_1.jpg?w=480&auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=max)
In March this year, the Union government announced that the schemes under the Ministry of Women and Child Development are classified under three umbrella schemes: Mission Poshan 2.0, Mission Vatsalya, and Mission Shakti. Child rights defenders and activists have raised concerns about Childline 1098 moving under Mission Vatsalya (which includes child protection Services and child welfare services), and the Ministry of Home Affairs taking administrative control of Childline. The latter has been in the works for a while – in 2021, the then Secretary of Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD), mentioned that Childline would move under MHA to “preserve data sensitivity."
The Union government has sent the draft guidelines of Mission Vatsalya to states for their comments; the document states that “the civil society, people’s groups, and various volunteering organizations can be encouraged to participate under Mission Vatsalya in a systematic and planned manner.”
One thing that the civil society appears deeply concerned about is that the guidelines propose merging the 1098 helpline of Childline with 112 Emergency Response Support System (ERSS), which is the number for emergencies like a fire, police intervention, etc. Further, child rights activists are questioning what the “data sensitivity” concerns are here, and whether Childline moving under MHA would translate into the loss of transparency over data. TNM spoke to several people working towards child rights and child safety about their concerns.
The Mission Vatsalya draft guidelines state, “The Mission Vatsalya in partnership with states and districts will execute a 24x7 helpline service for children as defined under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, as amended in 2021. […] The Child Helpline under Mission Vatsalya shall be run with improved coordination with State and District functionaries and integration with 112 helpline of MHA.” Under a section called “Inter Ministry Convergence”, the guidelines propose “integration of Childline Services with MHA 112 ERSS.”
A recurring question that civil society is asking is why this is being done now when Childline, which has been around for 25 years, has been established as a trusted resource in the country that children or adults reporting children in distress can reach out to. Kushi Kushalappa of Enfold, a Karnataka-based organisation working on issues of gender sensitivity and child sexual abuse, pointed out that 1098 Childline has been in textbooks, outside police stations, hospitals, and so on. “There is a lot of awareness about 1098 in rural areas also. If they merge it with 112, they will again have to do years of awareness campaigns, establish trust all over again,” she notes.
Further, Childline is a public-private partnership, which ensures that the operation involves the government but has some independent accountability as well. For instance, Childline releases annual reports about the number of calls taken, dropped, and disaggregation of the calls by subject matter.
An official of Childline, who did not want to be named, said that while they do not have a clear mandate from the Union government yet, the 1098 number is likely to continue being operational. However, Kavita Ratna, Director - Advocacy of The Concerned for Working Children, and a member All India Working Group for Children's Rights, argued that it will be a matter of time before 1098 is phased out, and 112 becomes the primary number. “This is problematic because 112 is an emergency response and rescue number. Many children or adults who call Childline aren’t looking for those,” Kavita says.
Last year, The Concerned for Working Children had started a petition on Change.org – online advocacy and petitioning platform – when the WCD Secretary had said that Childline may be moved under MHA. The petition elaborated on Kavita’s point; it said, “the nature of calls received by Childline is not at all restricted to complaints that require police intervention and recording. Many calls are from children who are in mental distress and require immediate as well as long-term counseling and support. Also, a significant number of calls include requests for support for food, books, shelter, and scholarships to name a few. These calls are not merely about information collection and recording but require experts who understand children and their psychology and are trained with appropriate skills, attitudes, and knowledge to protect and guide the children from that moment onwards. The police are therefore not at all an appropriate point of first contact for receiving these calls. Their primary roles and their training are not conducive or appropriate for this purpose.”
Varun*, who works at an NGO which runs Childline in a district in Karnataka, said that while they are awaiting clarity from the government, the speculation is that if 1098 merges, those dialing the number will also be redirected to 112. The responder at the latter will then redirect the caller to the relevant department, such as Labour (for child labour), WCD (for child marriage), and so on. “In one way, it is good that the state is taking complete responsibility. But we are wondering why it is the MHA when there is a WCD ministry. There is also the fear that it would reduce the involvement of civil society and non-government organisations who are presently helping implement Childline,” Varun says.
