Saturday, April 20, 2013

Street child of Nepal




  1. Logo

    Projects We Support



    The Children’s Food Programme (Bal Bhojan)

    This programme is one that the charity has been supporting for a number of years. It provides up to two free meals, as well as the opportunity for basic education, every day to street children in the crowded old quarter of Kathmandu.

     The project is characterised by the following main points:

    1. it has a low cost, localised approach
    2. poor local widows are employed to cook the food
    3. the food is basic but nutritious
    4. there is access to lessons run by a qualified teacher
    5. the programme is supervised by a doctor
    6. the programme pays for the food, wages for the cook/s and teacher/s and the rent of the basic rooms for teaching
    7. the work of the programme is overseen by a committee of prominent community members
    8. The number of children having meals and attending lessons varies from day to day but is usually in the region of 50 – 60. This project is often the safety net that children turn to in times of greatest need.
    SathSath medical clinic in Kathmandu


    This clinic was opened to children in March 2008 and aims to provide 24 hour emergency, medical and hospital support, as well as in-house first aid and medication facilities to children living and working on the street. The initial costs of setting up the clinic including purchasing a van, beds, bedding and other furniture, medical supplies and first aid kits, was funded by nscglobal, a corporate supporter of The Street Children of Nepal Trust. We hope to be able to continue to support the clinic in the coming years and help them pay for on-going expenses including rent, electricity, water, wages and medical supplies.


    Scholarship Programmes

    The Street Children of Nepal Trust supports a number of ‘scholarship’ programmes which enable children from the poorest families, and those affected by trafficking and violence, attend primary school. In Nepal primary education is provided free but there are certain costs that families have to meet including uniforms, books, stationery supplies and enrolment fees. Unfortunately for the poorest families these costs can prove too much and children are excluded from gaining even the most basic skills in literacy and numeracy.

    These ‘scholarship’ programmes enable children to attend school and helps them have access to self development opportunities that will help them, their families and communities in the future. In the current school year, which runs until April 2012, we are supporting 66 children.

    The programmes we are currently supporting help families in the Doti and Kapilvastu districts of Nepal.


     Children’s Home for Girls

    This project is run by The Rural Women’s Development and Unity Centre (RUWDUC) which is involved in helping to improve the quality of life of women and children in the far west of Nepal, one of the poorest and most disadvantaged areas of the country. They work mainly in the areas of education, health and income generation.

    The Children’s Home for Girls is a project that we have been supporting for some years. The Home provides 12 orphaned or abandoned girls with improved living conditions, access to education and proper nutrition and healthcare. The costs in running the home include food, rent, clothes, electricity, water, medical care and wages for a warden and a cook / cleaner.


    Mobile Food Unit (Mobile Bal Bhojan)

    This is a project that we started supporting in 2008. A van operates on Saturdays each week and visits six different areas of Kathmandu where street children are known to congregate. The project distributes free food packets and water to as many needy children as possible - it is estimated that an average of  200 - 250 street children are helped each week.


    Bishram Drop In Centre

    The Centre was opened in 2001 to offer a lifeline to street children in Kathmandu. It provides a warm, safe environment with food and shelter, as well as education, training towards employment, counselling and access to medical care. The Street Children of Nepal Trust gave financial assistence to this very worthwhile project in both 2008 and 2009.

    Unfortunately due to a lack of ongoing funding the Centre had to close its doors in early 2010.


    Construction of Girls' Toilets

    This project was for the construction of toilets specifically for female pupils at Tankaprasad - Rewantakumari School in the Nawalparasi District of Nepal. Research has shown that one of the main reasons that girls drop out of education when they reach puberty is the lack of proper toilet facilities which means that they have to share with male pupils. The Street Children of Nepal Trust donated full funding for this project in 2008/9.

    In 2011 we have funded a second toilet building project through the Fatima Foundation which has constructed two new toilets for female students at a school in the Banke District in Western Nepal.



    Further Education Initiatives

    In 2010 five of the girls who had been resident at the Children's Home for Girls (please see above) passed their School Leaving Certificate (SLC). This is an important milestone in a student's academic life and is normally taken at about age 16 (or earlier for the most able students). It however also marks the time when the girls can no longer carry on living at the Home and this can leave them in a vulnerable position as they may have no family to return to and unclear job propects.

