Child Abandonment and Illegal Abortions on the Increase
Government, child protection organisations and civil
society need to find common ground to address humanitarian crisis facing SA’s
vulnerable children and mothers.
The public hearings held by the government portfolio committee tasked with assessing the Children’s Amendment Bills were a stark reminder that many sectors of government still believe that ubuntu is the panacea for all of our orphans’ ills. In the context of child protection, ubuntu is epitomised by community-based care and the principle that no child is left behind. But ubuntu alone is not the solution. Click the image below for the full story.
The government says its planned amendment to the Children's Act will simplify the complicated and lengthy adoption process in South Africa. But the part of the process it is trying to fix is not broken, and there is no evidence that this amendment will fix those parts of the process that are. No one disagrees that more social workers are needed for adoptions, but by flooding the market with its own adoption social workers, the government could wrest the management of adoptions away from current practitioners and end up holding all the cards. By ROBYN WOLFSON.
The Department
of Social Development’s recent media statement that it wants its
social workers to provide adoption services in a bid to “curb the high cost of
adoptions and make it easier for ordinary families to adopt children” is deeply
concerning at its core. Not because of
its intention to train and skill government social workers in the specialised
adoption practice – this is to be lauded as indeed there is a shortage - but
because the spirit in which such an announcement was made is deeply harmful and
dishonest in its treatment of child protection organisations and social workers
in private practice.
DSDS’s statement that 'Adoption Agencies charge no less than
R100,000 to manage the adoption process
of a single child", is both irresponsible and inaccurate. Not only is it untrue, but it paints Child
Protection Organisations who do exceptionally important work in an unfairly
poor light. More fundamentally, it can
only discourage people from considering adoptions, possibly waiting for the DSD
to provide “free and cheap” adoptions, while millions of orphans remain in
orphanages and far from the ideal circumstances of a loving parental home and
family.
The primary losers in this political fracas
are the millions (not thousands!) of adoptable children who will be left without
any hope of a loving home due to bureaucratic red tape and political
posturing. Evidence
of this is already clear in the unintended consequences of the Children’s Act
implemented in 2005, which has seen a 30% drop
in adoptions in a country with about 5.4 million orphans since its
implementation. Currently less than 1600
adoptions are taking place annually. When you do the sums, it becomes
frightening, if not insurmountable in the current status-quo.
Some incredibly important realities need to be put on
the table, and the Department of Social Development would do well to
acknowledge the important work done by all the role players and the importance
of collaboration in working towards our single most important purpose – child
protection and loving families for our orphans.
Here are
the facts:
·The Children's Act 38/2005 actually makes provision for the payment of
fees in respect of an adoption to a Child Protection Organization. These fees are regulated in terms of Regulation
107 of the Children's Act.
·The fees are not however legislated for in respect of accredited
adoption social workers in private practice.
The National Adoption Coalition, a mandated body of adoption service
providers, has been consistently lobbying the Department of Social Development
to give attention to the regulation of the fees in respect of adoption social
workers in private practice to bring it in line with those of Child Protection
Organizations.
·More importantly, given the fact that adoption fees
are regulated by the Department of Social Development, it would be difficult for
a Child Protection Organization to charge R100k for a single adoption. All
adoption reports are canalized through the Department of Social Development
before an adoption can be finalized in court. The fees paid in respect of an adoption need
to be declared in a formal report and if the Department have picked up that
some agencies are charging R100k, why have they not investigated such outrageous
fees being charged by organisations? If unusually high fees
are charged by certain organisations, then such specific cases should be dealt
with by DSD swiftly.
·To indicate that organizations can charge
this amount for an adoption really discredits all the good work being done by
so many Child Protection Organizations who also specialize in processing
adoptions. This should not be about an “us and them” situation, and working
together as a collaborative is critical to resolve the many onerous challenges
we face as a cohesive voice.
·Most Child Protection Organizations work on a sliding scale and accept
applicants from all walks of life, including people from rural areas, domestic
workers and cleaners. In fact the fee
paid in these instances is minimal and does not preclude anyone who has a
genuine desire to adopt a child, and who is found to wholly competent.
