Locked away in an orphanage
BY THARUKA Dissanaike
SRI
LANKAN orphanages are not really for orphans. An orphan by definition is
a child without both parents. But the large majority of children locked
away in our 'orphanages' have both or at least one parent. This was a
startling piece in a Sunday newspaper a few weeks ago.
Although they have parents and family back in their 'village' these 'institutionalised'
languish in regimented, loveless conditions in a less-than-healthy
environment.
Many of us who have seen the inside working of State or private
trust-run large orphanages have come away with a huge feeling of sadness
and helplessness-believing that these children have no better option but
to grow up in this crowded, cramped, unhealthy fashion since they are
without family. It was shocking indeed to find out that this notion fell
far short of the truth.
The secret of this country's orphanages came out when Save the
Children commissioned a study to find out the status of Sri Lankan
orphanages and the manner in which they are run. Over 300 institutions
were included in the study and 84 such institutions were studied
in-depth.
Astonishingly, over 50% of the children in the care of these
institutions have both parents. Only less than 10% claimed to have lost
both parents.
There is little need to elaborate upon the conditions of orphanages.
But the study had come upon some ground truths-It says that a number of
these institutions lacked water and sanitation. Some did not have proper
transportation or sick room facilities.
Many of the employed staff had no knowledge of child rights- nor did
they appear to care about such lofty ideals- also they were not trained
to be caregivers.
Although the institutions allowed parents to visit- these visits were
deliberately kept brief, supervised, and limited. Overnight facilities
were not offered for parents and family who often travelled long
distances to see their child(ren). Letters written home were read by the
people in-charge before posting, letters received were also scrutinized.
In effect the children were imprisoned in these institutions- away
from their parents, their families and cared for by impersonal, often
unfriendly and strict staff who give the children little care and very
little respect.
Although the report does not address abuse, it is a well-known fact
that sexual and physical harassment occurs frequently in many such
homes, especially because the controls over them are lax and supervision
of the Social Services officers is very marginal.
The report states: "The children lacked most was emotional support
and the space to grow as individuals. This is a serious drawback since
the lack of emotional support during childhood can cause irreparable
consequences to a child's healthy development in the long run."
So why do people put their children in institutions? Poverty was
cited as the main reason for many. Others felt that putting a child in
an orphanage would enable him or her to receive proper education and
care. This was especially so in the North and East where decades of
civil war had eroded the social fabric of many communities.
Many a single parent finds it difficult to cope with responsibilities
of child rearing, earning a living etc, and takes up on the option of
institutionalizing one child of a family or all of them.
Parents with children who are mentally or physically disabled also
take upon the option of institutionalizing since the support and care
from the State and community is very minimal.
This is a very sad state of affairs. For a child being with family
under the care of one's own parents is the most important aspect of
development. However poor, the emotional ties with parents cannot be
replaced with the cold impersonality of an institution- however well
run.
This report has to serve as an eye opener for a number of Ministries
and programmes. If poverty is driving people to send their children into
orphanages- it is a very harsh statement upon the failure of our systems
and programmes to address abject poverty. Single parents and parents
with disabled children could cope better if their specific needs were
addressed.
There are many successful micro-level grass roots programmes
supporting single parents (especially women) and households with
disabled young. But these efforts have to be encouraged and
'mainstreamed'.
Otherwise, this despicable situation will continue- where parents opt
to send their children off to virtual imprisonment under the delusion
that they would grow up better. |