ORI GIN AL PA PER

Eliciting Children’s Perspectives of Risk and Protectionin Liberia: How to Do It and Why Does It Matter?

Monica Ruiz-Casares • Cecile Rousseau • Joeta Morlu •

Celestine Browne

Published online: 7 June 2013� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

AbstractBackground After 14 years of civil war and two rounds of democratic elections, Liberia

is working to reduce child abuse and exploitation. Young children’s perceptions on pro-

tection and risk are rarely elicited to inform program planning and intervention.

Objective The aim of the present study was to explore young children’s perceptions of

child protection and risk in a post-conflict setting and how visual methodologies may

facilitate this process.

Methods Six group discussions using visual methodologies were conducted with 59

children aged 7–11 years living in family and residential care in rural and urban settings in

Central and Western Liberia. Data were analysed using inductive coding.

Results There was no unanimous concept of ‘child’, which included people with limited

capabilities between the ages of 5–46 years. Children identified a number of risk and

protective factors. Normative knowledge (e.g., smoking) elicited unanimous reactions

whereas survival-related life experiences (e.g., violence or food) yielded ambivalent

understandings of risk and protection. Visual methods facilitated active and thoughtful

participation among young children.

Conclusions These findings add to the scarce literature on child participation in public

decision-making in child protection. They also have practical implications. Children’s own

and community transmitted perceptions of life experiences need to be taken into account to

M. Ruiz-Casares � C. RousseauDivision of Social and Transcultural Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

M. Ruiz-CasaresCentre for Research on Children and Families, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

M. Ruiz-Casares (&) � C. RousseauCentre de Recherche et de Formation, Centre de Sante et de Services Sociaux de la Montagne,7085 Hutchison, Office 204.2.14, Montreal, QC H3N 1Y9, Canadae-mail: monica.ruizcasares@mcgill.ca

J. Morlu � C. BrowneChild Protection Program, Save the Children, Monrovia, Liberia

123

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437DOI 10.1007/s10566-013-9208-z

inform service planning and implementation. Visual methods are recommended to that end

as they increase participation among young children and help avoid pre-conceived notions

of dangerous and protective practices.

Keywords Visual methods � Child protection � Child participation �Group discussion � Liberia

Introduction

The value of child participation is recognized in the UN Convention on the Rights of the

Child (CRC) (1989), ratified by Liberia in 1993, and supported domestically by the

Children’s Law (2012). Article 12 of the CRC provides that children have the right to

express their views and be involved in decision-making according to their own maturity. In

turn, the Children’s Law underlines the need to support children to express their views in

order to advance the rights and interests of children (Articles 14 and 16). Practical reasons

reinforce the human rights argument and legal requirement. Not only may children’s input

result in more effective interventions (Aldiss et al. 2009; Cavet and Sloper 2004; Davies

and Wright 2008), but children and providers may also draw a personal benefit from

collaborating (Willumsen and Skivenes 2005). A large scoping review indicated that child

participation in child protection may have positive effects such as increasing children’s

safety and feelings of wellbeing (Vis et al. 2011). Indeed, children’s perceptions on child

protection and risk are crucial to ensure that children are protected from violence and abuse

at all levels (Rampazzo and Twahirwa 2010).

Researchers in the field of child protection have paid limited attention to children’s

participation in public decision-making, particularly outside of Western industrialized

countries. Instead, research has largely focused on older children ([12 years), and issues

related to court attendance and care planning of individual cases (Timms and Thoburn

2006; Holland 2004). Less attention has been paid to effective participation in child

protection service development and public decisions affecting children ‘as a group’. Often

excluded have been children of primary school age or younger (Aubrey and Dahl 2006),

and certain groups of children, such as ethno-cultural groups and non-biological children

(of the head of household). Participation in research aimed at informing services and

policies is further limited ‘‘when potential child participants are considered vulnerable and

the topic of the research is regarded as sensitive’’ (Powell and Smith 2009, p. 125).

The legal and developmental boundaries defining childhood vary across cultures and

times (Kehily 2008; LeVine 2007). These collective representations are internalized by the

children themselves and associated with different appreciations of their role and of what

they should expect from their environment. Researchers have found that young people are

willing and able to discuss their perceptions of child protection (Woolfson et al. 2010).