·There are entirely valid and important reasons for some fees to be
charged – and these are steeped in the reality of the situation. Fees vary between adoption social workers and CPO’s, ranging between R5000
to R20 000 for a national adoption. These fees are dependent on how much is
subsidised by the DSD and the amount of work required to finalise an adoption
in SA – an intensive process that requires skilled and experienced people. The fees are derived from the costs of
detailed assessments, pre-adoption workshops and preparation, counselling,
administrative fees (often involving months of work), court preparation, legal
documentation and court reports, ongoing consultation with DSD at both a
provincial and national level, medical fees, and so on. All the while, these children are taken care
of, clothed, fed, kept healthy and homed by dedicated caregivers – none of
which is without cost and none of which are included in the adoption fees.
DSDs statement that adoptions will be ‘cheaper and
easier’ when government social workers are also able to process adoptions is
entirely misleading. What Government
should rather have been putting out there, is that once Government social
workers are able to process adoptions, it will open up a new option for
prospective adopters wishing to adopt, but that it works hand in hand with all
the other role players in the adoption community, who also provide an excellent
service to help people with the adoption process.
The National Adoption Coalition is constantly
trying to recruit adoptive parents in what is a national crisis. Putting out a false message that it costs
R100,000 to adopt is wholly counter-productive and irresponsible, as it discourages
anyone from coming forward to adopt. Adopting a child is a life changing and
lifelong decision with enormous responsibilities – at all times child
protection and putting the interests of children first are paramount before all
other considerations. It seems inconceivable that the Department responsible
for accrediting adoption service providers would want to discredit a community
of organisations who do incredibly important work, who assist Government with
training and skills transfer for their own social workers, and we can hopefully
out these statement down to poorly conceived notions and statement by an
individual who has possible not considered the long term unintended
consequences of such statements.
Adoption is a specialised service, which means that people who provide
these services must be accredited to ensure that the best interests of the
child are protected. Many parents who
have worked through a social worker who was not specialised have found that the
adoption requirements were not properly met.
If government social workers are trained in this field, it would assist
with the shortage of specialised adoption social workers, but it could not be
done successfully without the support and skills transfer from specialists in
private practice and dedicated child protection organisations.
This past weekend we had the privilege of attending a baby-shower for a place of Safety. Incidentally, this particular place of safety looked after our little one before he came home to us. Such a wonderful idea, getting a bunch of people together, most of whom would never be at a place to hear about the victories and losses experienced at a home like this.
Some stories gave you such hope and others reached deep within and had people questioning how others could be so cruel to those so small. Stories of sheer determination being found in the most unlikely places arose, from Corporate grinders turning their lives around to babies who in spite of the outside world’s desire to abort them, refused to give up, valiantly fought the odds, defeated cruel intentions and made their way into the hearts and lives of forever families.
But, and there always seems to be a “but”, what will result from an encounter like this? Even though many sat, listening intently, sharing a moment of vulnerability and agreeing with the mission, will anyone be moved from being a fan of the idea to becoming a champion of the cause?
I have two avenues I would like people to explore, the one is simple. It doesn’t hurt, it probably won’t even be felt by most and yet it will create something that may result in a ripple that will affect change that was never expected. The second idea, will require a little effort. I will need a few fearless explorers to go on a journey that in spite of their feelings may lead them into a future where their hearts and lives are rocked to their core, where they become partners in prophetically altering the course of people’s lives. Whatever avenue is taken, I am certain, a difference will be made and lives changed for the better.
The first option is something I have been mulling over for far too long. The irony of money is that no-one has enough, yet there is more than enough to go around. We tend to look at mountains and see the size of our shovel and decide the project is impossible. We believe that without the heavy machinery, we toil in vain. Yet Jesus tells us, the harvest is great, but the workers are few (Mathew 9:37). He doesn’t say the harvest is great, pity about our little shovel! Theres a saying that begs the question “How do you eat an elephant?” The answer is, one bite at a time. When the task is huge, we focus on the size of the whole and not the size of our whole. When things are broken up, the impossible becomes possible. Jesus shows us clearly that the issue we will face is not the harvest or the task but the manpower.
