Domestic child labor: An overview in the light of Brazil’s recent experience Armand F. Pereira * Child domestic work received little attention until the late 1990s. It remains highly neglected because of the relatively invisible nature of such work, the difficulty in getting good data within and across countries, lack of interest among policy-makers and legislators, limited law enforcement, etc. In several countries, labor-related laws still do not address domestic work, much less that of children which is still perceived by many people as a “good” option for poor girls. This problem has as much to do with children’s rights and public attitudes as with deregulated labor markets and necessary changes thereof. Domestic work represents up to 10 percent of total employment in several countries, according to ILO’s labor statistics. Yet, it is generally undervalued, overworked, underpaid, unprotected and, therefore, open to abuse of children and adults as well. Indeed, a significant proportion of domestic workers are children in spite of international treaties and national laws prohibiting it. Yet, the first point to stress is this: Human rights violations get more sympathy when it comes to children, but we can more effectively crack down on domestic child labor through efforts to improve the regulatory framework covering domestic work at large - a critical point reemphasized at the end of this article. One in seven children is in child labor of some sort, according to ILO’s statistical efforts since the late 1980s. Over 6% of the working children are in community, social and personal services, including domestic work. Child domestic workers are estimated around 175,000 under 18 in Central America, nearly 325,000 between 10 and 17 in Brazil, over 53,000 under 15 in South Africa, some 38,000 between 5 and 7 in Guatemala, more than 688,000 in Indonesia, and probably much more in some other large Asian countries for which semi-reliable estimates are still missing. About 90% of domestic child workers are girls; boys may exceptionally share up to 50% (e.g. in Katmandu in the late-1990s); most are in the 12-17 age group, but some are as young as 5 or 6. They are often far from their families, controlled by their employer, invisible to public authorities, frequently deprived of basic rights and related social services, decent lodging and working conditions, deprived of protection from sexual