This needs to be conducted in ways that facilitate communication and balance power

relations (Cousins and Milner 2006). Child-focused research methodologies hold the

potential to enhance meaningful child participation while ensuring their protection

(Hunleth 2011). For example, there is evidence that the techniques such as play, puppets,

drawing, and storytelling help engage children in research and share their perspectives

(Aldiss et al. 2009; Davies and Wright 2008). Similarly, the use of visual methodologies is

gaining ground among researchers as a way to enhance the validity and usefulness of study

426 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

results (Harper 2002; Clark-Ibanez 2004; Mitchell 2011). Photographs, for example, have

been successfully used as prompts in structured individual interviews with young children

(Aubrey and Dahl 2006). Despite limited evidence, researcher-provided photographs may

also be used in a group setting to elicit viewpoints and generate discussion, thereby making

participants central to the collective process of interpretation.

The legacy of 14 years of civil strife and extreme poverty in Liberia resulted in major

violations to child protection (CRIN 2010; UNDP 2011). Despite gradual improvements in

the last few years, diverse forms of child abuse are still widespread. Child labour is

prevalent in the country, particularly in the agriculture (rubber tapping) and mining sectors

(USDL 2010). Sexual violence against children and human trafficking from rural to urban

areas, across borders, and to diamond mining areas for purposes of domestic service,

prostitution, and forced labour, abound (USDS 2011a; Abrahams 2011; Sarkar et al. 2009).

Underage marriage, corporal punishment, and female genital mutilation continue to be

performed, especially in rural areas (Government of Liberia 2009). Despite efforts to

reunite separated children with their families, many children still live on the streets of

Monrovia and other major urban centers (USDS 2011b) or in unofficial orphanages and

orphanages unable to provide adequate care to the children living there, most of whom

have living parents (MOHSW 2011).

This paper provides empirical evidence for participatory research and practice in child

protection by seeking the perspectives of children of primary school age in a post-conflict

setting; included were both biological and non-biological children living in family settings

and in residential care. We describe an innovative method to hold group discussions (GDs)

with boys and girls aged 7–11 years in communities in Central and Western Liberia.

Photographs were used to elicit children’s attitudes, practices, and knowledge—both

normative and experiential, about salient issues in child protection. We also analyze

children’s discussions of the photographs. We hypothesized that systematic recruitment

and child-oriented visual methods would facilitate an active exchange of diverse per-

spectives by young children in all settings; and that young children’s understandings of

who is a child and what constitutes child abuse and neglect would differ from commonly-

held perceptions of risk and protection in high income countries, which dominate the

literature on protection. This study has a double purpose. The first aim is to pilot an

innovative method to enhance children participation in the determination of risk and

protective factors. The second objective is to incorporate children’s input to assist with

program development and implementation.

Method

Setting and Participants

Six GDs were conducted in Central and Western Liberia, including Greater Monrovia, in

May–June 2011 to explore the views and experiences of 59 children aged 7–11 years (9–10

participants per group). Overall, 28 boys and 31 girls participated. Two GDs were con-

ducted with children in orphanages (both urban); the rest involved children living in family

settings (two in rural and two in urban locations). GDs were conducted in the context of a

larger child protection study commissioned by Save the Children-UK (SC) in Liberia

aimed at establishing a baseline on current levels of knowledge, attitudes, and practices on

child protection as well as at identifying resources, barriers, and enabling factors that may

contribute to violations of child protection. Two GDs with a balanced group of boys and

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 427

123

girls (approximately 10) were conducted for each of the main variables of interest of the

larger study, namely type of care (family/residential) and location (rural/urban); no

orphanages were located in rural settings. GDs with children in family-based care included

both biological and non-biological children of the head of the household, as there was

anecdotal evidence of differential treatment of children in the family. The data reported in

this paper was collected in Bong, Gbarpolu, Margibi and Montserrado counties.

Procedures

Upon arrival into a community, GD facilitators (both men and women) met with the local

authority to gain permission to work in the community and to map neighborhoods where

child protection issues were likely to be found. Careful explanation of survey procedures to

the Chief was conducted to ensure neighbors would not feel threatened by the research and

would understand that households were selected according to set criteria and that there was

no monetary compensation. Screening questionnaires for family-based and institutional

settings were developed to facilitate recruitment of a diverse group of children (e.g., by not

selecting more than one participant from the same household, covering different areas of

town, and children with different religious affiliations). GD facilitators visited households

in pairs to identify eligible participants, obtain parental consent, and invite children who

met pre-established criteria. Care was taken to avoid mixing in the same group children

from very different socio-economic status as this might interfere with children’s comfort

and effective participation.