    In August 2010 The Street Children of Nepal Trust (SCON) agreed with RUWDUC, who runs the Girls' Home, that SCON would continue to support these five girls for a further two years to enable them to gain further qualifications and improve their job propects. It is hoped that SCON will be able to expand this project in the future to provide support for more girls from the Home as they leave school (and possibly also access to, and support through, higher education).


    Posted by
    0

    Add a comment



  2. We define conflict as a disagreement through which the parties involved perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns. Within this simple definition there are several important understandings that emerge:
    Disagreement - Generally, we are aware there is some level of difference in the positions of the two (or more) parties involved in the conflict. But the true disagreement versus the perceived disagreement may be quite different from one another. In fact, conflict tends to be accompanied by significant levels of misunderstanding that exaggerate the perceived disagreement considerably. If we can understand the true areas of disagreement, this will help us solve the right problems and manage the true needs of the parties.
    Parties involved - There are often disparities in our sense of who is involved in the conflict. Sometimes, people are surprised to learn they are a party to the conflict, while other times we are shocked to learn we are not included in the disagreement. On many occasions, people who are seen as part of the social system (e.g., work team, family, company) are influenced to participate in the dispute, whether they would personally define the situation in that way or not. In the above example, people very readily "take sides" based upon current perceptions of the issues, past issues and relationships, roles within the organization, and other factors. The parties involved can become an elusive concept to define.
    Perceived threat - People respond to the perceived threat, rather than the true threat, facing them. Thus, while perception doesn't become reality per se, people's behaviors, feelings and ongoing responses become modified by that evolving sense of the threat they confront. If we can work to understand the true threat (issues) and develop strategies (solutions) that manage it (agreement), we are acting constructively to manage the conflict.
    Needs, interests or concerns - There is a tendency to narrowly define "the problem" as one of substance, task, and near-term viability. However, workplace conflicts tend to be far more complex than that, for they involve ongoing relationships with complex, emotional components. Simply stated, there are always procedural needs and psychological needs to be addressed within the conflict, in addition to the substantive needs that are generally presented. And the durability of the interests and concerns of the parties transcends the immediate presenting situation. Any efforts to resolve conflicts effectively must take these points into account.
    So, is it still a simple definition of conflict? We think so, but we must respect that within its elegant simplicity lies a complex set of issues to address. Therefore, it is not surprising that satisfactory resolution of most conflicts can prove so challenging and time consuming to address.
    Conflicts occur when people (or other parties) perceive that, as a consequence of a disagreement, there is a threat to their needs, interests or concerns. Although conflict is a normal part of organization life, providing numerous opportunities for growth through improved understanding and insight, there is a tendency to view conflict as a negative experience caused by abnormally difficult circumstances. Disputants tend to perceive limited options and finite resources available in seeking solutions, rather than multiple possibilities that may exist 'outside the box' in which we are problem-solving.
    A few points are worth reiterating before proceeding:
    • A conflict is more than a mere disagreement - it is a situation in which people perceive a threat(physical, emotional, power, status, etc.) to their well-being. As such, it is a meaningful experience in people's lives, not to be shrugged off by a mere, "it will pass…" 
    • Participants in conflicts tend to respond on the basis of their perceptions of the situation, rather than an objective review of it. As such, people filter their perceptions (and reactions) through their values, culture, beliefs, information, experience, gender, and other variables. Conflict responses are both filled with ideas and feelings that can be very strong and powerful guides to our sense of possible solutions.
    • As in any problem, conflicts contain substantive, procedural, and psychological dimensions to be negotiated. In order to best understand the threat perceived by those engaged in a conflict, we need to consider all of these dimensions.
    • Conflicts are normal experiences within the work environment. They are also, to a large degree,predictable and expectable situations that naturally arise as we go about managing complex and stressful projects in which we are significantly invested. As such, if we develop procedures for identifying conflicts likely to arise, as well as systems through which we can constructively manage conflicts, we may be able to discover new opportunities to transform conflict into a productive learning experience.
