PERTANIKA
Journal of Quality of Life Studies
Full-Length Research Article
Beyond Basic Provision: Relationships and Quality of Life in Government Residential Care in Southern Thailand
Arina Charansarna
a
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand
Abstract
Placing children in government residential care does not necessarily ensure their sustained wellbeing. Thus, this study conducted semi-structured interviews involving 12 caregivers and two focus group discussions involving 12 institutional officers and cross-sector specialists to explore the social support systems of a government residential care institution for girls within the culturally distinct context of Southern Thailand and the influence of its arrangement on their quality of life within the relational and institutional contexts. Thematic analysis was conducted on the gathered data on structured provision, relational dynamics, systemic constraints, and transition planning. Despite the consistency of formal support delivery, such as education, daily care, structured activities, and access to professional services, relational continuity and cross-system coordination appeared to be fragmented. Emotional security, identity affirmation, and belonging were found restricted due to the fragmentation across ecological levels. Concerns regarding employment opportunities, social networks, and long-term stability among adolescents approaching discharge underscored the temporal limits of institutional protection. Findings showed that material provision was necessary but insufficient for sustainable quality-of-life outcomes. Durable relationships, cross-sector coherence, and culturally responsive transition planning were also important for strengthening children’s life trajectories. This study provides empirical evidence that relational continuity and ecological alignment function as key structural conditions for sustained quality-of-life outcomes in alternative care contexts.
Keywords: child well-being; social support; residential care; quality of life; transition from care
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being; SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
Cite As (APA)
Charansarn, A. (2026). Beyond basic provision: Relationships and quality of life in government residential care in Southern Thailand. Pertanika Journal of Quality of Life Studies, 1(1), Article e002.
References
Alves, C. P., Relva, I. C., Costa, M., & Mota, C. P. (2024). Family support, resilience, and life goals of young people in residential care. Behavioral Sciences, 14(7), Article 581. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070581
Askew, H., & Rogers, J. (2025). Opportunities of care at what cost: Findings from a qualitative study exploring care leavers’ experiences of residential care homes for children in Thailand. Institutionalised Children Explorations and Beyond, 12(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/23493003241288623
Ben-Arieh, A. (2008). The child indicators movement: Past, present, and future. Child Indicators Research, 1, 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-007-9003-1
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619–647). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018
Casas, F. (2011). Subjective social indicators and child and adolescent well-being. Child Indicators Research, 4, 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-010-9093-z
Courtney, M. E., & Hook, J. L. (2017). The potential educational benefits of extending foster care to young adults: Findings from a natural experiment. Children and Youth Services Review, 72, 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.09.030
Danpho, W., & Thommachot, P. (2025). Factors related to resilience of adolescents living in out-of-home care settings in Bangkok. BMJ Paediatrics Open, 9(1), Article e003238. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003238
Desmond, C., Watt, K., Saha, A., Huang, J., & Lu, C. (2020). Prevalence and number of children living in institutional care: Global, regional, and country estimates. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 4(5), 370–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30022-5
Greeson, J. K., Thompson, A. E., Ali, S., & Wenger, R. S. (2015). It's good to know that you got somebody that's not going anywhere: Attitudes and beliefs of older youth in foster care about child welfare-based natural mentoring. Children and Youth Services Review, 48, 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.12.015
Gypen, L., Vanderfaeillie, J., De Maeyer, S., Belenger, L. M., & Van Holen, F. (2017). Outcomes of children who grew up in foster care: Systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 76, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.02.035
Intahphuak, S., Kidhathong, S., & Tipwareerom, W. (2025). Caregivers’ perspectives about health and psychosocial wellbeing of next generation of hill tribe children in institutional care in Northern Thailand: A descriptive qualitative study. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 42(3), 404–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886571X.2024.2390060
Islam, T., & Fulcher, L. C. (Eds.). (2018). Residential child and youth care in a developing world: Middle East and Asia perspectives. CYC-Net Press.
Okpych, N. J., Park, S., Powers, J., Harty, J. S., & Courtney, M. E. (2023). Relationships that persist and protect: The role of enduring relationships on early-adult outcomes among youth transitioning out of foster care. Social Service Review, 97(4), 619–674. https://doi.org/10.1086/724736
Petrowski, N., Cappa, C., & Gross, P. (2017). Estimating the number of children in formal alternative care: Challenges and results. Child Abuse & Neglect, 70, 388–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.026
Rees, G. (2017). Children’s views on their lives and well-being: Findings from the Children’s Worlds Project. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65196-5
Rogers, J. M., & Karunan, V. (2020). Is the deinstitutionalisation of alternative care a “wicked problem”? A qualitative study exploring the perceptions of child welfare practitioners and policy actors in Thailand. International Social Work, 63(5), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872820940016
Steenbakkers, A., Ellingsen, I. T., van der Steen, S., & Grietens, H. (2018). Psychosocial needs of children in foster care and the impact of sexual abuse. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(4), 1324–1335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0970-7
UNICEF. (2019). The state of the world’s children 2019: Children, food and nutrition: Growing well in a changing world. https://www.unicef.org/reports/state-of-worlds-children-2019
UNICEF Thailand. (2015). Review of alternative care in Thailand: Policy to implementation with special focus on children affected by HIV/AIDS. https://www.unicef.org/thailand/reports/review-alternative-care-thailand
United Nations General Assembly. (2010). Guidelines for the alternative care of children (Resolution A/RES/64/142). United Nations. https://undocs.org/A/RES/64/142
van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Duschinsky, R., Fox, N. A., Goldman, P. S., Gunnar, M. R., Johnson, D. E., Nelson, C. A., Reijman, S., Skinner, G. C. M., Zeanah, C. H., & Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S. (2020). Institutionalisation and deinstitutionalisation of children 1: A systematic and integrative review of evidence regarding effects on development. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(8), 703–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30399-2