Kavita adds, “Will a 112 responder, who is fielding calls for all types of emergency services, be trained to gauge the anxiety in a child’s voice? This first point of contact is of tremendous importance because children, if they make the call at all, do so with a lot of trepidation. Even adults who call to support a child need reassurance and require trust to be built. Are all Childline officials equipped for this sensitivity? Perhaps not. But that is the mandate for Childline. We don’t know if this will be the case for an umbrella service like 112. The gap between the person who calls for help and the person who can provide help will become many-layered under 112 unlike 1098.”
Apart from concerns about calls to an integrated helpline like 112 being answered by those untrained to cater to vulnerable children, child rights defenders are also worried that integrating Childline with 112 could mean that the calls are answered by police officials – a prospect many children may feel wary of.
The petition on Change.org last year pointed out, “[Children] recount that when they have complained to the police about drug peddlers or sexual abusers, the police have exhibited bias and discriminated in favour of the abuser or even taken bribes. In fact, the presence of police at the scene of the abuse or at their homes increases the social pressure and ostracism against them. This is in direct contrast to the more supportive role of Childline personnel that they have experienced. Equally important is to recognise that various studies from around the country make it clear that children fear the police system.”
Further, most calls made to Childline may not require rescue or law enforcement. “Children themselves report that when they are deeply distressed, they make silent calls and Childline personnel patiently wait on the line until the child opens up,” the petition said. According to the analysis of calls received by Childline in 2020-21, out of over 50 lakh calls received, the highest proportion – 32% – were logged under the “silent/confidence-building” category. While the Union government’s reason for integrating Childline under MHA and 112 is "child protection”; calls for “protection from abuse” and "child in conflict with law” accounted for 2% and 0.009% of the total calls, respectively. In fact, the second most popular category of calls to Childline was “crank/chat” (over 14 lakh) followed by calls relating to “technical connectivity problems” (over 11 lakh), the latter not requiring intervention.
Vidya Reddy of Tulir – Centre for Prevention and Healing of Child Sexual Abuse, says, “Under the current setup, the people who are recruited into Childline are all trained to understand children, the way they talk, the way they should be responded to. They are recruited for a certain skill set, knowledge basis, attitude, and aptitude. The criteria which is used for police recruitment is very different, and the purpose is also different than what is required from Childline.”
Kavita adds, “We don’t understand why MHA is taking up the mandate, which involves the police. If the WCD ministry was taking over Childline entirely, there wouldn’t be so much opposition to it.”
There are also concerns that MHA taking administrative control of Childline and integration with 112 may compromise data transparency. Civil society is also not clear on what the “data sensitivity” concerns of the Union government are that have prompted this move.
“When the government is saying there is a data sensitivity issue, what is the sensitivity and what is the issue? This is not just about rhetoric. The Childline data speaks for itself - it's an indication of issues affecting children in this country. What's sensitive about it and why do we whitewash it?” Vidya says. “If the government tells us why there is an issue with data sensitivity, we can try to fix it,” Kavita adds.
Some are also concerned about what will happen to privacy as well as transparency if the public-private partnership model of the current Childline is done away with. “Accurate data is crucial for an efficient and adequate response. Are there going to be checks and balances in place to ensure accurate data is made available? We don’t know right now if the MHA takes over Childline who will hold the data,” Kavita says.
Another line of argument is that the government wants to take over Childline to protect its image, which it may perceive affected when the extent of child sexual abuse, and child distress is made available through Childline data. “But controlling the data will not solve the problem. Instead, allocate more funds, implement more programmes and aid to ensure that child rights are upheld,” Varun says. He adds, “It is not that the government is not getting regular data now. Childline India Foundation collects data from across the country and relays it to WCD Ministry or other concerned governmental departments on a monthly or weekly basis. So it is not as though we are withholding it. The police also get involved when we need to do rescue. So it is not clear why the government is proposing what it is.”
Child rights activists are also concerned that so far, Childline Foundation India has been silent on the matter. TNM has also reached out to the Foundation and will update this story if and when it responds.
Kavita adds that they do intend to revive last year’s Change.org petition to oppose the move of Childline under MHA. You can access a copy of the petition here.