Parents and caretakers were provided with a detailed account of the purpose and use of

the study and their informed consent was obtained for children to participate. Permission

was obtained from children before starting the discussion, making a brief pause after the

introduction so that they could leave without feeling any pressure. Survey principles and

procedures, including confidentiality and voluntary participation, were explained orally to

ensure understanding. Careful explanations were provided in order not to raise unwar-

ranted expectations in children and adults. The SC Child Safeguarding Policy including

procedures for reporting suspected abuse and ensuring safe child participation was applied

in the study. Nonetheless, no such case emerged from the GDs. Refreshments were pro-

vided to all children at the end of the GDs in gratitude for their participation. Permission to

undertake the study was granted by the Liberia Ministry of Health and Social Welfare.

Scientific and ethical approval was also obtained from the Research Ethics Committee at

the Health and Social Services Centre de la Montagne affiliated with McGill University

(Canada) as well as by an Advisory Committee created ad hoc in Monrovia, which

included representatives from relevant ministries, NGOs, and UNICEF.

Interviews were conducted during out-of-school time and lasted between one-and-half

and two-and-half hours each. All GDs were facilitated in pidgin English by one of the

Liberian authors, experienced in facilitating GDs with children and accompanied by one or

two note-takers. Moderator’s Topic Guides were developed to facilitate discussion and

note-taking. Having obtained informed consent, facilitators started with a song or cultur-

ally appropriate game and participant introductions. Next, children’s definition of child,

ages at which children could start doing different activities, and daily routines were

explored. Subsequently, children’s perspectives of risk and protection were mostly elicited

through the use of photographs. About 70 color photographs representing elements of

nature and human interactions that Liberian children could easily relate to (half positive

and half negative; some in duplicate) were selected from diverse websites. Themes were

abstracted from the scientific child development literature as well as a desk review of child

428 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

protection studies from Liberia, and verified by the co-authors, all with ample expertise in

this area, and two GDs with adult caregivers and children carried out prior to data col-

lection. Images represented the following themes: nature, basic needs (e.g., food, clothing,

shelter, care/attachment), family and peer relations, school environment, sports and leisure

activities (including children playing games, socializing, and using substances), religious

places and practices, working children (including child soldiers and children working in

mines), and symbols of social desirability (e.g., money, beauty, liberty).

During the GD, all photographs were extended on a flat surface (table or floor). Twice

during the activity, children were invited to walk around them, observe, and select one that

represented something that made them feel good and safe and, later, bad and unsafe. These

simple questions were selected to uncover children’s representations of both wellbeing/

protection and risk of harm. The photographs were used as triggers (visual support) to elicit

children stories about wellbeing and vulnerability. The vocabulary of the questions was

simple and age appropriate, as established in consultation with key informants. Children

were then invited to explain to the large group their choices, which provided an oppor-

tunity to validate interpretations in a non-judgmental way. All photographs were then

returned to the pile for the second round of selections. This allowed to surface conflicting

interpretations of the same images.

Data Analysis

GDs were digitally recorded with agreement from participants and their caretakers.

Denominalized notes from GDs were typed into Excel and Word documents for data

archival and easy retrieval of information. Qualitative data was coded inductively using

open and thematic coding techniques. Content analysis was also used to flag converging

and diverging views. Special attention was paid to the meaning that children attached to

each image as a representation of protection or risk.

Results

Process to Enhance Participation

Two innovative practices were used in this study to enhance child participation—one for

recruitment and another one at the discussion stage. Recruitment was time-consuming and

recruiting non-biological children of the head of the household was often difficult; the

latter was likely due to caretakers’ preference that their own biological children participate,

in the hopes of directing any potential benefits or gains towards the latter. Nonetheless, the

recruitment strategy used ensured considerable diversity among participants.

In all groups, children enjoyed looking at the photographs, holding them, and eventually

selecting one that made them feel ‘good and safe’ and another one, ‘bad and unsafe’.

Returning photographs to the pile for the second round of selections allowed conflicting

interpretations to surface of the same images. There were instances where two persons had

the same picture but expressed different things. Other times, they gave similar responses

but different examples. All in all, the use of photographs and small groups facilitated

children’s active participation and sustained their interest throughout the activity. Children

often joked and laughed during the activity, and on numerous occasions they had to be

reminded that only one photograph was to be selected (and later returned to the pile!).

