Ending the Era of Orphanages in Armenia
by Nanore Barsoumian
August 15, 2012
Why the Diaspora Should Help the Process of De-Institutionalization
In his childhood poems, my father grappled with the absence of his
mother. He lost his parents by the age of eight, and spent years in an
Aleppo orphanage, until he graduated. More than anything, he wanted
his mother’s arms, and her hug. The poems are moving, and acutely
painful.
A child must live with a family
`The orphanage is the opposite of a mother. This is the reason that an
orphanage is so terrible,’ Armenian journalist Mher Arshakyan, an
orphanage graduate, once said.
Around 5,000 children in Armenia spend all or most of their time in
residential childcare institutions, such as orphanages and boarding
schools. Over 80 percent of children living in orphanages have at
least one living parent. The government of Armenia adopted a plan in
2006, as part of their child welfare reforms, to secure the rights of
children through the closure of orphanages or their conversion into
family and child support institutions. UNICEF has supported this
initiative, gently prodding the slow-moving process forward.
`The right of a child to grow up in a family could not remain on the
sidelines,’ Emil Sahakyan, communications officer at UNICEF Armenia,
told the Armenian Weekly in an interview. `We have been actively
working with the ministry of labor and social issues and ministry of
education and science in order to design the so-called
de-institutionalization strategy which envisaged either return of
children living in institutions to their biological families whenever
possible or creation of alternative family-based care services,’ he
said.
Seven state-run orphanages and three private ones currently operate in
Armenia. In addition, there are 23 special education institutions for
those with mental and physical disabilities, and 8 night-care
(boarding) institutions, where children from poor families spend most
of their time – about 250 days, according to Eduard Israyelyan, a child
protection officer at UNICEF Armenia.
`Children in these institutions are more of `social orphans,’ as they
ended up there because their families were unable to meet their basic
needs – such as nutrition, clothing, education, and proper healthcare,’
Sahakyan said.
High unemployment, poverty, and migration contribute to parents’
inability to care for their children. In Gyumri, the situation seems
especially bleak, where there’s currently one orphanage for children
with disabilities, two night-care centers, two private institutions,
and one state-funded daycare center. `Half of the male population has
left the region looking for jobs outside of Armenia – for example,
working in Russia – so they keep their families by sending remittances
to them,’ explained Sahakyan.
A child from a poverty-stricken home will find food, clothing,
education, and healthcare in an institution. However, he or she will
lack emotional sustenance. `When you look at children who graduated
from orphanages, you will immediately discern them from the rest of
society. They’ve had no family model to follow. It is very difficult
for them to form a family because it is difficult for them to
understand what family is,’ he said.
According to Anna Mnatsakanyan, the international relations
coordinator of the Armenian Relief Society (ARS) in Armenia, children
in orphanages are not only deprived of parental care, but they become
part of a `sub-culture’ of orphanage graduates, often marginalized by
society at large. `They have considerable difficulties in finding
employment, in creating a family, in securing housing, and, most
importantly, in establishing communication with the rest of society,
where they are seen as the `children of orphanage,” she told the
Weekly, adding that all these factors result in their being assigned a
`marginal identity.’
Most institutions do not have in-house social workers or counselors
that monitor the psychological and physical wellbeing of the children.
`In most institutions they only have the position of social worker,
but the people working there are just filling papers,’ explained
Israyelyan.
Instances of abuse can go unnoticed in these institutions, as was the
case at the special needs school in Nubarashen, where the complaints
of sexually abused female students were ignored or attributed to
`overactive imaginations’ until a human rights activist, Mariam
Sukhudyan, turned the issue into a national scandal.
Canadian-Armenian human rights advocate Araz Artinian has chronicled
the plight of disabled children in Gyumri’s `Children’s Home’
orphanage. She found the children there neglected, and deprived of
medical care. She also observed that instead of receiving state-funded
surgeries, which they were entitled to, the children’s operations were
being funded through donations solicited from the diaspora. Artinian
is also an advocate for children’s reunification with their parents.
Institutions do not allow unannounced visits; an advance notice is
required. They are mainly closed-door institutions, according to
Sahakyan, although there is a monitoring group comprised of various
NGOs that pay periodic surprise visits to the ones under the ministry
of education.
Foster care program
With the premise that children need families to thrive in a healthy
environment, UNICEF launched a foster care program in 2005. Around
two-dozen suitable families were trained, and 25 children were placed
in their care.
UNICEF initiated the project and established guidelines for the
selection of the families. The program is currently in the hands of
the government, which has allocated funds to support the project since
2008. However, the program has not grown and the number of children
has not increased. The government says it lacks the funds.
`The ministry of finance made it clear that it cannot maintain two
systems – residential care institutions and foster care – and requested
the ministry of labor and social issues to decrease the number of
children in orphanages, which will release funds that could then be
channeled to the foster care [program],’ said Sahakyan. `Some
officials within the ministry of labor and social issues also contest
that foster family is not something where the government should invest
financial resources; rather the government, according to those
officials, should invest in the return of children to their biological
families, which as those officials say is currently being
implemented.’
Reunifying families
The reunification of children with their families is in fact moving
forward in Lori province. Since 2006, the government has been engaged
in a de-institutionalization project for children in Vanadzor’s
orphanage. The government plans to reunify 40 children with their
families and prevent the institutionalization of 10 children every
year. The government provides each family with a financial assistance
package worth 15,000 AMD (38.5 USD). The project costs the government
22 million AMD (around 56,500 USD).
