In the basis of the proposals, we are told, lies the concern that foster care children are being abused. The solution to the problem of officials is obvious – to tighten 4 times. Yes, some foster parents are incompetent. As some employees of children’s institutions. Why a lot of children in the family is unacceptable, and the institution can have a hundred? Let’s limit the number of children in the institution up to 8-15. Difficult? To limit the parents, of course, easier.
- Prison, STUMPS, standing abortion: that they waited for the orphans from the orphanage
- The so-called parents
- There is an illusion that children turn parents from which to choose
- We will soon see the parents crying about their children
“We will tighten the selection of the so-called parents. Tightened, great tightened. Very tightened” – these words of the Minister of education Olga Vasilyeva made an impression on the community of adoptive parents and experts on family device. The words included proposals to change legislation, is also impressive. Mandatory psychological testing of adoptive parents, the prohibition to take the family for those children who already have three, including families.
Impressive here mostly not specific proposals: proposals can be successful and not; and for the discussion, examination and other procedures to make a successful and unsuccessful change or reject. Striking submission form behind her to the adoptive parents in combination with a clear misunderstanding of the process of the family unit.
In the basis of the proposals, we are told, lies the concern that foster care children are being abused. The solution to the problem of officials is obvious – to tighten 4 times. We have always an education and a tightening in one, and in the ratio of 1 to 4.
No one takes children to torture them and beat
Tell me why it doesn’t work.
In any activity, including in family placement of children, there is always this dilemma: the more you do, the greater the risk of errors and failures. The only way to bring a failed device to zero – no one to arrange. The only way to eliminate the mistreatment of children is to sterilise the entire population of the polls and wait 18 years. There is no other.
Developing and expanding the device, we increase the risks. To reduce risks, “tightening” the requirements for candidates thought that comes to mind first. And like almost all first thoughts about complex problems, it is wrong. For grandmothers on the bench is allowed to remain at this level for professionals – no.
During the training we with experts, long is analyzed: building a sociometric scale, looking for his or her position between the poles of “acceptable” and “avoid risks”. Tracked, how to change our thoughts and feelings, our position on this issue depending on many factors. Learn to see this “equalizer” inside, notice how after a hard case with a foster family he flies to the pole “do not give children to anyone,” but after the information about a child who literally dies in state the system moves to the pole “well, at least someone would get it”. Learn to see, but not to act only under the influence of the situation, because this is professionalism – the ability to surround, system, vision, reflection. In working with people and families there are no simple solutions. Rather, all simple solutions are always doing worse, with all good intentions. “The walk” on this scale, we always come to the conclusion that the answer lies in choosing the right perspective on it.
You have to choose wisely the degree of toughening of screening to make more, but the risk is less. It doesn’t work.
Not working because no one takes children to torment and beat.
If someone is sadistic needs, honestly, receiving parenting – well, a very difficult way to satisfy them. Explosive perverzne psychopaths and narcissists do exist, they certainly shouldn’t be around children, and current law requires that the candidate for adoptive parent has passed examination by a psychiatrist. It is reasonable and necessary, and if it is carried out formally, this problem should – and really to decide.
The vast majority of candidates in adoptive parents – ordinary normal people who want a baby to love and live with him happily ever after. They can overestimate their own strength, can unrealistic to imagine a child – all this in itself does not say that they would be beaten, badly fed or go back.
That’s when they face real life with a difficult child, anything can happen. And none of the psychological tests do not predict and do not show. I know incredible resource for adoptive parents, whose personal maturity and psychological stability, optimism, patience and common sense could serve as an example to all of us. And many of them told me that it got to the point where I want to smear the child against the wall, certainly, and it came to blows. Found in himself such a fierce beast whose existence you were unaware previously, neither they nor their loved ones. Traumatized child knows unconsciously that beast adult to remove, because he already knows him, saw and, sadly, that is his “image of an adult”.
And that’s when a person takes such – again, it can happen to anyone and neprijemny a foster parent, it is important that he had someplace to go. Who was to say about it. It was a place to vent their anger, despair, horror, and get help, not a “psychological evaluation”. For this and need a support professional. Which very often is not, or they are not able to work because no one teaches you to help.
Parents should not be afraid to come and say: broke, help
Attempt to solve the problem of “selection input” first, useless, and second, harmful.
Useless because there are no valid, recognized the professional community of the techniques, allowing to understand, whether the person to safely raise the child. The same parents with someone perfectly capable, and on the other can break. Many countries paid tribute to the illusion of effectiveness “psychological testing” and abandoned this practice as senseless.
And harmful, because it destroys the contact with the family, hurts and humiliates people. Almost any problem can be overcome if the parents seek help at the first sign of trouble, even before reaching exhaustion. Parents should not be afraid to come and say broke, I don’t know what to do, help is almost always this situation is remedied. And nothing can help if the family hides the complexity and does not trust the experts, because it sees in them not assistants, and “inspection”, because initially their communication was based on the presumption of their guilt, greed, inability to take care of the children. That’s when the problems come to light as emergencies.
All ideas about “the tightening of selection” actually increase risks, not reduce them. Because it’s not in the qualities of their parents, and the quality of the assistance he can get, if you find that difficult.
To train professionals hard “to toughen up” – just
Ten years have passed since the beginning of the mass device in foster care. This occurred in the mode of campaigning and “plan on a shaft” without training and support, and already then experts warned that after a few years it will result in refunds and violence. What do we have.