Quieter participation of children in orphanages could be a reflection of a more deprived

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 429

123

environment in which children may be under stimulated (and also still mourning). It may

also result from a more disciplined environment and reflect injunctions about good

behavior and participation by institutional authorities.

A Child Is ‘‘Someone Like Us’’: Concepts of Childhood

Participants were asked to explain who was a child to them. The age at which they thought

a boy became a man ranged from below 8 to 46 years; girls became women between 5 and

30 years. Expressions used to describe a child included ‘‘a small person’’, ‘‘someone who

is innocent,’’ ‘‘under age or under restriction,’’ and who ‘‘cannot do woman business’’ (i.e.,

engage in sexual activity). Still, a few described a child as a person under 18 years of age.

Table 1 shows ages at which children can start doing certain activities according to par-

ticipants. Ranges were broad for all tasks listed. Activities that children may start at a

younger age include drawing water or toting wood, walking alone to school, and cutting

grass. Earning money to buy their own things or to contribute to the family would start no

earlier than 10 years, and generally at an adult age.

Child Risk and Protective Factors

Children identified a number of risk and protective factors (Fig. 1). Overall, risk factors

included basic needs not met (e.g., food and clothing), violence and harsh disciplining

practices, smoking and other substance use by children, and child labor (e.g., children

toting heavy rocks). Lack of food was of particular concern—I don’t like the photo because

the people are dry dry (slim/thin); they look sick. So was violence in many manifestations

(e.g., husband beating wife, parents fighting over children, child beating, locking children

up, teachers yelling at students, guns, and harming children through witch power). Beating

at home and at school made children feel? sad and unsafe. They explained how people beat

their children like this in this community when the children insult other people; some

children can be beaten by people in the street. In the school setting, children denounced

teachers yelling at and beating students—it is not good for teacher to beat student, so I

don’t like this photo; if the teacher continues beating the student the student will get sick

and he doesn’t have money to send the student to the hospital. Children also explained

Table 1 Children’s views onage at which children can startdoing selected tasks

Task (n = 59) Age

Min Max Median(mode)

Draw water or tote wood 5 14 10 (10)

Cook 9 20 13 (12)

Walk alone to school 3 19 10 (10)

Walk alone to the market 9 21 16 (18)

Care for brothers and sisters(no adults around)

9 20 16 (17)

Cut grass 6 18 12 (11)

Expected to earn moneyto buy their own things

10 31 18 (17)

Expected to contribute moneyto the family

13 55 26 (20)

430 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

selecting certain photographs because children looked fearful, confused, or sick—and

sickness makes you unsafe. Physical hazards and lack of hygiene were also considered; for

example, places were described as unsafe because they were very dirty and the presence of

a candle in the background made some children feel bad because when the woman makes

mistake (…) the candle can burn people and house. Just like the danger of fire was of

concern to children in different groups, several participants worried about children in

prison because it is not good to jail a child.

Child protective factors included having access to food, clothing, transportation,

healthcare, and schooling; having time to sing, play, and practice sports; praying and

attending services; children living with and helping parents at home; and parents playing,

joking, and reading with children, as well as showing them love (e.g., when your mother

loves you, you feel good and safe); this includes not beating them [children] without love.

Interestingly, this reflects how the children internalized the fact that physical punishment

may be a sign of parental investment and has to be differentiated from physical abuse,

which has the objective to harm the child. This traditional assumption is reflected in

numerous proverbs, including from the Bible—‘‘Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but

he who loves him is diligent to discipline him’’ (Proverbs 13:24). In fact, the expression

‘‘spare the rod, spoil the child’’ is often used by adults in Liberia, across all religious

denominations. Children also mentioned that it was good to provide children with support

in the form of money or a football ball—Money makes me happy (…), I will buy my food

and clothes. Children’s acute awareness of the meaning of money gains special force in a

context of financial scarcity. Although this attitude towards money may not differ from

other countries, increasing modernization and purchasing power are likely to change the

use that children give to their money (i.e., spending more in non-essential items instead of

basic needs as indicated in this quote). The value of independent money management and

the symbolic importance of clothes as a sign of status for working children has been

documented in neighboring Cote d’Ivoire (Jacquemin 2004). Finally, representations of

healthcare professionals were selected by children in different groups because when you go

to medical school, it is good because you will treat people when they are sick.

Certain activities and goods were alternatively assessed as risk or protection (Table 2).

