Most people from the developed world, including myself, learned as children that poverty is one of the world’s greatest problems. We were told that half of the world lives in poverty. Nearly a quarter of the world lives in extreme poverty. Perhaps even more depressing, we know that thousands of children die each day from poverty. Yet we also know that the world has enough food to feed everybody. So did we get it wrong? How can so many people live in poverty if the world as a whole is not impoverished? Could it be that poverty is rather a symptom of something else?

Our nonprofit – Iniciativa Guatemala – is working with partner organizations in Guatemala to improve life opportunities for marginalized families that live in urban poverty. I was recently in a meeting with some of my Guatemalan colleagues regarding our programs to rescue youth-at-risk from the streets. We found ourselves discussing the definition of “youth-at-risk” and what factors cause a child to become “at-risk”. Essentially, a child becomes at-risk when their life circumstances make them an easy target for gangs or groups of teenagers involved in misconduct (crimes and drugs). Experience has shown that continuing on this path will lead them to a point where there is almost no coming back, and they will struggle with poverty and violence in their families as adults.

When we talked about the life circumstances that surround youth-at-risk, we identified poverty, lack of child supervision, family problems and the presence of young criminals within the community as the four primary factors that collectively cause a child to become at-risk. Poverty, while relevant, didn’t seem to be as important as some of the other factors. For example, poverty is present in both urban and rural areas, yet rural areas rarely struggle with the challenge of youth-at-risk. Many urban areas struggle with poverty, but their communities do not always suffer from gangs or crime. Thus, poverty is most likely not the trigger.

Lack of child supervision means that a child could be harmed because nobody protects the child from a harmful situation. If the child is in an environment with extreme danger the risk is greater. However, living in a community with gangs and misconduct does not necessarily mean that a child will go spend his or her time with the local MS-13 just for fun. Even though lack of supervision means that the door is wide open, something has to make a child want to walk through it. So how about family problems? Could they be the trigger?

One of my colleagues – Juan Carlos Molina – has about 15 years of experience working with imprisoned gang members and ex-gang members. Out of all of the cases he worked during those 15 years, each of his patients identified family problems as the trigger that made them flee to the streets. They were starving for love and since they couldn’t find it at home they went looking for it elsewhere. Just as a starving person will eat whatever food is available to survive, so will a person starving for love. At home they feel abused, abandoned and rejected. In the gang they feel welcome, cared for and protected. When we ask the youth in our programs, “What makes you want to flee to the street or consume drugs?” they begin answering, “When I fight with my family”, “When my father is drunk”, “When my parents hit me”, and “When I feel like nobody cares about me.” Not a single one of them mentions poverty. They are describing the environment of their homes, and in reality, culture is the problem. There is a culture of disconnect and abuse that is both physical and emotional. It is experienced during childhood and repeated as adults. However, we cannot blame somebody for their culture when they have not known any other. A new culture needs to be introduced, and that takes time.

Several weeks ago, one of my colleagues launched a program to work with families of at-risk children. The goal is to introduce a culture of love that replaces the culture of disconnect, which acts as a trigger for youth-at-risk. Parents were blindfolded and the kids walked around the room touching the hands of all the parents. The parents were told to recognize the hands of their child by touch. For many children and parents this was the first time they had ever experienced an intimate connection between them. As one girl remarked of her mother, “She told me for the first time that she loved me. And I loved it. I loved it so much!” Another mom asked her daughter for forgiveness and the daughter noted, “To feel their warmth and their arms felt good. I’ve never had that with them.” One teenager said, “When I passed by them my hands were shaking because I thought they wouldn’t recognize me. Neither did they. But when they touched my hands [my father] said ‘this is my son!’.” By introducing a culture of tenderness inside the home, families create an environment for growth rather than an environment that makes kids flee to the street.

Many underprivileged communities – including those where we work – have support from NGO’s, non-profits and aid organizations. Without the right culture among the beneficiaries, these communities will never be able to fully leverage the support being offered to them. Similarly, without the right culture the social organizations will never be able to efficiently and effectively deliver solutions. Often, approaches that are non-collaborative end in failure because the problem needs more solutions than one organization can provide. Other times bureaucracy stands in the way of progress. I think by identifying these issues we begin to see more clearly that poverty is a symptom of a bigger problem. The real problem has been a misguided approach to helping these communities. I’ve been fortunate and proud to work in an environment where new cultures are being introduced and embraced by the brokenhearted, impoverished and development workers alike.