    • Creative problem-solving strategies are essential to positive approaches to conflict management. We need to transform the situation from one in which it is 'my way or the highway' into one in which we entertain new possibilities that have been otherwise elusive.
    Conflict is Normal: Anticipating Conflicts Likely to Arise in the Workplace
    Consider your own work environment for a moment:
    • What are some key sources of conflict in our workplace?
    • When do they tend to occur? 
    • How do people respond to these conflicts as they arise?
    • When we solve problems, do we do so for the moment, or do we put in place systems for addressing these types of concerns in the future?
    In reflecting upon your answers to these questions, you may begin to understand what we mean by anticipating conflicts likely to arise in the workplace: Normal, healthy organizations will experience their share of conflict, and workplaces experiencing a certain amount of dysfunction will experience it in greater quantities. Anticipating conflicts is useful in either situation for transforming these situations into opportunities for growth and learning. Consider…
    • Are there seasonal peaks in our workload that tend to occur annually?
      • Chart the occurrence of such challenges, and consider whether they can be managed as a normal period of stress and transition. For example, a school had a large population of students who arrived after long bus rides without breakfast, who tended to arrive at school ready to fight. The school identified 10 minutes at the start of the day to give these students a healthy snack, and worked with teachers to pull out students who weren't yet ready for school before they became disruptive. After food and a little counseling, students entered their classrooms in a better frame of mind (and body) to participate.
    • Do we have channels for expressing normal problems and concerns in a predictable, reliable manner?
      • Staff meeting should be used as a tool for effective problem-solving in a range of situations, including anticipated conflicts. If such channels are perceived by staff as closed, unsafe, and non-productive, they will be replaced by gossip, 'end runs' and back-biting.
    • Are there certain factors in the environment that make problems worse, especially at times of conflict?
      • Take stock of your processes for managing during stressful times. Look at how phones are routed, noise is managed, client lines are queued, distractions are managed, etc. Often, our response during times of stress is to meet less frequently, because 'we have no time to meet.' And we continue to do things the way we've been doing them, because 'we have no time to create new procedures.' This approach dooms us to repeat the same errors, rather than to learn from the opportunities. Examine your systems for managing problems, including dispute resolution systems, and use times of "harmony" to identify process improvements that can be implemented in times of stress.
    Conflict Styles and Their Consequences
    Conflict is often best understood by examining the consequences of various behaviors at moments in time. These behaviors are usefully categorized according to conflict styles. Each style is a way to meet one's needs in a dispute but may impact other people in different ways.
    • Competing is a style in which one's own needs are advocated over the needs of others. It relies on an aggressive style of communication, low regard for future relationships, and the exercise of coercive power. Those using a competitive style tend to seek control over a discussion, in both substance and ground rules. They fear that loss of such control will result in solutions that fail to meet their needs. Competing tends to result in responses that increase the level of threat.
    • Accommodating, also known as smoothing, is the opposite of competing. Persons using this style yield their needs to those of others, trying to be diplomatic. They tend to allow the needs of the group to overwhelm their own, which may not ever be stated, as preserving the relationship is seen as most important.
    • Avoiding is a common response to the negative perception of conflict. "Perhaps if we don't bring it up, it will blow over," we say to ourselves. But, generally, all that happens is that feelings get pent up, views go unexpressed, and the conflict festers until it becomes too big to ignore. Like a cancer that may well have been cured if treated early, the conflict grows and spreads until it kills the relationship. Because needs and concerns go unexpressed, people are often confused, wondering what went wrong in a relationship.
    • Compromising is an approach to conflict in which people gain and give in a series of tradeoffs. While satisfactory, compromise is generally not satisfying. We each remain shaped by our individual perceptions of our needs and don't necessarily understand the other side very well. We often retain a lack of trust and avoid risk-taking involved in more collaborative behaviors.
