Adoptive parents shocked by the bill of the Ministry of education

The Ministry of education has prepared a bill on “protection of children’s rights” according to which it is proposed to limit the number of adoptable children – up to three per family together with blood – and to enter psychological testing. Foster parents have called him “cannibal” and believe that the chances of finding a family, children have almost no.

  • “We don’t pick up a beautiful, smart, healthy children”
  • “More than three children in hands not to give!” – will the limits and tests the device of orphans
  • “Such a baby as Olga just die in the walls of the children’s home” foster care bill of the Ministry of education
  • Ministry of education intends to limit the number of children in foster care to three

The Chairman of the Union of foster parents, adopters, guardians and Trustees Natalia Gorodiskaâ

– Some time ago we had a meeting at the Ministry was the Minister of education Tatiana sinyugina, were representatives of NGOs and two councils – the Council for the protection of children and the Council of the Association of foster families. We talked about the need for reform. Do you need to make changes, because over the last five years has increased the number of foster families has decreased the number of orphans, and we are not satisfied with the level of support and training that now is. We, adoptive parents, understand that we do not have enough specialists. So we talked about the need to reform the whole system, from preparation of specialists who will work with foster families to provide them assistance and support.

On the issue of psychological testing we discussed at that meeting what may, there are cases of abuse, there are cases where parenting come with some other intentions far from positive. But in fact none of the testing will not immediately identify the inclination of man. In the end, he might have something happen that will snap him and he starts with a child to abuse, even if you passed the testing phase.

Therefore, the subject of testing, we discussed with the reservations that we need experts, we need methods that also still need to discuss and understand how it will be at all effective. So we said that testing might be implemented, but only by changing the system as a whole system of training of parents themselves. We’ve consulted and talked for a long time, but for some reason this is not a word, and it is very sad. We see this situation from the inside, we live with foster children and work with foster parents, but for some reason nothing was offered, no. All miraculously transformed into completely different things.

Therefore, we are categorically against what is written in the bill in terms of restricting children, the impossibility of movement without the permission of bodies of guardianship and so on. This morning I first saw this text. And we, the community, not collected, we absolutely were not aware of. We with representatives of all NGOs want to get together the points to make suggestions, comments and to publish it. Over the past years has done huge work: has formed the foster parent community, organized clubs, starts, accompanied by the forces of NGOs in many regions, and great to work with. But now what happens?

The word “tougher” to me as a foster mother, which is 10 years in the subject, so hurt rezanulo. I now have a family of 7 children – three of their four adopted children, including those with disabilities. So these children, who were already grown who had such strong positive changes, they simply would not have been, we would not be able to give it to them.

Natalia Gorodiskaâ family

At that meeting talked about a personal approach. I know families who have raised many children, and they are very resource. I also know a family with two children who have huge problems – they just need help. So here’s to all to apply the same rules is absurd. I still can’t handle it. If asked our opinion, of course we are absolutely against those measures that are planning to apply to foster families. I’m glad it’s only a bill. I know some very sane people in the Ministry of education, with whom we cooperate for many years, and so I’m sure that it will not accept. Otherwise it destroys all what we wanted and what we have achieved over the years.

Evgeny Solovyov, President of the Novosibirsk city public organization of adopters, “day of the stork”:

I am an optimist, you know. And a lover of common sense. In this combination it’s easier for me to live. But sometimes the brain is boiling, not finding the answer in the usual way. For example, tonight, when a colleague from the Moscow school of adoptive parents have received a “project of innovation in the adoption procedure, I was very surprised. Yesterday, I chuckled at the definition of Minister of education we, the adoptive parents as “so-called parents.” I thought, well, loves children and has little interest in the topic of adoption, it happens. I do not love football, but no one bad.

But now, reading the points of proposed changes, every time I had to go back to the beginning of the sentence because my eyes could not believe it: what?

There’s no suggestion of pearl.

Now I can’t even seriously discuss them.

Carefully Express and perhaps to ask those who in the topic? The subject of psychologists, foster parents, successful care?

And it is a shame, but really.

And scary for children.

