Number of children in residential institutions fell by 2,700. Info-Prim Neo interview with Tatjana Colin, Coordinator of Child Protection Programs, UNICEF Moldova

[ - Mrs Colin, why should the residential childcare system in Moldova be reformed?] - First of all, because every child should be brought up in the family. The experience of many countries and numerous researches show that the family is the environment where the child develops the best. The love and care that the children receive at home help them become an integral, independent and responsible person. [ - Why do we have so many boarding schools in Moldova and, respectively, too many children that grow there, contrary to the international practices?] - Moldova is not an exception. Many countries had and have residential institutions. The societies develop and new, more advanced forms of social protection appear. Modernization does not mean only new models of computers. This process also influences the people’s way of thinking, their values and aspirations. The boarding schools in Moldova are still needed owing to poverty and migration and because tribute is paid to the tradition of the Soviet period, when most of the boarding schools and children’s homes had been build in Moldova. Due to the excessive trust in residential institutions, the number of children separated from the family has increased. For example, 10,000 children of the 11,500 that lived in boarding schools in 2006 had parents and ought not to be there. Until recently, a large part of the parents did not realize the risks of placing the child in a boarding school and knew no other solutions. [ - Why the children should not grow up in a residential institution?] - For the things to be understood correctly, we must give an important explanation. The boarding school is not necessarily bad for the child. We should not demonize the residential institutions, saying that the biological family is always the best option. Surely, there are exceptions. When a child is regularly subjected to abuse, his needs are neglected and his physical integrity is endangered, he cannot be left with his biological parents. If we refer to the 10,000 non-orphans that were in boarding schools in 2006, the separation of most of them from their families was not necessary. Of course, we cannot speak about 10,000 exceptions and I would not ask where it is worse for these children, but where it is better. The answer is evident. In most of the cases, a child feels better at home, near his parents, or near the grandparents, uncles, aunts, brothers and sisters if the parents are not alive. But this is an ordinary situation, not an extreme one. It is important that we do not compare two situations that cannot be compared – a family where a child is regularly abused with a residential institution where the child is looked after and provided with the basic necessities. [ - Why should we then renounce the tradition of institutionalization?] - First of all because even when we separate the children from their biological parents in order to protect they interests there are alternative ways to institutionalization. The humans feel the psychological need to develop in a relatively small group. When the parents cannot look after the child, another family can offer him the group safety which is normally offered by the family. It is better when this is done by the child’s relatives. If the relatives cannot raise the child that remained without parental care, the child can be brought up in a family-type children’s home. It is an alternative service that provides a home to the vulnerable children on the one hand and a job of professional parent assistant - this is how this job is correctly called - with salary and social benefits to those that accept to raise a child without adopting him. Until present, about 300 children were helped to find a home in which they live in conditions similar to the family environment. This way, all the people gain advantages – the child lives in a family, while the adults that raise him get a job. Certainly, these people need to be trained because the job of professional parent assistant is not at all easy and, as any other job, is learnt. Also, somebody has to guide them. [ - Is it the social assistant that is so popular lately like a savior for the vulnerable families?] - Yes, because the local social assistant is in fact the person that is close to the vulnerable families and that can lend a hand. When we backed the creation of this network of community social assistants, we started from the idea that the social workers will maintain and develop the process that we initiated two years ago. The social assistants are very useful when there should be identified a child at risk and the way that he can be helped. They also monitor the family-type children’s homes because the social protection system is anyway responsible for these children. The fact that we place them in a family-type home does not spare us from responsibility. The network is just being created. Some of the settlements do not have social assistants yet. It is a start and I personally admire the social assistants as they do a hard work. About 550 social assistants worked in Moldova in 2007. In 2008, their number has almost doubled. [ - What are the effects of the reform of the residential system?] - Probably, the figures count less because there are a number of factors that determine them. Many children leave the residential institutions when they come of age. A larger number of children are not placed in boarding schools because there are alternatives – day centers, family-type children’s homes and others. We can yet say that the number of children in residential institutions fell from 11,500 to 8,800. Since the reform was initiated, 2,700 children had left the boarding schools. [ - These figures impress, but also disarm... We all know that any reform may be painful, especially for the personnel of these institutions that could be laid off, isn’t it?] - Reform does not necessarily mean redundancy. When I said that the figures count less, I referred also to this aspect of any reform, which is rather painful. Even if the children are very important, we cannot yet neglect other aspects and namely the personnel and the buildings, the property. Surely, the necessities of the people working in these institutions must be also taken into account as they should not lose their jobs and earnings. It would be a waste to abandon the buildings that absorbed investments during the years. Secondly, we cannot carry out a reform speedily. It is not enough to put a lock on the door of the boarding school and say that the reform was completed. We must make sure that the reform benefits everyone: decide and plan where the children will go, what the educators will do, who will prepare them for another job that they can do in the reformed system and what the costs and benefits of the reform are. We must also understand that the boarding schools can remain the only viable solution for a limited number of children. But institutionalization must not be applied universally, in any situation and practically without discernment. In general, the reforms should be an evolution, not revolution. The situation will change rather quickly so that the children are provided with favorable conditions for development, but slow enough to offer the educators the time needed for re-qualification and adaptation to the new requirements of the system. [ - Will UNICEF continue to support the reformation of the residential system in 2009?] - Undoubtedly, UNICEF, as organization that aims to protect the rights of the children, supported and will support this year any governmental reform that is for the benefit and in the interests of the Moldovan children. First of all, we will support the further development of the alternative services. As I said earlier, the boarding schools must not be demonized, but they also must not remain the only solution for the parents that cannot or think that they cannot raise their children at home. The creation of a system for permanently monitoring the alternative services is another priority. We must be sure that the children feel better there than in boarding schools. The child protection services must be changed so as they center on the child and family and not on the system. This means that the system must modify the services so that they promote children’s and the family’s interests, as provided in the Convention on the Rights of the Child to which Moldova is a party.