    • Collaborating is the pooling of individual needs and goals toward a common goal. Often called "win-win problem-solving," collaboration requires assertive communication and cooperation in order to achieve a better solution than either individual could have achieved alone. It offers the chance for consensus, the integration of needs, and the potential to exceed the "budget of possibilities" that previously limited our views of the conflict. It brings new time, energy, and ideas to resolve the dispute meaningfully
    By understanding each style and its consequences, we may normalize the results of our behaviors in various situations. This is not to say, "Thou shalt collaborate" in a moralizing way, but to indicate the expected consequences of each approach: If we use a competing style, we might force the others to accept 'our' solution, but this acceptance may be accompanied by fear and resentment. If we accommodate, the relationship may proceed smoothly, but we may build up frustrations that our needs are going unmet. If we compromise, we may feel OK about the outcome, but still harbor resentments in the future. If we collaborate, we may not gain a better solution than a compromise might have yielded, but we are more likely to feel better about our chances for future understanding and goodwill. And if we avoid discussing the conflict at all, both parties may remain clueless about the real underlying issues and concerns, only to be dealing with them in the future. If you'd like further insights into the conflict styles you tend to use take the Situational Conflict Styles Assessment Exercise on this site. If you have further questions contact us!
    How we Respond to Conflict: Thoughts, Feelings, and Physical Responses 1
    In addition to the behavioral responses summarized by the various conflict styles, we have emotional, cognitive and physical responses to conflict. These are important windows into our experience during conflict, for they frequently tell us more about what is the true source of threat that we perceive; by understanding our thoughts, feelings and physical responses to conflict, we may get better insights into the best potential solutions to the situation.
    • Emotional responses: These are the feelings we experience in conflict, ranging from anger and fear to despair and confusion. Emotional responses are often misunderstood, as people tend to believe that others feel the same as they do. Thus, differing emotional responses are confusing and, at times, threatening.
    • Cognitive responses: These are our ideas and thoughts about a conflict, often present as inner voices or internal observers in the midst of a situation. Through sub-vocalization (i.e., self-talk), we come to understand these cognitive responses. For example, we might think any of the following things in response to another person taking a parking spot just as we are ready to park:
    "That jerk! Who does he think he is! What a sense of entitlement!"
    or:
    "I wonder if he realizes what he has done. He seems lost in his own thoughts. I hope he is okay."
    or:
    "What am I supposed to do? Now I'm going to be late for my meeting… Should I say something to him? What if he gets mad at me?"
    Such differing cognitive responses contribute to emotional and behavioral responses, where self-talk can either promote a positive or negative feedback loop in the situation.
    • Physical responses: These responses can play an important role in our ability to meet our needs in the conflict. They include heightened stress, bodily tension, increased perspiration, tunnel vision, shallow or accelerated breathing, nausea, and rapid heartbeat. These responses are similar to those we experience in high-anxiety situations, and they may be managed throughstress management techniques. Establishing a calmer environment in which emotions can be managed is more likely if the physical response is addressed effectively.
    1 Adapted from Harry Webne-Behrman, The Practice of Facilitation: Managing Group Process and Solving Problems, Quorum Books, Greenwood Publishing, 1998, by permission of the author. All rights reserved.
    The Role of Perceptions in Conflict
    As noted in our basic definition of conflict, we define conflict as a disagreement through which the parties involved perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns. One key element of this definition is the idea that each party may have a different perception of any given situation. We can anticipate having such differences due to a number of factors that create "perceptual filters" that influence our responses to the situation:
    • Culture, race, and ethnicity:2 Our varying cultural backgrounds influence us to hold certain beliefs about the social structure of our world, as well as the role of conflict in that experience. We may have learned to value substantive, procedural and psychological needs differently as a result, thus influencing our willingness to engage in various modes of negotiation and efforts to manage the conflict
    • Gender and sexuality:3 Men and women often perceive situations somewhat differently, based on both their experiences in the world (which relates to power and privilege, as do race and ethnicity) and socialization patterns that reinforce the importance of relationships vs. task, substance vs. process, immediacy vs. long-term outcomes. As a result, men and women will often approach conflictive situations with differing mindsets about the desired outcomes from the situation, as well as the set of possible solutions that may exist.
