Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not sure - what's your point Jeff?
Why are you bringing this particular subject out of a blue? Are you looking for ways to fix it?
Well guess what - there is no way to fix it, the train is gone.
Because in order to fix this problem, two factors are needed - the society that cares, and money.
Now in order to have the caring society, you need to have certain civil institutions in place, which were nipped at the bud twenty years ago, and money - money went in the hands of a few, hand-picked with the help of American "economic advisers" as you remember. ( Or what do you think would have happened in the society, where all the wealth has been consciously placed in hands of the few - that they'll decide to share it somehow, or that this particular move will lead to "development of civil society," what? )
So it's really strange for me to hear from Americans - this lamenting of the sad fate of children in Russia, handicapped or not.
This is a forum for topics to be discussed. I happened to read this report (sent to me by my Russian friend), so I shared it here. Is there any particular reason Americans should *not* care?
If you actually read the report, you would see they offer ways to fix it. But, yes, discussion here in that regard would be great.
As I stated, I volunteered in an orphanage in Russia, so it is something I care about.
Why do defensive? Your non-stop blame of all Russia's ills on the USA is tired.
talking about "porn and other filth" where did it really come from to Russia? Yes, really?
I think he meant that in this particular case, because these children are easy prey, this kind of filth is easy to be made in Russia, not that porn and filth originated or only exist there.
This is a forum for topics to be discussed. I happened to read this report (sent to me by my Russian friend), so I shared it here. Is there any particular reason Americans should *not* care?
No, Americans can care of course as anybody else, but they should be aware of the root of the problem as well, probably more than anyone else.
Quote:
If you actually read the report, you would see they offer ways to fix it.
They have nothing meaningful to offer.
"The government should blah-blah..."
"Abolish blah-blah,"
"Ensure bla-blah,"
"Establish blah-blah,"
"Protect blah-blah," - a lot of blah-blah, which requires first of all funds for implementation of these
* meaningful* recommendations. Because when you go through the whole report- this what it's really all about.
Here is then the bottom line -
"Most importantly, Human Rights Watch has found that children with disabilities and their families have felt the effects of the government measures to a very limited extent. Parents continue to give up their children to state care with little or no information about their children’s rights and developmental
potential or about community-based services that are available
to help them raise their children."
(And "community-based services" are what exactly and who is paying for them? Do they even exist?)
"Russia also lacks a cohesive state infrastructure to ensure adequate material and social
support for children with disabilities after they
are placed with adoptive or foster families.
Social payments to foster parents of children
with disabilities vary by municipality. For
example, in St. Petersburg foster parents an
d “guest” parents receive 10,000 rubles per
month (US$278), and in Moscow city, they
receive 15,000 rubles per month (US$418)."
"Foster and guest parents told Human Rights Watch that they encountered many expenses
in excess of these payments in caring for children with disabilities in their custody.
Natalia and Sergei S. reported several challenges raising the children, including insufficient funds from the government to afford necessities such as orthopedic shoes for their youngest daughter; the absence of services such as state developmental psychologists to give guidance on their children’s development; and a lack of an accessible kindergarten and schools in their community. As a result, Natalia S.
homeschools the 8-year-old boy, who has a disability, because the teachers at a local
specialized school required that she stay with him throughout the day in the absence of
school personnel to provide necessary support. Since Natalia S. must also accompany
their 6-year-old foster daughter to kindergarten to help her move around the premises,
Natalia S. is unable to accompany her foster son to school at the same time."
Quote:
But, yes, discussion here in that regard would be great.
What discussion? As I've already said it's all about money and priorities of current Russian government. It's cheaper for them to dump those children in institutions in bulk, than to provide families with said above "services." Case solved. ( Not that the priorities were drastically different in the 90ies in this respect.)
And who is going to MAKE this government to spend on the handicapped children ( or to prevent corruption even if any money are allocated for the cause,) who can manage to hire decent stuff for the handicapped children that won't abuse them, if even doctors and nurses who work with NORMAL children can barely survive on their salaries? As I've said, it's all about the priorities of the government, and the "robust civil society" in Russia that Human Rights organization quotes here, has no leverage with the government. None. Why? Because as in any modern "democracy" you have leverage only when you have money.
All that this "robust civil society" in Russia can do, is basically to complain to European courts, Human rights watch and to take grants from foreign donors, for which it's condemned by the rest of the society. Because the rest of society doesn't trust those "foreign donors"; it's weary of their motives and not without good reason ( see the 90ies yet again.)
Quote:
As I stated, I volunteered in an orphanage in Russia, so it is something I care about.
Well can't you figure out the root of a problem by now then?
Quote:
Why do defensive? Your non-stop blame of all Russia's ills on the USA is tired.
Not defensive, rather annoyed sorry to say. And yes, truth sometimes IS tiresome.
I have shared it before on here, but I would be happy to share it again. What is it you would like to know?
Anything that relates to your thread topic. How were the conditions and the staff? Did the kids attend public school? Was the place decently funded? I'm sure you can think of relevant things to share. I assume (I hope) it compared favorably with the institutions in your OP.