For example, photographs representing weapons and child soldiers were selected by some

children as representations of protection; holding a gun was thus described as a sign of

strength and a tool for self-defence. In contrast, these images represented imminent danger

for other children; the association of guns with death, isolation, and forced migration, was

Fig. 1 Photographs depicting risk and protective factors identified by children

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 431

123

common, arising from family or personal experience. Despite their young age, the history

of prolonged and violent civil war in which almost 150,000 people died and one million

were displaced into refugee camps is still very recent, and armed personnel are still

common sight around the country (UNMIL n.d.). Similarly, images of joyful children

surrounded by many fruits and vegetables were selected by some to represent greed and

risk of harm (e.g., envy or need may entice others into stealing), and by others to represent

a basic need that must be met for protection. Whereas children’s hard labor (e.g., in mine

quarry) was generally described as unsafe, other children interpreted it as a way to obtain

money and therefore selected the image as protective—They are hulling load because they

will get pay. I feel good when I get pay. The significance of children as economic agents

and children’s appreciation of working for pay has been documented in other African

countries too (Robson 2004; Orkin 2011). This dichotomy between child labor and pro-

tection requires, at least, an in-depth analysis of each context before launching an inter-

vention (Bourdillon 2005). Discrepancies in interpretation also emerged on specific

elements in photographs; for example, one child explained liking dogs because they can

safe people, while another indicated not liking dogs because they can bite people; or one

participant justified his selection because of the kissing the people are doing, while other

children in the group explained feeling bad for them kissing (…) because some people do

not wash their mouth and that makes their mouth smell bad.

Discussion

Results from this study confirm our original hypotheses that systematic recruitment and

visual methods facilitate effective child participation, and that young children’s views of

risk and protection are mixed and may challenge common understandings of child pro-

tection by adults within the international community. This includes usual age ranges for

engaging in certain activities (as indicated in Table 1) as well as a broader identification of

Table 2 Quotes from children’s views on risk and protection on selected themes

Theme Risk Protection

Violence(guns)

Guns killed plenty of children in Liberia; this iswhat my mother told me

It is not good to fight war; this boy is holding agun; he could kill anybody. [He has] no one togo to for help because he is holding a gun

The army man [is] showing gun to the children. Idon’t like people pointing gun at me; it canmake me feel bad

I don’t like this photo because war can make youto run away from your home, the soldier willcome and take all your good things from yourhouse and burn it

When the war comes to Liberia, I will besafe when I am holding a gun. Nobodywill kill me

The boy holding a gun makes me feel safebecause the gun will protect him from badpeople

Food The boy is greedy; if a child is greedy he or shecould get killed; someone can fool him andcarry him because of food and harm him/her

I love eating and laughingGood food makes you wellIt is good to eat, it makes you to grow and

do workI like the photo because it has food on the

table (…), the people are eating plenty offood

432 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

risk and protective factors. Bound by an obligation to protect children from potential harm,

adults also uphold the right of children of all ages to take part in research and in public

decision-making (CRC 1989). Avoiding overprotection and paternalism (Balen et al. 2006)

needs to be combined with appropriate protection of children who chose to participate and

the continuous development of methods to communicate effectively with children (Vis and

Thomas 2009; Kirby et al. 2003; Franklin and Sloper 2009). This also includes the

informed consent process, as risks and benefits need to be explained to children and

caretakers in a language they can easily understand.

In adapting the method hereby described, we encourage researchers and practitioners to

select photographs that represent the cultural and socio-economic context of children in

each setting while presenting a balanced range of options. In our study, the use of a diverse

set of photographs to focus discussion and elicit children’s views allowed children to think

freely and respond without feeling threatened or experiencing loyalty conflicts. In fact,

whereas children in institutions might have been somewhat more reserved on their answers

to the initial questions, using photographs during the second part of the discussion helped

‘‘break the frame’’ and stimulate participation. Time and resources available may set limits

to the use of the recruitment approach used in this study. However, attention should be paid

to maximizing the diversity of perspectives. Child protection systems need to be supported

in context. Recruitment and group composition should reflect local customs, norms, and

pre-existing structures, including families so that adults do not feel that their authority is

threatened by listening to children and taking their views into account. The purpose is to

ensure that children are not penalized for their participation and to increase use of results

by decision-makers. In fact, findings from this study continue to influence program

planning at all levels in Liberia. For example, lessons learned about corporal punishment

and differential treatment of children within the household have been used to design a

behavior change communication strategy and plan now being implemented through radio

programs and training of community actors. Findings from this study have also informed

multi-year planning by Liberia Department of Social Welfare, including justifying the need

for deployment of more government social workers at the County level.