    • Knowledge (general and situational): Parties respond to given conflicts on the basis of the knowledge they may have about the issue at hand. This includes situation-specific knowledge (i.e., "Do I understand what is going on here?") and general knowledge (i.e., "Have I experienced this type of situation before?" or "Have I studied about similar situations before?"). Such information can influence the person's willingness to engage in efforts to manage the conflict, either reinforcing confidence to deal with the dilemma or undermining one's willingness to flexibly consider alternatives.
    • Impressions of the Messenger: If the person sharing the message - the messenger - is perceived to be a threat (powerful, scary, unknown, etc.), this can influence our responses to the overall situation being experienced. For example, if a big scary-looking guy is approaching me rapidly, yelling "Get out of the way!" I may respond differently than if a diminutive, calm person would express the same message to me. As well, if I knew either one of them previously, I might respond differently based upon that prior sense of their credibility: I am more inclined to listen with respect to someone I view as credible than if the message comes from someone who lacks credibility and integrity in my mind.
    • Previous experiences: Some of us have had profound, significant life experiences that continue to influence our perceptions of current situations. These experiences may have left us fearful, lacking trust, and reluctant to take risks. On the other hand, previous experiences may have left us confident, willing to take chances and experience the unknown. Either way, we must acknowledge the role of previous experiences as elements of our perceptual filter in the current dilemma.
    These factors (along with others) conspire to form the perceptual filters through which we experience conflict. As a result, our reactions to the threat and dilemma posed by conflict should be anticipated to include varying understandings of the situation. This also means that we can anticipate that in many conflicts there will be significant misunderstanding of each other's perceptions, needs and feelings. These challenges contribute to our emerging sense, during conflict, that the situation is overwhelming and unsolvable. As such, they become critical sources of potential understanding, insight and possibility.
    2 Much more can be said about this subject. We have posted an article as an additional resource: "Managing Intercultural Conflicts Effectively," by Stella Ting-Toomey, 1994.
    3 This topic is well addressed in the writings of Professor Deborah Tannen, who has focused extensively on gender differences in communication.
    Why do we tend to avoid dealing with conflict?
    Engaging in dialogue and negotiation around conflict is something we tend to approach with fear and hesitation, afraid that the conversation will go worse than the conflict has gone thus far. All too often, we talk ourselves out of potential dialogue:
    "Why should I talk to her? She'll bite my head off and not listen to anything I have to say!"
    OR
    "I should talk to him about this problem, but maybe it will go away on its own. There's no sense stirring up something that makes us both uncomfortable."
    OR
    "If I go to him, I'm making myself vulnerable. No, that's his responsibility - he should come to me and ask me to talk!"
    Our responses, as noted earlier, tend to include behaviors, feelings, thoughts and physical responses. If any of these responses indicates stress factors that make us reluctant to talk things out, we are more inclined to follow the pathway of avoidance. In addition, if we have history with the individuals involved in this conflict (i.e., we've tried to negotiate with them in the past, without success), it will "filter" our perceptions of this situation and make us reluctant to negotiate.
    In addition, consider that our society tends to reward alternative responses to conflict, rather than negotiation: People who aggressively pursue their needs, competing rather than collaborating, are often satisfied by others who prefer to accommodate. Managers and leaders are often rewarded for their aggressive, controlling approaches to problems, rather than taking a more compassionate approach to issues that may seem less decisive to the public or their staffs. In other circumstances, those who raise issues and concerns, even respectfully, are quickly perceived to be "problem" clients or staff members… they tend to be avoided and minimized. In any of these approaches, negotiated solutions to conflicts are rarely modeled or held in high esteem.
    Finally, we should keep in mind that negotiation requires profound courage on the part of all parties: It takes courage to honestly and clearly articulate your needs, and it takes courage to sit down and listen to your adversaries. It takes courage to look at your own role in the dispute, and it takes courage to approach others with a sense of empathy, openness and respect for their perspective. Collaborative approaches to conflict management require us to engage in the moment of dialogue in profound and meaningful ways, so it is understandable if we tend to avoid such situations until the balance of wisdom tips in favor of negotiation
    Posted by
    0