I live in the theme of foster parenting more than fifteen years, when our family third child there is adoption. And then I got two higher educations, two more kids both ways, took lots of courses on the psychology of orphanhood. During this time in my Novosibirsk we have created an organization adopters “day of the stork”. Over the years we have trained and receive the support of more than two thousand nekrovnymi parents. And you know what I know? Feeling good, happy with the world and ready to psychological care and openness where the family receives support, where they together with the children accept and appreciate, where there is no punitive control and the disputed test. I was hoping that in the last year realized that there is no valid test for human, parental suitability. It’s a shame that this issue was raised again, and more bozo. Wonder. I’m on vacation now, but the first thing to raise the discussion of this strange topic and at the level of the public and ministries.

Dina Tycoon, psychologist, head of the School of adoptive parents of the Institute development family devices:

The emotional part of the review I’ll skip, but there’s almost nothing left: I really want to swear.

If to speak in fact, in this project, well just about everything. The Ministry of education in their delusions of control and inspection has reached the point of absurdity. There are cases of abuse in foster families? Yes, there are. We must prevent this? – It is necessary. Then we will tighten the rules of adoption and guardianship and control of the family. But we’re in the best families there are cases of violence. And no statistics which would say that in adoptive families the level of violence against children is higher than in blood. But blood family do not control in advance? Do not implement psychological testing, do not give permission to whom to give birth, and who does not. With blood families is to get up afraid, and with foster somehow.

There is a statistic that tells what percentage of the abolition of adoptions and guardianship roughly the same from year to year so that there was nothing requiring immediate tightening of the screws.

In the bill there are a number of provisions to tighten the rules of them in any reasonable – about three and a half.

First, you can at least discuss the situation that children, if they are not siblings, it is better to take the family for a hundred people at once, but one by one, the family and the child time to adjust to each other before the arrival of the next child.

Second, a reasonable offer to resolve to adopt brothers and sisters in different families. Now the law says that it is not allowed, except when it is in the interests of children; and the new bill proposes to do the opposite – allowed, except the cases when it is not in the best interests of children. This approach will make it easier to arrange the family “locomotives” brothers and sisters, often even strangers who live in different institutions. Now they don’t like to hold separately, I believe that “prohibited”, not looking to see whether between the children relations which they, and just not give the family one and all.

Even so, it makes sense to separately prepare related and unrelated guardians, this, too, there are words in the bill.

Finally, regarding limitations of children in foster care – it’s just the same “half” — there is a small reasonable element: indeed, it happens that people do not expect forces to take a lot of children and they have at some point not strong enough. It can be discussed – but that does not mean that we should be allowed to have families more than four children! This proposal puts an end to large families, where there are often very skilled parents, able to take a very difficult child. Many of them started with a small-healthy and then experience took the family all the more challenging for children’s health.

This bill is outrageous everything. He proposes a psychological examination of the candidates for adoptive parents. The creators of this legislation have a strange fantasy that somewhere there is a magical psychologists who have magical techniques that will allow you to say exactly a person can be a foster parent or can not, he will beat his foster child or not. But such methods did not exist.

A psychologist can examine a person to determine his personality structure, but there is no evidence that such a personality type for adoptive parenting is suitable, and such do not. Or that there is a universal type of personality that allows you to be a perfect foster parent for any child. A child and a parent – always a pair, there are no parents, which is good for every child, but there are people who can become good parents to this child, and to help find this couple way more than the “psychological examination”.

You can not delegate to the psychologist responsible for the resolution of man to be or not to be a foster parent. Just that – he would be guilty. If with the child something happens – that a psychologist comes to law enforcement and will ask why you allowed this man to be a parent? A testing methodology is biased, very much depends on interpretation, and hide behind the psychologist will be nothing. It is easier to deny the right to be a parent, and psychologists will be denied, in jail-that no one wants. And to appeal such refusal in court would be impossible. Now, when potential adopters challenged in court the refusal of care in the resolution for adoption, they can win if they have abandoned psychological testing. And if the case is the conclusion of a psychologist who says she is not optimal for this family adopt a child because the family has a child in adolescence, in which adolescence crisis, to challenge the expert opinion in court is almost impossible.

In addition, the bill proposes to psychologically examine not only the potential parents and guardians, but all living together with them. This rule in itself is very vague. Now, when living together is required only consent to care and regularly have problems: who is living together? Some of the care require the consent of all registered in the housing, but it can be grandparents who actually live in the village. Now they can go to your courthouse and there to sign the consent, but where will they go psychologically examined? And sometimes, on the contrary, in the house there never was a civil husband, he was not at home, the potential adoptive mother says that at home she lives alone with her daughter, as it is generally to test?