By ratifying the CRC, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

(1990), and other human rights instruments, Liberia signaled its intention to meet certain

obligations. Although at the time of this study the Children’s Law (2012) had not been

launched yet, Articles 14 and 16 now underline the need to support children to express

their views. Approval for this study provides evidence of the Liberia government’s com-

mitment to the principle of child participation. An example of an adult-initiated consul-

tation (Hart 1997), the approach hereby used is an important step in fostering child

involvement towards more advanced shared-decision processes. Indeed, there is still a long

way to go to strengthen children’s involvement in public decision-making. The imple-

mentation of the CRC domestically requires systems that allow children to voice their

perspectives as well as the adoption of guidelines and standards on child participation by

all institutions and organizations working with young people. Despite the time require-

ments of participatory processes, including children in program development and evalu-

ation can benefit both participating children, staff and organizations; and can also result in

improved interventions (Cavet and Sloper 2004; Nichols 2002; Vis et al. 2011).

The results of this study are not only relevant for research and evaluation given that the

CRC and the rights that it enshrines apply to all aspects of children’s lives and capacities.

For example, the method hereby described can also be used in schools or childcare

institutions to involve young children in decisions affecting them in those settings. Sim-

ilarly, the significance of these findings extends beyond Liberia since the CRC has been

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 433

123

widely adopted internationally (currently 193 countries have ratified or acceded to it). In

adapting these findings to other contexts, attention should be paid to the specific factors

that can enable and hinder the meaningful participation of children and young people in

decision-making in each setting.

Just like this study was successful in eliciting children’s perceptions in a non-threat-

ening, respectful way, researchers should carefully select research methods that are

appropriate to children’s developmental stage as well as to context and culture. The

expectations of young people and adults need to be clearly addressed too. Analysis of the

photo-elicited GDs highlighted the cultural relativity of assumptions about childhood and

child protection. Children’s concept of childhood is not uniform across communities and

reflects both collective and personal understandings of gender roles and family responsi-

bilities. Similarly, despite the universality of child abuse and neglect, the form they take

and the ways to address them vary by culture and overtime. Program development and

implementation need to reflect local norms and systems and have the flexibility to adapt to

the wide range of personal experiences. The need to understand childhood in context and

the challenges of integrating international, domestic, and customary norms such in the case

of post-conflict Liberia have been underlined (Francis 2007).

Children identified a number of risk factors, including unmet basic needs, violence,

substance use by children, and child labor. Child protection factors included providing

food, clothing, and schooling; children living with parents and parents caring for children;

and praying and attending services. Normative knowledge (e.g., smoking) elicited unani-

mous reactions whereas complex life experiences (e.g., violence or food) yielded ambiv-

alent reactions around key risk and protection factors. Poverty and children’s own and

transmitted war experiences can probably explain these findings. In a civil war, survival

can be associated with extreme experiences and transform parents and children’s per-

ceptions of weapons. This may lead children to perceive violence as sometimes necessary

for survival and, as such, protective. Similarly, a lot of food may elicit envy and become a

source of potential danger. These interpretations call for a more nuanced discussion of

wealth and violence, avoiding oversimplification and acknowledging special situations in

the best interest of families and communities.

During the interpretation of findings, some adults’ voiced surprise about children’s

knowledge seemed to reveal a tendency to apply normative judgment about right/wrong

answers rather than to question their own assumptions. Not only are good listening skills

needed to build rapport and encourage children to share (Kirby et al. 2003), but critical

thinking and self-reflective practice are needed to avoid ethnocentrism and adult-centrism.

Providing guidance to practitioners on how to facilitate the participation of children and

develop ‘‘a listening culture’’ may also be needed (Cavet and Sloper 2004). Relatedly,

future studies should assess adult ability and preparedness to involve young people in

decisions on care and protection and how adults—both facilitators and decision makers,

benefit from their involvement in participatory projects (Kirby and Bryson 2002).

This study achieved significant diversity of participants through systematic recruitment.