    Add a comment




  3. On January 18, 2013, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Rent-A-Center, Inc., a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled that Rent-A-Center, Inc. ("RAC") had no duty to accommodate its Store Manager, Ferdinand Charles, when he requested to have every Saturday off to practice his faith as a Seventh-day Adventist. This is an interesting decision for retailers that face similar requests for scheduling accommodations from employees who seek religious accommodations. It is a vexing issue because the Circuit Courts are split with respect to whether granting such a scheduling request would constitute an "undue hardship" and thus allow retail employers to reject the request. The Third, Fourth, and Fifth Circuits have held that granting such a religious accommodation could create an "undue hardship" for the employer, while the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have adopted an approach that is less favorable for employers. Here, the D.C. District Court found that requiring RAC to give Mr. Charles every Saturday off would, under the special circumstances involved, create an undue hardship. The Court's ruling provides guidance with respect to the criteria retail employers should consider when an employee requests such a schedule change as a religious accommodation.
    RAC is a rent-to-own business with retail facilities across the country. Customers select merchandise at RAC stores, enter into rental agreements, and have RAC deliver the items to their homes. Since the stores are closed on Sundays, Saturdays are the Company's busiest days. RAC staffs its stores very leanly and expects all Store Managers to work on Saturdays.
    Mr. Charles worked for RAC for a number of years before RAC promoted him to Store Manager. The Store Manager is the highest ranking in-store employee and performs certain functions that no other employee performs. RAC explained that it was disruptive to business on Saturdays if the Store Manager did not work. After several months of working on Saturdays, Mr. Charles informed RAC that his religious beliefs as a Seventh-day Adventist prevented him from continuing to do so. After briefly accommodating his request, the Company ultimately determined that it was a hardship to continue to accommodate him this way. Accordingly, it terminated his employment after he failed to come to work on Saturday.
    The court granted summary judgment for RAC, finding that it would be an undue hardship for RAC to give Mr. Charles every Saturday off because (i) the Store Manager was a unique and very important position, (ii) Saturdays were central to RAC's weekly cycle, and (iii) RAC had adopted a policy requiring all Store Managers to work on Saturdays. The court held that if RAC did not have the only Store Manager available on Saturdays, then RAC would suffer more than a de minimis burden on its business.
    The Court made a few other helpful findings: (1) Employers need not need present conclusive empirical evidence to prove that an accommodation would cause an "undue hardship." (2) Employers need not actually implement the requested accommodation in order to claim that it would create an "undue hardship."
    While EEOC v. RAC is a very favorable decision for retail employers, it has a narrow factual context: a situation where schedule changes would result in critical employees being absent during high volume periods on core business days. In addition, courts in the Second, Sixth and Ninth Circuits may not be as sympathetic to the hardships that retailers face in granting such scheduling requests. Finally, in certain states (for example, in New York, and in California, as of January 1, 2013) employers face statutes that significantly increase the employer's burden in proving the affirmative defense of undue hardship. Under these statutes, it not enough simply to show that an accommodation would create more than a "de minimis" burden; rather, the employer must show that the accommodation would create a significant expense or difficulty in light of various factors such as employer's size and operating costs and the number of employees requiring the accommodation.
    Posted by
    0

    Add a comment



  4. Posted by
    0

    Add a comment



  5. Posted by
    0

    Add a comment




  6. बालअधिकार सचेतना तथा अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम

     बालबालिकाको अधिकारको लागि विगत दश वर्ष देखि पोखरामा निरन्तर लागीपरेको मुस्कान क्लवले यहि मंगलबार पोखरा –१३, बेसलाईन स्कूलमा बालअधिकार सचेतना तथा अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम सम्पन्न गरेको छ । बाल दिवसको अवसरका पोखराका १२ र १३ का वडाहरुको मुस्कान बालक्लबहरुको उपस्थितिमा बाल अधिकार सचेतना, स्कूल बाल क्लब सञ्चालन तालिम, भावी योजना सम्वन्धी अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम सम्पन्न भयो । ३५जना भन्दा धेरै सहभागीता रहेको उक्त कार्यक्रममा भद्रकाली, ताराकुञ्ज, बाल विद्या, बेसलाईन, मौला ईलामीक, चिल्ड्रेन अक्स्फोर्ड लागयतका स्कूल बाल क्लवहरुको प्रतिनिधि विद्यार्थीहरुले आफ्नो विचार र जिज्ञासा राखेका थिए ।
    कार्यक्रममा शुभकामना मन्तव्य दिनुहुदै बेसलाईन एकेडेमीका प्रिन्सिपल षडानन्द गौतमले अझै पनि अरु बालबालिकाहरु अधिकारबाट बञ्चित रहेकोले तिनीहरुको पनि अधिकार सुनिश्चित गराउनका लागि मुस्कान क्लबले उल्लेखनीय भूमिका निर्वाह गर्नुपर्ने औल्याउनुभयो । सीमित व्यक्तिहरुमात्र नभई समाजका बहुआयामिक पक्षमा अनुभूतिपूर्ण परिवर्तनको खाचो रहेको कुरालाई मध्यनजर गर्दै अघि बढ्न यस क्लबलाई सल्लाह दिनुभएको थियो ।
    कार्यक्रममा आफ्नो मन्तव्य राख्ने क्रममा स्थानीय युवा स्वयंसेवी सञ्जय शान्ति सुवेदीले बालबालिकाको अधिकार प्राप्तीका लागि बालबालिकाहरु स्वयं जगरुक एवं सचेत हुनुपर्ने धाराणा पेश गर्नुभयो । एक्लै–एक्लै सम्पन्न गर्न नसकिने कामहरु क्लबमा संगठित भई प्रयाश गरेमा सुुसम्पन्न गर्न सकिने कुरा जिकिर गर्नुभयो ।
    बाल अधिकार सेचतना तालिमलाई फातुमा खातुन र सञ्जय शान्ति सुवेदीले सहजीकरण गर्नुभएको थियो । सो कार्यक्रमको अध्यक्षता यसै क्लबका अध्यक्ष जैनव खातुनले तथा उपाध्याक्ष फातुमा खातुनले कार्यबक्रम सञ्चालन गर्नु भएको थियो
    Posted by
    0

