Contributed by Dr. Lisa Werkmeister Rozas
Deinstitutionalization of Child Welfare in Peru
With the help of El lnstituto’s Seed grant in 2024, I conducted a small pilot study. As a result of this study I was able to 
connect to state officials in Peru and through my collaborations with NGOs am proposing education and training for social workers in child welfare settings.
This study examines whether Peru’s child welfare deinstitutionalization efforts align with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), especially in protecting children’s rights to family life, identity, and cultural background. Through interviews with child welfare professionals, caregivers, parents, and community elders, key themes emerged around how these rights are implemented–or overlooked–in practice.
Participants agree that Peru’s laws are partially aligned with the CRC, particularly in efforts to protect children from violence and promote nurturing care. However, no centralized institution exists to enforce the CRC directly, and implementation varies across regions. Although the state supports the rights outlined in the Convention, children’s opinions are often excluded from decisions that directly impact them. Multiple examples revealed how children were removed from residential homes and placed with unfamiliar relatives or returned to unsafe environments, despite their protests. These abrupt transitions contributed to further trauma, suggesting a gap between policy and practice.
Cultural and religious identity, a core part of the CRC, is inconsistently addressed. In faith-based homes, particularly evangelical ones, children are raised with Christian principles but are reportedly allowed to choose their beliefs when they reach adulthood. In terms of cultural identity, some efforts exist to honor children’s backgrounds. For example, children from rural Andean areas have been allowed to maintain their traditional dress, and outings to places like Machu Picchu and museums are organized to promote cultural knowledge. However, there is minimal support for preserving indigenous languages like Quechua, because of the fear they will be discriminated against.
When considering who is best suited to raise children outside of parental care, responses emphasized that empathy, calling, and willingness to learn are more important than academic qualifications alone. Some highly trained professionals reportedly lacked the compassion needed to connect with children. A recurring concern is that Peruvian families are not culturally inclined to take in non-biological children, limiting the effectiveness of foster care as an alternative. Residential homes offer more structure and supervision, but family-based care is seen as more emotionally beneficial, providing consistent relationships, love, and individualized attention.
In conclusion, while Perú has taken steps to align with the CRC in its child welfare reforms, significant gaps remain. Greater attention must be given to education and training of child welfare workers, listening to children, supporting culturally inclusive care, and building family-based alternatives that ensure emotional, psychological, and identity development for children transitioning out of institutional settings.