Indian children working at a construction site near the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi. Photograph: Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images
By Priya Virmani, The Guardian, Thursday 12th April 2012
Delhi, India.
A 13-year-old girl employed as a domestic worker by a couple who are doctors is locked up in their house while her employers are on holiday in Thailand. Neighbours hear her frantic screams for help. Her story then makes the national and international headlines.
The "child maid" story shone a light on to the dark recesses of child labour, and the response has been rightly one of outrage. It is heartening to note that the centre of the fury is India, and particularly Delhi – the city of the alleged crime. The international media, however, have also questioned whether the Indian mindset enables and perpetuates the mentality of having "servants".
It was the British, in the days of the Raj, who were known to have a retinue of servants commonly referred to as ayahs (female servants) and bearers (male servants). The British Library archives recount: "The ayahs usually had no contract of employment, despite offering a crucial service to their employers. Some could even be dismissed with no pay." When the British left India in 1947, it was predominantly rural and disproportionately poor. The Indian elite were joined by the middle classes, and together they perpetuated their erstwhile colonialists' tradition of sourcing household help from the much poorer majority, and in a derogative manner. Sadly this practice of having servants that has travelled into coeval times has not precluded the employment of children.
To read more:
No comments:
Post a Comment