The idea of funding homes, adoptions, medical costs etc in the process of adopting is huge and we typically rely on big business, corporates, to come to the party and donate through events, golf days, fundraisers etc. Mostly for the incentive of tax breaks or corporate noddy badges that tell every one that you’re a “Good guy”. Don’t get me wrong, this needs to continue and if this is you, from the bottom of my heart thank you!
But what about you and me?
What about giving up 2 cappuccinos once a month? What if your decrease in caffeine resulted in you being a part of the greatest fund raising initiative since the lottery. What if you could be a part of effecting massive change from the comfort of your closed circle of friends. What if you could see on a monthly basis that you were a part of supplying thousands of nappies, formula, medicines, food, homes, caregivers or whatever else is needed.
I want to start a fund! It’s called the fatherheart fund. It starts with me picking 10 people plus me, so 11, and then having those 10 each find 10 more. Basically a pyramid scheme approach with the beneficiaries being places of safety and orphans. Before your discredit the idea, think about this, if I get 10, those 10 get 10 each and then those 10 find themselves 10 each, with only going to the third tier, the fund is generating over R50 000.00 per month. That’s over half a million every year aimed directly at the needs arising out of these homes and the adoption process. BOOM! All of a sudden, with the increase in shovels, moving the mountain may still be difficult, but it’s no longer impossible.
Let me have your thoughts, this is happening and I’d love input!
The second avenue, yup the harder route is this. Even though I don’t believe everyone should adopt, I do believe everyone should consider adoption. I have found that even though some say “I could never do what you’re doing” or “That’s not for us” my experience is that no-one actually puts any real effort into putting themselves in the position of meeting one of these little super stars, no-one does any reading or active inquiring into whether they actually could do what others do. The response to adoption is often knee jerk, based on opinion and a faulty belief in our own financial and emotional capacity.
I’m not saying you must, I believe you should, but at least put some thought into your response. take a look at the following:
Give them a call, find out what they’re about, can you help, how can you help. You’d be amazed at how your capacity grows. It’s like a muscle, work it a bit and it grows, you look and feel better and life takes on a whole new meaning.
In modern society there are few things as truly evil as human trafficking, especially when it involves children, and Home Affairs Minister Malusi Gigaba’s argument for those afflicted by the scourge is compelling. But his supposed solution has once again been called into question along with the statistical basis for the plan. It begs the question that if the minister’s strategy is really about solving South Africa’s child trafficking problem why, in a style reminiscent of ‘Saving Private Ryan’, is he willing to risk the lives and livelihoods of many for the sake of the ones and twos. While it is difficult to ignore the fervor with which he speaks, it is equally difficult to avoid the sense that his department is playing an elaborate game of Top Trumps with stakes that are appallingly high. Beyond the oratory, what does the research say about how to prevent trafficking?
JUST two hours old, a newborn baby wrapped in a orange throw, wide-eyed and looking around without making a sound, was left on the doorstep of a home in Cottonwood Lane, Panorama Gardens, yesterday morning.
The tiny baby girl, nicknamed Usiphile, which means “given to us”, was believed to be just two hours old when she was found on the doorstep of the Cottonwood Lane home. The umbilical cord was still attached and untied while dried amniotic fluid was still in her hair.
Homeowner Cebo Ntombelo found the baby girl when he walked out of his house to take his two children, aged seven and eight, to school.
His wife, Cindy, said her husband found the baby on the doorstep wrapped in the throw and covered in blood.
“It was very scary but we were happy to see she was alive.
“We took her into the house as it was cold outside and then we called the police right away.
“She was very cute, and had the chubbiest little cheeks. I don’t know how any mother can carry a child for nine months and then just abandon their own baby,” said Ntombela.
ER24 spokesperson Russel Meiring said when paramedics arrived they immediately assessed the child and found that she had suffered mild hypothermia but was in a stable condition.
“The young patient was treated by advanced life support paramedics and transported to Northdale Hospital for further assessment and treatment.”