With the preparation over the years progress, we introduced a mandatory PDS, and though the process was not intelligently organized, now everything is settled and people get help in making decisions and in preparing for the reception of the child.
With the help of the family after the arrival of the baby it’s worse. A good professional escort service is still a rarity, they’re always on human factor specific people and work, especially in the regions, for pennies.
To develop services, to train specialists difficult. “To toughen up” – just.
Unscrupulous family, “gaining” a bunch of babies for payments exist. They are quite a bit in percentage terms. In fact, generally of large families even among professional foster only 15%, and of unfair and bad coping even less. By the way, some of them it is all arranged when it was necessary urgently “to stuff” children after the infamous Dima Yakovlev law.
Yes, some foster parents are incompetent. As some employees of children’s institutions. But the child behind the fence of the institution much more vulnerable to the arbitrariness of the adults than the child who lives in a normal family, goes to school and walks in the yard, catches the eye of dozens of people. Why a lot of children in the family is unacceptable, and the institution can have a hundred? Let’s limit the number of children in the institution up to 8-15, as in most developed countries, let’s derive institutions from behind the fence into society, this measure is long overdue, this will really improve the protection of children. Difficult? To limit the parents, of course, easier.
Ward said: “If we allow, we will fly”
Here are some instances of the latter, described by colleagues:
- In early may, the graduate of our PDS appealed to the guardianship of a small town under the Bottom a statement on the appointment of her guardian three-month girls. Girl complex, was in the hospital, she didn’t eat, was fed through a tube. Her many times, watched the candidates for adoptive parents, wrote the cracks. The potential guardian is already a foster mom, she and her husband have one child there, so decided on a second. Not afraid that the child is challenging what frightened diagnoses that the prospects of rehabilitation are unclear, believe that they will cope and stretched. Decided to take custody, and then in Moscow to adopt. The regional operator gave direction to the acquaintance, met, signed the consent form, written statement on the appointment of a guardian. The PLO refused. In words – “we have babies queue up for adoption, we custody not give up. In conclusion, you have written that you are the prospective adoptive parents, not guardians”. Written waiver contained wild the phrase “in connection with the refusal of the parties concerned”. Mom wrote a complaint to the Prosecutor’s office and on the website of the presidential administration. From the first there is no response, from the second came the reply. It took three months. The child is still in the institution.
- Three years looking for three times the return of the girl is very experienced and resource family. Many interested, but no one picked up. And found here. Very experienced mother, with experience of working with challenging teenagers. Met. Took home. Guardianship was over. But… sent out a new order “no more than three in one hand”, and the last day the family was refused because the family already has 3 adopted children. Ward said that if we resolve, “we will fly”. And that it is now in an orphanage?
- In the spring of 2018 a large foster mother came from Moscow in their care with a package of documents to adopt another child. Ward sent her to a psychological examination at the center of “Childhood”. Of course, I had to sign a paper saying that on examination she is “voluntarily”. How was examined, a different story; suffice it to say that “psychologists” coming home to the candidate, refused to talk with the living there child because “he’s 18, he’s not a member of the family.” As a result, the applicant drew the conclusion that the child it may take only six months, because all the children were suddenly discovered the crisis (six months later, they seem to dissolve), and the future adopted child “it’s better to first finish the school year.” Based on the opinion of psychologists, the PLO issued a denial of opinion on the opportunity to be a guardian; the candidate tried to challenge it in court. The court did not accept the statement as a candidate voluntarily submit to a psychological examination, and the results can be the basis for the solution of care.
Please note, still no amendments are accepted. A “tightening” already has children. And it would be interesting to know who will take responsibility for all the abuse that can happen to children as a result of Confusion?
Not the asylum or the criminals
In conclusion, I want to appeal personally to the Minister Olga Vasilyeva.
By chance was that You are responsible for the field of family placement of children. It happened because orphanages were once educational institutions. This is a complex and important area, which over the past 15 years have seen tremendous changes. Those people You call “so called adoptive parents” over the years, pulled from the orphanages, tens of thousands of children. Often very difficult children with health problems and development, with a very traumatic past. Frankly, they got a little help from the state all this time, they are always in front of everyone was to blame and still doing its thing, sometimes.
The decline in the number of orphans significantly in recent years – it is their merit, not Yours. And now You are talking to them as supplicants or criminals.
You don’t seem to understand the essence of the process of family placement in which the foster parent is an equal and valued partner of the state. Because ministries and departments may proclaim the beautiful slogans like “Russia without orphans” or “we will Not give children in America will raise themselves.” But if these people do not come and children will not take, and then will not take care of them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, the slogans will not help. We again get a full orphanage and lives. I’m not talking about the damage to the image of the country and for the budget, if You are a pragmatist closer.
You are concerned about the violence and abuse? Very good. This is a issue that you need to seek in the dialogue with foster parents and specialists. But that dialogue has taken place, you first need to throw out the word “to tighten”. Then can and will find solutions not simple, and correct.
Edition Pravmir requested the Ministry of education for an interview with a representative of the Department on this bill. August 29, in the Public chamber of the Russian Federation held a round table organized by Elena Alshansky and the Fund “Volunteers in aid to children-orphans”, dedicated to the discussion of the new draft law “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation on protection of the rights of children”.