2014.21.11.
Alphonse, M., George, P., & Moffatt, K. (2008). Redefining social work
standards in the context of globalization: lessons from India.
International Social Work, 51(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0020872807085855.
Better Care Network and Global Social Service Workforce Alliance.
(2015). Working paper on the role of social service workforce de-
velopment in care reform. Washington, DC: IntraHealth Available
from http://www.socialserviceworkforce.org/resources/role-social-
service-workforce-development-care-reform.
Bose, A. B. (1992). Social work in India: Developmental roles for a
helping profession. In M. C. Hokenstad, S. K. Khinduka, & J.
Midgley (Eds.), Profiles in international social work (pp. 71–83).
Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers Press.
Desai, M., & Narayan, L. (1998). Challenges for social work profession:
towards people-centered development. The Indian Journal of Social
Work, 39(2), 531–558.
Government of India (2015). Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act.
Available from http://uphome.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/Images/j-
j-act.PDF
Gray, M., Coates, J., & Yellow Bird, M. (Eds.). (2010). Indigenous social
work around the world: towards culturally relevant education and
practice. Surrey: Ashgate Press.
International Federation of Social Workers and International Association
of Schools of Social Work. (2014). Global definition of social work.
Retrieved from https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-
definition-of-social-work/
Ministry of Women and Child Development (2009). Chapter 1:
Conceptual background of the scheme. The integrated child protec-
tion scheme (ICPS)- A centrally sponsored scheme of government-
civil society partnership. Available from http://wcd.nic.in/childprot/
drafticps.pdf
Nadkarni, V. (2013). Contextualizing social work education: lessons from
the Indian experience. In Z. Meenai (Ed.), Repositioning social work
education and practice (pp. 1–16). New Delhi: Bloomsbury.
Nadkarni, V. V., & Sinha, R. (2016). Transforming social work education in
India: Integrating human rights. Journal of Human Rights and Social
Work, 1(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-016-0002-3.
Panicker, R. (1998). Children’s rights: Challenges and future thrust.
Indian Journal of Social Work, 59(1), 276–290.
Pathare, S. (2014). Social work education in India. In A. Tatsuru (Ed.),
Internationalization and indigenization of social work education in
Asia (pp. 183–250). Retrieved from https://jcsw.repo.nii.ac.jp/?
action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_view_main_
item_detail&item_id=250&item_no=1&page_id=13&block_id=32
 Author's personal copy
Payne, M. (2002). The role and achievements of a professional associa-
tion in the late twentieth century: the British Association of Social
Workers 1970–2000. British Journal of Social Work, 32(8), 969–
995.
Reamer, F. G., & Nimmagadda, J. (2015). Social work ethics in India: a
call for the development of indigenized ethical standards.
International Social Work. Advance online publication. doi:https://
doi.org/10.1177/0020872814559563.
Reynaert, D., Bouverne-De Bie, M., & Vandevelde, S. (2010). Children’s
rights education and social work: contrasting models and under-
standings. International Social Work, 53(4), 443–456. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0020872809355367.
Rotabi, K. S., & Bromfield, N. F. (2017). From intercountry adoption to
global surrogacy: a human rights history and new fertility frontiers.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Sampurna Behrua v (2018). Union of India, 1501 (supreme court of
India).
Singh, S. (2013). Social work and social development: perspectives from
India and the United States. Chicago: Lyceum.
Singh, D. (2015). American impact on social work education in India and
the way forward. Conference publication. doi:https://doi.org/10.
13140/RG.2.1.3466.120.
Singh, S., Gumz, E. J., & Crawley, B. C. (2011). Predicting India’s future:
does it justify the exportation of U.S. social work education? Social
View publication stats
J. Hum. Rights Soc. Work
Work Education, 30(7), 861–873. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02615479.2010.515303.
Tatsuru, A. (Ed.) (2014). Internationalization and indigenization of social
work education in Asia. Retrieved from https://jcsw.repo.nii.ac.jp/?
action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_view_main_
item_detail&item_id=250&item_no=1&page_id=
sowers13&block_id=32
The Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice (2016). Strengthening
rehabilitation and restoration of children under the juvenile justice
system. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.in/Uploads/Publications/
Resources/pub_doc116.pdf.
The Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice (2017). Effective im-
plementation of the juvenile justice (care and protection of children)
act of 2015: Focus on rehabilitation services and linkages with the
POSCO Act, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.in/Uploads/
Publications/Resources/pub_doc147.pdf.
UN General Assembly (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Available from https://www.unicef.org/crc/.
UNICEF, UNHCR, Save the Children and World Vision (2013). A better
way to protect all children: The Theory and practice of child pro-
tection systems. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/protection/
files/C956_CPS_interior_5_130620web.pdf.