The house can be a grandmother to dementia, which cannot be tested, they will not be able to answer the questions. Can be those who are against the idea of a foster child. It seems to be bad to bring a child into a family where someone doesn’t want him? And with children unless there is no way that the parents demand that the daughter did not give birth, do not want to grandson, and then he when he was born they love him?

All this is very toxic rules that create room for arbitrariness.

There is still a requirement that the guardians changed their place of residence with the permission of the guardianship only after an examination of the new place of residence. Now everything is so: for example, you need to move. You find a new apartment, move, go to a new wing, say: I live here now, and from the old to the new care sending your documents. What should be done under the new rules? Need to find a new apartment, go to the new wing, it will see housing act it is necessary to go to the old guardianship for permission, but she is still not allowed, then it is still necessary to sue on this issue… And if the family lives in a rented apartment, and the hosts are told to release it before the end of the month? Sometimes there is in life? Haven’t got time to sue, you’ve got to move quickly. Sometimes, it’s urgent. But this practice is a direct violation of the constitutional rights to freedom of movement.

And if an unmarried woman with a child under guardianship is getting married and going to move to the future husband? To her husband she can move only with the permission of the guardianship?

I understand what faces haunted by the Ministry of education and that they want to cut off. They think, writing these rules, about the case, which last year was in some Alusuisse (and he probably really was) when the family took off for three months good housing and received approval from the guardianship, and then with fifteen children moved to a Studio apartment. But in order to cope with such cases, do not need new rules of law need to be performed existing.

Even the MoE proposes again to introduce the norm of square meters that are needed to take the baby. This rule was previously, then it was, fortunately, cancelled, has introduced a certificate of SES, then canceled it. Now OPEC is simply looking at housing families – is that there was not the unsanitary conditions. And now it is proposed to introduce an accounting rate for the region (in Moscow, for example, such a rule is 33 square meters per person, for a family of two – 24 on each of three or more — 18 meters each). That is, parents with one child, living in a typical Khrushchev’s visit to adopt another child will not. Not to mention the families with eight children. It is clear that, again, was a case in Alusuisse where eighteen children lived in one room on four-story bunks. But if the guardianship is just doing what they are supposed to do by law – they see trouble in a family before something happens. And the new rules will complicate life isn’t malicious olulisem, and ordinary people who live ordinary lives and say – Oh, why bother to mess with this. And get the baby.

Yet it is proposed that the guardianship was for each child the plan of measures for its adaptation in the family. But to do it at the entrance of the child into the family is impossible. Adaptation in the family is a piece of work, and doing it should not the care. And again, surely there was a case in Alusuisse took the baby and handed back, with the adaptation failed, so let’s tell the OPEC to adapt children in families. But hit it for all those who are living a normal life. All these innovations – direct sabotage each paragraph.

The new proposals of the Ministry of education can understand the points for a long time, but the main thing is that the proposals are trying to solve the problem from the wrong end. They’re trying to regulate and write on all occasions the rules and algorithms. But finding a family for a child, its adaptation in the family and home life is tedious lot of work, in which there are no magic wands, and the only possible algorithms. Can’t live on algorithms and rules, life is always wider. This means that the law should be the place for decisions at the discretion of the specialist. According to circumstances, for a particular child, a particular family, a particular situation. But in order for this approach to work, the training of professionals to understand what the child’s interests; these interests do not contradict the fact that ask those of the members of OPEC.

Now they ask for the absence of accidents. If the orphanage with the baby, something happened, no one will bear responsibility for it, rarely the Director of the institution. And if the family – care torn apart, can be fired, put on trial. The current care staff are not able to decide anything, a little something trained, very busy and always to blame; only it cares for children people with this approach are willing to take risks and to take responsibility in helping the children find family.

Officials don’t trust people neither care staff nor the parents. Anything left at the discretion of parents or guardianship is impossible, hence the desire to order all three children at one year to 18 meters each, but it is a mess.

