Welfare Policy; (5) monitoring the cases of violence against the domestic workers and ensuring prosecution of the perpetrators of such violence; (6) maintaining a list of children in a register to be kept in every union parishad and obliging parents of young children who send their children from rural to urban areas for work to register the details of the child; (7) setting up a mandatory registration regime for child domestic workers which would require all employers to register the details of children or other domestic workers with local government units such as pourashava or municipal corporations (though not union parishads);53 (8) expecting that the Government would take steps to enact law requiring that the employers must ensure health check-up of domestic workers once in every two months; (9) requiring that existing legal framework would be strengthened in such a way that benefits of regulated working hours, rest, recreation, salary etc. enjoyed by industrial workers are also ensured for all domestic workers; and (10) requiring that laws would ensure proper medical treatment and compensation to be paid by employers to the domestic workers for any illness, injury or fatality occurring in the course of employment or as a result of it.54 Directions issued by their Lordships in this case follows an in-depth analysis of the various ill effects of domestic works on the workers, is well-intoned, and based on a genuine desire to ameliorate the working and living conditions of child domestic workers. Hence, their Lordships must be lauded for taking a thorough view on an area that has generally been neglected by the legislature. However, the wisdom behind some of the directions, their desirability, or practicality is not beyond question. Some of the directions are expressed in so broad and imprecise terms that whether or not those have been implemented to any meaningful extent can hardly be assessed by any objective 53 The judgment does not give any justification for the exclusion of union parishads from the ambit of such registration regime. Presumably, union parishads have been excluded because it has been assumed that child domestic work is only an urban phenomenon or children working in rural areas would stay close to their own families and so, they would be less vulnerable. However, such assumptions may not always be correct as though they would reflect the common trend; their exceptions are also not rare. 54 BNWLA v Bangladesh, above note 10, at para 40. 14