Nonetheless, results are limited by the characteristics of the sample, which focused on

children 7–11 years of age, and by the qualitative, cross- sectional design. Future studies

could benefit from sub-dividing participants by age, obtaining a more diverse sample (e.g.,

in terms of ability), as well as examining possible sex differences. Involving children in

refining this method (e.g., through collaborative selection of photographs for use with other

groups of children) would further enhance its validity as a tool to advance child

participation.

434 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

Conclusions

This study paves the way toward enhancing children participation in consultation about

their lives and wellbeing. It proposes an innovative, developmentally appropriate method

to move beyond the paper and pencil or interview approach. The integration of visual cues

invites children’ participation through a more playful and less academic process. The

results also provide insight into children’s understanding of core concepts in child pro-

tection, most notably risk and protective factors. Emerging from this study is the impor-

tance of distinguishing normative and experiential knowledge, as the latter yielded

ambivalent understandings among participants. Implications include the need to take into

account children’s own and community transmitted perceptions of life experiences when

researching child protection. Findings also indicate that visual methods increase partici-

pation among young children and help avoid pre-conceived notions of dangerous and

protective practices. In consequence, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers seeking

to advance child protection and promote children’s participation will benefit from using

this method with young children in Liberia and elsewhere. There is no one best way to

protect children but they require active participation of key actors … including young

children!

Acknowledgments This research would not have been possible without the children who so generouslyshared their time and ideas and the dedication of the KAP study research team. Thank you also to CarlF. Weems, Tinka Markham Piper, and two anonymous reviewers for their careful read of different versionsof this manuscript. The study was funded by the United States Agency for International Development(USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of thefunder.

Conflict of interest M.R.-C. takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the dataanalysis. J.M. and C.B. disclosed receiving employment salary for the implementation of the KAP study.M.R.-C. disclosed receiving consultation fees for the design and implementation of the KAP study.

References

Abrahams, B. (2011). Study on traditional trauma healing mechanisms in communities in Liberia. Liberia:UNIFEM.

Aldiss, S., Horstman, M., O’Leary, C., Richardson, A., & Gibson, F. (2009). What is important to youngchildren who have cancer while in hospital? Children & Society, 23(2), 85–98. doi:10.1111/j.1099-0860.2008.00162.x.

Aubrey, C., & Dahl, S. (2006). Children’s voices: The views of vulnerable children on their serviceproviders and the relevance of services they receive. British Journal of Social Work, 36(1), 21–39. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch249.

Balen, R., Blyth, E., Calabretto, H., Fraser, C., Horrocks, C., & Manby, M. (2006). Involving children inhealth and social research. Childhood, 13(1), 29–48. doi:10.1177/0907568206059962.

Bourdillon, M. F. C. (2005). Working children in Zimbabwe. In L. Bass (Ed.), Sociological studies ofchildren and youth (Vol. 10, pp. 7–21). UK: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.

Cavet, J., & Sloper, P. (2004). The participation of children and young people in decisions about UK servicedevelopment. Child: Care, Health and Development, 30(6), 613–621. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2214.2004.00470.x.

Clark-Ibanez, M. (2004). Framing the social world with photo-elicitation interviews. American BehavioralScientist, 47(12), 1507–1527. doi:10.1177/0002764204266236.

Cousins, W., & Milner, S. (2006). Children’s rights: A cross-border study of residential care. Irish Journalof Psychology, 37(1–2), 88–96.

CRC. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. New York: United Nations General Assembly.

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 435

123

CRIN. (2010). Liberia: Children’s rights references in the universal periodic review. 9th Session—2010.London, UK: Child Rights International Network.

Davies, J., & Wright, J. (2008). Children’s voices: A review of the literature pertinent to looked-afterchildren’s views of mental health services. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 13(1), 26–31. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3588.2007.00458.x.

Francis, D. J. (2007). ‘Paper protection’ mechanisms: Child soldiers and the international protection ofchildren in Africa’s conflict zones. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 45(02), 207–231.

Franklin, A., & Sloper, P. (2009). Supporting the participation of disabled children and young people indecision-making. Children & Society, 23(1), 3–15. doi:10.1111/j.1099-0860.2007.00131.x.

Government of Liberia. (2009). Government of Liberia combined second, third, and fourth country report tothe United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. Monrovia, Liberia: Government of Liberia.

Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13–26. doi:10.1080/14725860220137345.

Hart, R. A. (1997). Children’s participation: The theory and practice of involving young citizens in com-munity development and environmental care. London, UK: UNICEF & Earthscan.