Pietermaritzburg SAPS spokesperson Constable Mthokozisi Ngobese said the mother of the abandoned child had been found by police and was arrested yesterday afternoon.
“We can confirm the incident and the mother has been arrested and charged with child abandonment.”
The mother is expected to appear in court today.
Child Welfare director Julie Todd said that most babies who were abandoned were born at home and not at a hospital or clinic where the baby and mother would be monitored.
“Often these women think they do not have any alternatives and their families will not accept the baby and help look after it. They feel they need to abandon the baby.”
She said Child Welfare often found that the family of the woman were “happy to accept the child” and there was no reason to abandon the baby for fear of being rejected.
“If a woman has a baby and feels she cannot keep it because of her circumstances we encourage her to bring the baby to our organisation where we will take the baby into temporary care and assist the mother.”
She said it was important to consider the best interests of the infant.
She added that if the public were to come across an abandoned baby, that they should call paramedics immediately as well as child services and police.
A report by National Adoption Coalition South Africa (Nacsa) consultant Dee Blackie published in May last year said that an estimated 3 500 babies were abandoned in South Africa in 2010.
“There are no current statistics detailing the number of children who are abandoned in South Africa on an annual basis, but most child protection organisations believe that the numbers have increased significantly over the past decade,” said Blackie’s report.
Statistics gathered in the report also showed that of the 18,5 million children in South Africa, 4,5 million do not live with their parents.
“Orphans have increased 30% over the decade to approximately 5,2 million children.
“An estimated 150 000 children live in child-headed households, over 13 000 live in residential care facilities and an estimated 10 000 live on the streets of South Africa,” said Blackie.
The report also stated that ano-nymous child abandonment is a criminal offence with mothers facing charges such as concealment of birth and attempted murder.
“Baby safes are considered illegal in terms of the Children’s Act, however, these are being opened up more frequently given the increase in abandonment,” Blackie added
First Seen on IOL.co.za June 22 2015 at 12:09pm
By Jan Cronje
A local internet app that helps parents navigate South Africa’s maze of new child visa regulations has been accessed more than 8 000 times in its first three weeks.
The South Africa Child Visa Checklist app, which went live on May 30, is a free web-based service created by travel company the Discover Africa Group.
The app was set up after strict new regulations for children under 18 travelling to or from SA came into effect on June 1 despite opposition from within the tourism industry.
The regulations include the need for children to have an unabridged birth certificate, and other documents on a case-by-case basis, including court orders and adoption certificates.
The app was first developed as an in-house aid for travel consultants, before being published online for anyone to use.
Its creators said it was developed to “simply explain” the 15 different documents and 37 “unique scenarios” for children travelling in and out of SA.
“(It) removes the fear, uncertainty and complexity faced by parents trying to work out exactly which documents they need when travelling with their youngsters.”
Discover Africa Group spokeswoman Asanda Mcoyana said this week the app had been shared 1 500 times on Facebook since its launch.
She said the group had received “thank you” e-mails from travel agencies abroad.
Many agents said that they been using the tool to advise their clients travelling to SA.
The app, which can be accessed on mobile and desktop devices, gives users a step-by-step guide to which documents they need when travelling to or from SA with minors.
It does this by asking multiple-choice questions of travellers, such as who the child is travelling with; if the child’s parents are married, divorced or legally separated; and if the child has been adopted or is in foster care.
INDEPENDENT MEDIAPREPARED: Vivian and Lynne Alexander arrive at OR Tambo this morning with their baby. They were not asked for an unabridged birth certificate by customs, despite having the document. Picture: Boxer Ngwenya
Johannesburg - Although the minister of Home Affairs vowed the new immigration regulations would be in place on Monday, his officials appear not to have taken heed.
On Monday morning The Star visited OR Tambo to find travellers walking through customs without being asked for unabridged birth certificates for their children.
Vivian and Lynne Alexander came from Israel with their 19- month-old son, arriving on Monday morning on an overnight flight as SA citizens. They were not asked for an unabridged birth certificate despite having the document.
Mayihlome Tshwete, spokesperson for the Department of Home Affairs, could not comment on why officials were not asking for the unabridged certificates.