What to do instead? First, you need to work with blood families, so fewer children were in orphanages. Not on paper, when instructed to deprive the rights of antisocial parents not doing besides nothing, but in fact, when the family start to help before she was antisocial; and such experience in the country, though little. Secondly, if we talk about foster families, it is necessary to separate support for foster families and monitor them. The guardianship can’t do both. Once support services are vested with control function – credibility disappears. Secondly, you need a long and thoughtful training of workers and support services, and workers control of the guardianship.

And we must accept that parenting, including receiving increasingly any paper algorithms. Yes, the government wants and should to control this field; but it is impossible to control “algorithm”; it is necessary that in each situation was the ability of parents and officials to make decisions that are optimal for the family based on the interests of the child. This work of analysis, rebuild system training people. I understand that it’s all fantasy about the wonderful future of Russia, but without it we are doomed to a multiplication of meaningless rules.

Svetlana Stroganova

Let’s get acquainted.

My name is Sveta Stroganoff, and I have six children. The eldest is Sasha, has been living separately, she has his own family. Me reside five. Tap dance — home-made, Sonia, Nazar, Olga and Pauline foster.

In the morning we was wondering what happened with the Minister of education, Ms. Vasilyeva, why suddenly she started to threaten foster parents?

It turns out that it’s not just “rein under the mantle got”.

I’m reading the draft Federal law, which is now secretly sent to the regions.
Well, not quietly — from various sources, the leak went.

So, for example, according to these amendments, the number of children a foster parent, including blood children, may not exceed three persons.

That is, if I have my two children, I can only take one. If three — that is all, I the road to adoptive parenthood is closed.

Let me explain what this will mean in practical terms.


At pictures of my children.

I crossed out those who would remain in the orphanage (most likely forever), whether such a law passed a few years ago.


Nazar — a child taken from the child’s home for children with disorders of the Central nervous system and brain damage. Perinatal encephalopathy, mental retardation, delayed motor development, contact on Hepatitis C, mother — the addict, the lack of full legal status, upcoming lengthy court processes.

Olga — almost 5 years, the child does not walk or speak, diagnoses — cerebral palsy, hydrocephalus, congenital heart defect, mental retardation, strabismus… Yes, in principle, enough already, although it is still possible to dig into the map.

Pauline is 14 years old, a teenager, twice recurrent, regional, mom an alcoholic, dad is an alcoholic and a drug addict.

It is clear that behind them and so all is not worth, right?

And if you reduce the number of adoptive parents several times, then the chances of these children fall into the family almost was not.

Now the system is officially 50 000 orphans (actually more, it is a separate issue). The Ministry of education in the past education, a report for 2 consecutive years that the number of placed children in families exceeds the number of identified orphaned children. So, orphans becomes smaller. If this law is adopted, orphans will be more. A lot more. Very much more.

And so, a child like Olga just die in the walls of DDI and will never go or speak, a child as Nazar for his violent temper will become a regular visitor to the psychiatric hospital (this is the method of education in children’s homes actively practiced), a girl like Polina maximum I trained as a plasterer. If you’re lucky. If you do not drink too much and not Storch.

This is what the Ministry of education calls caring for orphans?

In my opinion, this is denoted by another word.


Olga Ovodova

Until last night, I still hoped that journalists stir up. Have not yet read the actual text of the bill, without emotion over the top. And now I can’t breathe from the terror. I fear I can not remember one family in which the sick child was first, second or third.

They certainly are. But I think about those who fell, when parents already have gained experience. Who learns, sings and dances. Who was sentenced to lie in bed and walk by myself. About the var, which he loved, but to heal and to teach was not planned. About Angela, who asks a thousand questions a day and remembers the answers to all your questions, puts your own scientific experiments, and it was considered profoundly mentally retarded.

Among my friends these children dozens. All they had to lie waiting for a good, proper parents, not the so-called. To Cook for 6 years were issued one direction to explore. Angela showed on the first channel three times, millions of families saw it. No one came for my precious girls, did not see, how beautiful they are.

God, stop this nightmare. Please.

Alex Ghazarian

<…> I don’t have on hand the analysis from which made such impressive insights, but it is obvious that the generalization on negative cases is a good idea. Even if we assume (hypothetically) that statistically in foster families, the level of violence is higher, it still about anything does not speak. Since we’re talking about families that very few people happy today who are discriminated against and deprived of proper medical care.