Holland, S. (2004). Child and family assessment in social work practice. London: Sage.Hunleth, J. (2011). Beyond on or with: Questioning power dynamics and knowledge production in ‘child-

oriented’ research methodology. Childhood, 18(1), 81–93. doi:10.1177/0907568210371234.Jacquemin, M. Y. (2004). Children’s domestic work in Abidjan, Cote D’ivoire: The petites bonnes have the

floor. Childhood, 11(3), 383–397. doi:10.1177/0907568204044889.Kehily, M. J. (2008). An introduction to childhood studies. London: Open University Press.Kirby, P., & Bryson, S. (2002). Measuring the magic? Evaluating and researching young people’s par-

ticipation in public decision making. London: Carnegie Young People Initiative.Kirby, P., Lanyon, C., Cronin, K., & Sinclair, R. (2003). Building a culture of participation: Involving

children and young people in policy, service planning, delivery and evaluation. Research report.London: Department for Education and Skills.

LeVine, R. A. (2007). Ethnographic studies of childhood: A historical overview. American Anthropologist,109(2), 247–260.

Mitchell, C. (2011). Doing visual research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.MOHSW. (2011). Liberia national social welfare policy. Monrovia, Liberia: Ministry of Health and Social

Welfare.Nichols, L. (2002). Participatory program planning: Including program participants and evaluators. Eval-

uation and Program Planning, 25(1), 1–14. doi:10.1016/s0149-7189(01)00044-1.Orkin, K. (2011). ‘See first, think later, then test’: How children’s perspectives can improve economic

research. European Journal of Development Research, 23(5), 774–791. doi:10.1057/ejdr.2011.46.Organization of African Unity. (1990). African charter on the rights and welfare of the child.

http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38c18.html. Accessed 27 May 2013.Powell, M. A., & Smith, A. B. (2009). Children’s participation rights in research. Childhood, 16(1),

124–142. doi:10.1177/0907568208101694.Rampazzo, E., & Twahirwa, A. (2010). Baseline study. Children’s perceptions of child protection measures

existing at community level in Rwanda. Final report. Kigali, Rwanda: Save the Children.Republic of Liberia. (2012). Children’s Law. http://mogdliberia.com/images/stories/pdf/children-law-as-

passed-by-the-Senate-15-September-2011.pdf. Accessed 27 May 2013.Robson, E. (2004). Children at work in rural northern Nigeria: Patterns of age, space and gender. Journal of

Rural Studies, 20(2), 193–210. doi:10.1016/S0743-0167(03)00047-0.Sarkar, M., Syed, S., & Nzau, M. (2009). Strategic inquiry on prevention and response to gender based

violence (GBV) in Liberia. Monrovia, Liberia: Government of Liberia and United Nations GBV Jointprogramme.

Timms, J. E., & Thoburn, J. (2006). Your shout! Looked after children’s perspectives on the children act1989. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 28(2), 153–170. doi:10.1080/09649060600974242.

UNDP. (2011). Human development report 2011. Sustainability and equity: A better future for all.New York: United Nations Development Programme.

United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL). (n.d.). UNMIL background. United Nations. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unmil/background.html. Accessed 18 March 2013.

USDL. (2010). Findings on the worst forms of child labor—Liberia. Washington, DC: United StatesDepartment of Labor.

USDS. (2011a). 2010 Country reports on human rights practices report: Liberia. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of State.

USDS. (2011b). Country reports on human rights practices for 2011—Liberia. Washington, DC: UnitedStates Department of State.

436 Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437

123

Vis, S. A., Strandbu, A., Holtan, A., & Thomas, N. (2011). Participation and health—A research review ofchild participation in planning and decision-making. Child & Family Social Work, 16(3), 325–335. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2010.00743.x.

Vis, S. A., & Thomas, N. (2009). Beyond talking—Children’s participation in Norwegian care and pro-tection cases. European Journal of Social Work, 12(2), 155–168. doi:10.1080/13691450802567465.

Willumsen, E., & Skivenes, M. (2005). Collaboration between service users and professionals: Legitimatedecisions in child protection—A Norwegian model. Child & Family Social Work, 10(3), 197–206. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2005.00371.x.

Woolfson, R. C., Heffernan, E., Paul, M., & Brown, M. (2010). Young people’s views of the child protectionsystem in Scotland. British Journal of Social Work, 40(7), 2069–2085. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcp120.

Child Youth Care Forum (2013) 42:425–437 437

123