    Add a comment



  7. National Child Right Day 2069: बालअधिकार सचेतना तथा अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम
    बालबालिकाको अधिकारको लागि विगत दश वर्ष देखि पोखरामा निरन्तर लागीपरेको मुस्कान क्लवले यहि मंगलबार पोखरा –१३, बेसलाईन स्कूलमा बालअधिकार सचेतना तथा अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम सम्पन्न गरेको छ । बाल दिवसको अवसरका पोखराका १२ र १३ का वडाहरुको मुस्कान बालक्लबहरुको उपस्थितिमा बाल अधिकार सचेतना, स्कूल बाल क्लब सञ्चालन तालिम, भावी योजना सम्वन्धी अन्तरक्रिया कार्यक्रम सम्पन्न भयो । ३५जना भन्दा धेरै सहभागीता रहेको उक्त कार्यक्रममा भद्रकाली, ताराकुञ्ज, बाल विद्या, बेसलाईन, मौला ईलामीक, चिल्ड्रेन अक्स्फोर्ड लागयतका स्कूल बाल क्लवहरुको प्रतिनिधि विद्यार्थीहरुले आफ्नो विचार र जिज्ञासा राखेका थिए ।
    कार्यक्रममा शुभकामना मन्तव्य दिनुहुदै बेसलाईन एकेडेमीका प्रिन्सिपल षडानन्द गौतमले अझै पनि अरु बालबालिकाहरु अधिकारबाट बञ्चित रहेकोले तिनीहरुको पनि अधिकार सुनिश्चित गराउनका लागि मुस्कान क्लबले उल्लेखनीय भूमिका निर्वाह गर्नुपर्ने औल्याउनुभयो । सीमित व्यक्तिहरुमात्र नभई समाजका बहुआयामिक पक्षमा अनुभूतिपूर्ण परिवर्तनको खाचो रहेको कुरालाई मध्यनजर गर्दै अघि बढ्न यस क्लबलाई सल्लाह दिनुभएको थियो ।
    कार्यक्रममा आफ्नो मन्तव्य राख्ने क्रममा स्थानीय युवा स्वयंसेवी सञ्जय शान्ति सुवेदीले बालबालिकाको अधिकार प्राप्तीका लागि बालबालिकाहरु स्वयं जगरुक एवं सचेत हुनुपर्ने धाराणा पेश गर्नुभयो । एक्लै–एक्लै सम्पन्न गर्न नसकिने कामहरु क्लबमा संगठित भई प्रयाश गरेमा सुुसम्पन्न गर्न सकिने कुरा जिकिर गर्नुभयो ।

    बाल अधिकार सेचतना तालिमलाई फातुमा खातुन र सञ्जय शान्ति सुवेदीले सहजीकरण गर्नुभएको थियो । सो कार्यक्रमको अध्यक्षता यसै क्लबका अध्यक्ष जैनव खातुनले तथा उपाध्याक्ष फातुमा खातुनले कार्यबक्रम सञ्चालन गर्नु भएको थियो

    Posted by
    0

    Add a comment

Loading
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)