TO Guyana’s credit, much work has been done on child rights. Among the first thing done by the Government of Guyana was that of a laser beam attention to education. Guyana stood out among her counterparts, in the Caribbean and further afield, in early childhood education which was initially at 3 years-nine months. More schools were built, allowing for greater accommodation of children. At the post primary level, the then common entrance school examination was used to place students in schools based on their evaluated intellectual ability and interest.

In recognition of secondary education the programme was expanded and augmented beyond the known schools, inclusive of the so-called elite, that only carried specific curriculum to include the multilateral and community high schools. The multilateral secondary curriculum allowed for expression and pursuing of academia based on interest and ability, whereas the community high was geared toward the more technically inclined, with opportunity presented at the 4th form to sit an examination to enter into the secondary school.

With the nationalisation of schools, in addition to it allowing all to benefit from a national education programme designed by the Government, it also aided in eliminating any child being discriminated against in attending a school based on religious ideology. Prior to public education, some schools were managed by religious denomination. There were instances where having access could not be done based on the child’s religion or the family or child having to ‘convert’ in order to gain admittance.

Where newly independent Guyana embraced religious freedom and pursued universal education as important to nation-building, continuing the practice of acceptance or rejection to an educational institution based on religion would have been a double-standard. In the area of economics, some expenses were offset by the State through various measures. The State assumed responsibility for programmes such as free uniform, textbooks, meals, transportation, and tuition free education from nursery to university.
A young post-colonial society, which at independence was met with high unemployment and limited economic opportunities, taking some financial responsibility of the family and placing it at the State had two-fold benefits. In the sphere of the family, it eliminated economic stressors and served as motivation to ensure the child pursue an education. In regard to the State it ensured creating an educated society equipped with skills and talents needed for development.

The tier-ship or rather discrimination in the legal system and ‘shame’ in the society that children were subjected to because they were not born in ‘wedlock’ was removed through repealing of the law that referred to such child as ‘bastard’ and not entitled to inheritance from the father. This labelling would have been applicable to children whose parents did not have a registered marriage, which meant it included all across the ethnic divide. This holistic approach to education, as examination shows in its multi-prong approach, aimed to leave no child behind. With the child’s psycho-social and economic well-being taken care of, education became one of the nation’s greatest equaliser. More importantly in the area of childhood development, that sense of equality and assurance that irrespective of a child or the family’s socio-economic status, their God-given talent will be allowed to bloom and grow, and he or she can be whatever he or she wants to be. In that some of these economic and supplemental benefits as stated above are no longer available, some of which were aborted during the period of economic downturn, do not prevent examination of new ways to ensure children are not denied an education in keeping with their ability.