Home Affairs has assured prospective adoptive parents that the visa regulations won’t hinder intercountry adoptions.
Up until two weeks ago, the regulations were a concern for overseas parents wanting to adopt South African children.
“Adoptions have already been decreasing. When we first heard about this regulation in September last year, we were told by Home Affairs there’d be no exceptions,” said Katinka Pieterse, programme director at Abba Adoptions and Social Services.
Pieterse told The Star the visa regulations would delay the intercountry process of adoption causing parents coming from overseas to be stuck in South Africa for over a year because of all the red tape surrounding the new regulations.
“It takes months for international parents to adopt and this would prolong this because of amendment processes, court orders and getting hold of unabridged birth certificates,” said Pieterse.
The National Adoption Coalition South Africa (Nacsa) met with officials in an attempt to get an easier process put into place.
“We have 250 adoptions a year and we understood that if some sort of easier process was not put in place, it would deter intercountry adoptions from taking place.”
Pieterse said there was a concern about children born in illegal clinics, who were abandoned and didn’t have birth certificates.
“It’s something we are addressing so these children can be adopted locally or internationally.”
But two weeks ago, Home Affairs came up with a standard operating procedure that should keep the international adoption process to a few months.
This procedure includes a final order of adoption from the registrar, the unabridged birth certificate with the names of the adoptive parents and a court order confirming the adoption.
Still, Nacsa believes the regulations may protect children if implemented correctly. “If this new law works properly, it will prevent child trafficking,” said Pieterse.
Meanwhile, Minister in the Presidency Jeff Radebe told the World Economic Forum on Friday that the government was considering reviewing the regulations.
“They have had an unintended consequence, which needs to be addressed,” he said, according to Monday’s Business Report.
David Frost, chief executive of the Southern Africa Tourism Services Association (Satsa), said on Sunday the impact could already be seen in the 20 percent drop in bookings for this month. “We are going to take big hits,” he predicted.
Satsa, along with the Southern African Travel Agents (Asata) and the Board of Airline Representatives South Africa, said last week that from May to December last year, the country had lost 66 000 foreign tourists as a result of the pending regulations.
“The total direct, indirect and induced impact on the economy in 2014 was a negative R2.6-billion and a potential loss of more than 5 800 jobs,” they said.
The number of foreign tourists who decide not to travel to South Africa this year could increase to 100 000, with a direct tourism spend of R1.4bn, while the total net loss to the GDP could be about R4.1bn.
And 9 300 jobs could be axed.
The outbound industry is also set to lose at least R8-million, with further job losses likely.
Otto de Vries, the chief executive of Asata, said the industry was “expecting chaos”.
Air China has cancelled its planned direct flights here.
A survey carried out by The Telegraph in the UK found most people (61 percent) who took part in the poll would not visit South Africa because of the regulations.
James Vos, the DA’s spokesperson on tourism, described Malusi Gigaba, Home Affairs Minister, and Derek Hanekom, Tourism Minister, as “tourism terminators”.
Home Affairs says the regulations are in line with an international obligation to curb child trafficking, saying about 30 000 minors are trafficked through South Africa each year.
But the industry claims this figure is a myth. It came from Operation Mobilisation, an NGO, which has said it was misquoted.
The Department of Home Affairs has released a brochure explaining the new immigration laws for children.
These new laws will come into effect of June 1, the brochure states.
The picture doesn't look good for many parents - with stringent requirements set out for a parent travelling with their child without their partner.
The new legislation states that parents travelling with a child will need to produce an unabridged birth certificate of the child, which includes information about the child's parents.
Meanwhile, parents of adopted children will need to provide an adoption certificate along with the unabridged birth certificate.
When one parent is travelling with a child, they must produce the unabridged birth certificate along with an affidavit from the other parent giving permission for the child to enter or leave the country with the present parent. The affidavit cannot be older than three months.
If one of the child's parents is deceased, a death certificate will be needed.
The new laws will apply to everyone travelling to and from South Africa - both citizens and foreigners.
The brochure also provides information for those travelling with children who are not the children's parents and the rules for unaccompanied minors.