School? Not happy. Neighbors? As lucky. Relatives? Unable to turn away. Friends? Come, let’s go.
Experts? They still have to find if you’re not in Moscow, and in Moscow are looking for.

.I meet with foster parents in different parts of Russia. You know, when they feel good? When the environment support: club, social organization, open and professional service, a competent school of adoptive parents, loyal (at least!) teachers of schools. But not where they had a good psychological examination

Who works to foster families tightly knows that the life of the family prior to the adoption of the child and after much changing. Changing her social status, starts, different, sometimes complicated and dramatic processes within the family all react to the new participant relations, there is a relationship with blood family (even if there is no communication direct blood parents become part of the emotional life,at least), starts the dynamics of adaptation (and there are such waves that ogogo!), may have difficulty with learning, health and behavior.

The family is in the new territory of life. Of course, there are various methods, questionnaires, structured interviews and tests that try to predict what some have families and children in the risks along the way. But it is a mistake to believe that good “after” we can get some guarantees. No, you can’t.

First, because we examine the patient in some realities, he will live absolutely in other. Secondly, because parents are not all who affect a child’s life, it is included in the set of relations of the world, including from his past. To happen anything, all that happens in this life. Thirdly, because the values and meanings of the person are also changing.

About the number of children a long conversation. There are many different opinions, “as you can”. It should be understood that family is family strife. It is generally very lively, diverse community of people. My opinion is – this issue needs to be worked much more juvelirnoe, be careful with real consideration of the consequences and comparison of risks.

Yes, we know that there are parents who are experiencing a huge load from a large number, suffer themselves, and with them the children suffer. There are those who exploit child labour, not much raise (this, incidentally, is not a question of quantity, actually). And also know of other cases: large, friendly, with dozens of grandchildren, they have as it turns out, talent like this.

Svetlana Stroganov wrote a post which showed the crosses on the photos of those children who could stay and live in the institution, whether adopted these “corrections”. That should be about it very carefully to think. About each of these 50 000. What will happen to Sergei, Sasha, Olga with Varya.

In this sense, it is a good school for foster parents is necessary for all our society as school awareness, empathy, trust and mutual support.

Naila Novozhilova

Today in the news I read the Minister’s position Vasilyeva about the strengthening of the family unit. Was surprised

And now at night I read the draft of the law… Well what can I say — this will cover for many children the opportunity to grow up in a family! And most importantly — there is no logic!
They will remain in an orphanage, where what you are trying to avoid, will be more with them.

Read the points of the bill!

  • In a foster family should not be more than 3 children, including blood
  • Each member of the family for 18 sq m, that is, in the family mom, dad and 3 children — 90 sq meters. Well, four or five-room apartment and do not have to be less.

And not a word about the necessity of forming a competent and in the right number of specialists. And not a word about the negative impact of people working in care and their competence or lack thereof.

All this does not apply to blood relatives and not foster families! Does not seem strange that we without reference to the resource parents just filter out and leave less than 30 % of the candidates?

What is the logic?

Yes, there are problems in the family unit and the system needs to be developed and improved, not only to prohibit and to tighten:
— need competent staff in sufficient numbers who are trained candidates, determine resourcest, accompany the family in the future! And then to talk about the survey.

— Need a unified information system on candidates to those who teach candidates could pass them in the custody of his observation. Last place of residence, etc. received in a single database information (it is believed that one tragedy could have been avoided if ward knew the opinion of the PDS).

Functions care support and control post in different departments. So some fought to the last for the welfare of the family, while others are just controlled. Now one man and accompanies and controls, it is sometimes easier to avoid the problem from seizing.

— Need to organize high-quality support to adoptive families. Why in child in the orphanage invested a lot of effort and money, and family difficulties of raising traumatized children on the family shoulder? If a small fire does not extinguish, a fire may occur.

Gentlemen, let’s look at the system. Yes, it is necessary to change many processes, the quality of specialists and selection of candidates. but only the whole system needs to be improved.

Well, not the current logic. There is a problem with violence in foster care, let’s have less hand-in-family, let them continue to live in children’s homes, where it thrives violence (Chelyabinsk, Bryansk history, etc.) worse. There is a problem with the preparation and selection of parents, let’s test or examination is entered, let the test confirms that you can.

I will try to assemble a coalition for constructive conversation with the Ministry.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.