That amount is small and insufficient in meeting a child’s basic
needs. For the project to succeed, families need additional financial
assistance. Aravot, the organization tasked with implementing the
project, must find other sources of funding – from private donors to
other non-governmental organizations – explained Sahakyan, adding that
the assistance families actually need to be able to afford
reunification is around 87,000 AMD (223 USD), which is the amount
currently provided to foster families.
Gate-keeping and other challenges
The issue is not only how to de-institutionalize children, but how to
keep them from ending up in these institutions in the first place.
Sahakyan says de-institutionalized children are constantly being
replaced by newcomers – what he characterizes as a `vicious cycle.’
Sahakyan suspects that corruption plays a role in impeding the
de-institutionalization process, particularly in terms of funding.
`These institutions are receiving budgetary funds per child, which
means the more children are placed there, the more funds that
institution will receive.’ Humanitarian workers we interviewed say
orphanages receive around 5,000 USD a year per child.
UNICEF is now helping the government to establish a new
agency – Integrated Social Services – which will have case managers who
monitor vulnerable families and assist them in their troubles as a
`gate-keeping’ method. According to Sahakyan, the department of social
services is currently preoccupied with distributing financial
assistance packages to families, but falls short of assessing family
situations and referring them to specialized services.
Employment is another challenge. The ministry of labor and social
issues fears further job loss, as the unemployment rate in the country
is already high. In their current state, these institutions provide
employment to thousands of workers. For instance, the Vanadzor
orphanage (founded in 1996) employs 70 workers for 110 orphans; in
other places, including institutions for children with disabilities,
workers far outnumber the children. Yet, Sahakyan says that
unemployment is not necessarily the result. `Closing orphanages must
be followed by their transformation into family support institutions,
where the skills and knowledge of the former orphanage workers will be
required,’ he argued, but admitted that workers may need to undergo a
retraining process.
UNICEF has helped establish such alternative family support and
daycare centers in Gyumri, Tavush, and Gapan. The centers help parents
with job placement, financial support, legal counseling, and
psychological support. According to Israyelyan, the project is
particularly successful in Tavush. `We have four daycare centers in
Tavush for children with disabilities. In all the institutions, there
are no children from this region,’ he said, adding that Tavush should
now serve as an example. Israeylyan believes that this is an area the
diaspora can invest in, as the government lacks the funds to support
such centers (which are often supported by organizations like Bridge
of Hope).
UNICEF was the first organization to establish a model of
community-based daycare centers in Armenia. One of the first centers
was set up in Gyumri. The Armenian government took up this model and,
since 2005-06, the centers have been receiving funding from the state
budget. There are seven daycare centers that are currently funded by
the government. Similar centers are also being run by non-governmental
organizations.
Plans to transform two special education institutions in Syunik
province – the Goris Special Educational Institution for Children with
Vision Impairments and the Sissian Special Education Institution for
Children with Mental Disabilities – into daycare centers have already
been drafted. The ministry of education and science has also planned
to transform one special educational institution in each
province – beginning with Yerevan – into resource and assessment centers
within the next 5-10 years, according to Sahakyan.
Redefining the diaspora’s role
The diaspora has consistently supported orphanages and institutions in
Armenia – often moved by the memory of orphaned genocide survivors, and
the more recent earthquake in Armenia that left many children
parentless.
`The word `orphans’ resonates very well with Diasporan Armenians,’
said Sahakyan. `They start to immediately feel associated with that
cause, and become ready to donate money. We are trying to tell them,
let’s give it to families rather than orphanages.’
`We don’t want children to step foot in orphanages,’ he stressed.
Sahakyan believes that the process of de-institutionalization has been
hampered by the diaspora’s `heavy funding’ of residential care
institutions. `Some institutions have been turned into highly
comfortable well-equipped and furnished premises owing to funds from
private Diasporan Armenians as well as diaspora-based organizations,
funds, and associations,’ he said. `This, in turn, attracted many
vulnerable families and seduced them into placing their children in
institutions that provide, as they erroneously believe, the best for
their children.’
Sahakyan hopes that the diaspora will cease to assist these
institutions, and instead support their transformation into family
support and daycare centers.
`UNICEF encourages the diaspora to invest funds in strengthening
`gate-keeping’ mechanisms, such as daycare centers, in establishing
new social services for vulnerable families in communities; in
supporting alternative family-based child care models, such as foster
care; as well as in investing in Integrated Social Services, which
UNICEF is now trying to introduce in Armenia in close cooperation with
the ministry of labor and social issues,’ said Sahakyan. `The
diaspora’s support is desperately needed by both UNICEF and other
non-governmental organizations working in the area of children’s
rights,’ he added.
`The mother of a child with Down syndrome can easily care for her
child if she has support – a doctor, a social worker who can visit her,’
said Sahakyan. `She wouldn’t take her child to an institution. The
same goes for other families, especially for parents of children
without disabilities. If you take your child to an orphanage just
because you are poor, then let’s solve your poverty problem; let’s get
you a job, and a salary,’ he added.
The transition will be a challenging process. Closing down residential
care institutions will bring the country closer to dealing with the
roots of problems afflicting the more vulnerable segments of the
population instead of the syndromes. Transitioning to an alternative
care of family and child support might bring with it an array of other
unforeseen problems. For now, Armenia is taking one small step at a
time.
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/08/15/ending-the-era-of-orphanages-in-armenia/