Anything that relates to your thread topic. How were the conditions and the staff? Did the kids attend public school? Was the place decently funded? I'm sure you can think of relevant things to share. I assume (I hope) it compared favorably with the institutions in your OP.
In the orphanage where I did most of my volunteering, the conditions were, overall, better than those reflected in the report. It was an orphanage for children with serious diseases, including HIV/AIDs. As such, the funding was better than most. The orphanage, in fact, received most of its furnishings (TVs/computers/etc.) from private donors. I was encouraged to see how giving many in the community were.
For the most part, the staff was caring and did the best with what they could. There was one unpleasant situation where we (volunteers) found out that one of the staff had stolen the children's sweets. That being said, I never saw physical abuse.
In the second orphanage, the conditions were somewhere between the places in the report and my aforementioned orphanage. The place was a little grungier, the staff a little surlier, and the furnishings more spartan. That being said, the staff, I know, did what they could with what they had. These were more "regular" orphans -- typically children of alcoholics -- who were extremely sweet and sociable.
Again, much of the funding, as I understand it, was received by people in the community. They had just gotten new windows when I moved away, and those were donated by a local family.
I have seen orphanages in farther-out reaches of both Russia and Ukraine, and I can assure you they are heartbreaking in terms of facilities and furnishings. However, I only visited these places briefly (generally to give a fun English lesson or two), and I did not see maltreatment by the staff.
In the orphanage where I did most of my volunteering, the conditions were, overall, better than those reflected in the report. It was an orphanage for children with serious diseases, including HIV/AIDs. As such, the funding was better than most. The orphanage, in fact, received most of its furnishings (TVs/computers/etc.) from private donors. I was encouraged to see how giving many in the community were.
For the most part, the staff was caring and did the best with what they could. There was one unpleasant situation where we (volunteers) found out that one of the staff had stolen the children's sweets. That being said, I never saw physical abuse.
In the second orphanage, the conditions were somewhere between the places in the report and my aforementioned orphanage. The place was a little grungier, the staff a little surlier, and the furnishings more spartan. That being said, the staff, I know, did what they could with what they had. These were more "regular" orphans -- typically children of alcoholics -- who were extremely sweet and sociable.
Again, much of the funding, as I understand it, was received by people in the community. They had just gotten new windows when I moved away, and those were donated by a local family.
I have seen orphanages in farther-out reaches of both Russia and Ukraine, and I can assure you they are heartbreaking in terms of facilities and furnishings. However, I only visited these places briefly (generally to give a fun English lesson or two), and I did not see maltreatment by the staff.
Did you see much foetal alcohol syndrome? For some reason, adoptive parents in the US have had bad luck in that regard, with their Russian adoptions. Or maybe it seems that way because those cases have gotten some publicity. Why don't Russians adopt their own orphaned kids? Maybe there are few fertility issues among Russian couples?
Did you see much foetal alcohol syndrome? For some reason, adoptive parents in the US have had bad luck in that regard, with their Russian adoptions. Or maybe it seems that way because those cases have gotten some publicity. Why don't Russians adopt their own orphaned kids? Maybe there are few fertility issues among Russian couples?
Many Russians simply won't adopt children who have medical issues (such as FAS). However, many American and Canadian people will. I met one family from the US who had adopted three children with Down syndrome or FAS, and they were there to adopt a fourth.
I know one Russian couple (who couldn't have their own baby) who adopted a child: They kept it very quiet that they were adopting, and they never mentioned that the baby wasn't "theirs" to people they weren't close to. There is definitely a social stigma about adoption; I think many people pity those couples who can't have their own children, and those who adopt prefer to keep it low-key so as to avoid awkward questions. Also, I think there is an assumption by many that all kids in orphanages have "problems; I heard this said often. It is my hope that these attitudes are changing. As an adopted child myself, I was very curious about the state of adoption in Russia, and I often wondered out loud why there were so many orphans who no one would seem to adopt.
Of course, the Russian government, not long ago, passed a very cynical law regarding adoption by Westerners (based on a few outliers from thousands of adoptions), and I fear for the prospects of many of these children.
I know a Kiwi woman who started a non-profit which helped street teens (Living Hope, if you're curious), many of whom were too old to stay in orphanages and really had nowhere to go after they left. She has done great, commendable work there.
I know a Kiwi woman who started a non-profit which helped street teens (Living Hope, if you're curious), many of whom were too old to stay in orphanages and really had nowhere to go after they left. She has done great, commendable work there.
I've read it's a problem in both Russia and the US, what happens to kids after they turn 18. But in Russia, wouldn't a lot of them be able to go to university? And have expenses paid for?
And my earlier question was more about why those kids of alcoholic parents that you said were sweet and sociable (apparently well-adjusted) don't get adopted. Sad. I guess it's like you said, there's a stigma. And families aren't going to adopt more than one child, probably, because of expense and that stigma. Most Russian families have just one or two kids, don't they?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
