Analysis of the Models for the Guardianship of Children in Africa

  • Rofiah Ololade Sarumi
  • Ann Strode
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Social Work book series (BRIEFSSOWO)


By enacting child-specific legislation to regulate the guardianship of children, Côte d’Ivoire, South Africa and Uganda have taken steps which are in line with their international law obligations to take legislative and other measures which are appropriate for the implementation of the rights of children. However, the three countries have addressed this obligation from different perspectives and this provokes a need for an investigation into the different models employed by the countries to see if anyone or all of these models are capable of realising the rights of children deprived of parental care. This chapter highlights the similarities and differences among the different models employed in the countries with a view to establishing the potentials of the different models to achieve the protective role which is necessary for the children in need of care and guardianship. It looks at the advantages and disadvantages of each of the models and highlights the strengths and weaknesses of the individual approach. It further underscores the fact that traditional African values play a pivotal role in understanding the concept of children and childhood in Africa and in shaping the protection available to children in the countries discussed.


Child-specific Parental care African values Family ties Parens patriae 


  1. Gilborn, L. Z. (2002). Beyond our borders: The effects of HIV infection and AIDS on children in Africa. The Western Journal of Medicine, 176(1), 12–14. Retrieved 20 August 2017, from Scholar
  2. Govt. of Uganda The Children (Amendment) Act (2016). Retrieved 24 April 2017, from
  3. Hale, J. E. (1998). Black children: Their roots, culture, and learning styles (p. 58). Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Musa, B. A., & Domatob, J. K. (2012). Media ethics and human rights education in post conflict Africa. In B. A. Musa & J. K. Domatob (Eds.), Communication, culture, and human rights in Africa (pp. 69–83). Maryland: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  5. Mwenda, K., Mumbae, N., & Mvula-Mwenda, J. (2005). Property-grabbing under African customary law: Repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience yet a troubling reality. George Washington University International Law Review, 37, 949.Google Scholar
  6. Sarumi, R. O. (2014). The protection of the rights of children affected by HIV/AIDS in South Africa and Botswana: A critical analysis of the legal and policy responses (p. 227). PhD thesis submitted to the University of KwaZulu-Natal.Google Scholar
  7. South Africa’s Children: A Review of Equity and Child Rights. (2011). Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities, South African Human Rights Commission and UNICEF, 2011 in AE Strode and CM Slack ‘Using the concept of ‘parental responsibilities and rights’ to identify adults able to provide proxy consent to child research in South Africa’. South African Journal of Bioethics and Law, 4(2), 69.Google Scholar
  8. UNICEF (2007). Protecting the world's children: Impact of the convention on the rights of the child in diverse legal systems (p. 19).Google Scholar
  9. Van Bueren, G. (1998). The international law on the rights of the child (p. 68). The Hague: Martinus Njjhoff/Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  10. Webster Dictionary (2017). Parens Patriae. Retrieved 02 August 2017, from

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rofiah Ololade Sarumi
    • 1
  • Ann Strode
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Postgraduate Legal StudiesUniversity of KwaZulu-NatalPietermaritzburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations