DEBATE: Foster homes Vs Orphanages: What is the better option?

Orphanages are resourceful to any society I strongly believe that orphanages are resourceful to any society because they can even be transitional centres for foster homes. I also think that the government policy of phasing out orphanages in Rwanda with a deadline that was extended to 2016 should be revised. Since 2012 when the campaign of phasing out orphanages was started, by the end of 2014 eight orphanages had closed their doors. With today’s way of life, given the difficulty of survival, I say that foster homes should not be considered as an option for taking care of orphans. In most cases, these families are low income earners and are also struggling to survive. Taking on an extra child is hard. We should first of all do research and look into situations or the injustices faced by children who have been raised by distant relatives after their parents died. We will be shocked by the testimonies we get. It’s good for every child to grow up in a family setting but when one becomes an orphan, I suggest that they are raised in an orphanage because with qualified and supervised staff whose main job is to take care of the children, it makes an orphanage a better institution. Also, orphanages are cost effective because as an institution, it is easier to take care of many children with limited resources unlike when a child is sent to a foster home where the family is in the low income earning class.This family will not be able to fund a child’s upkeep thus, mistreating the child out of frustration. Orphanages usually have counseling, educational and vocational facilities so children have shelter and at the same time, enjoy their rights as children. In situations where five to six children lose their parents, orphanages are a better option than foster homes. For example, a foster home cannot have the capacity to accommodate three to four children from the same family. In such a situation these children will be separated and taken to different foster homes yet with an orphanage they can all be together. It’s also hard to guarantee the stability of a child in a foster home because there is always an option of a child asking to change a foster home in situations where he or she is not comfortable with the foster home they are living in. The cases of injustices encountered in foster homes are many compared to those encountered in an orphanage. We all know the impact of injustice to a child. Let’s not forget the fact that in an orphanage, a child is able to relate with other children and experience sisterly or brotherly love which he or she may miss in a foster home where they could be the only child. doreen.umutesi@newtimes.co.rw Build families, not orphanages As I write this piece, all orphanages in Kigali city have been closed and children have been placed under foster care. However, with the increasing number of street kids most people wonder if foster homes are not mishandling these children, hence ending up on the streets. Whereas there might be some truth to this, it can’t be the benchmark for determining that foster homes are a bad idea for orphans. Orphanages do great work and they should be applauded but I’m a strong believer in family settings when it comes to giving children a good upbringing. Children deserve to be loved and cared for, which is something that an orphanage can’t fully do since they have more children to look after. To be able to monitor each child and give them the required amount of attention is very difficult. With minimal attention, we risk having children who may develop bad habits as a result of less monitoring. Orphanages cater for various kinds of children and each one of them brings with them a baggage of issues which might rub-off on others. Even in families, sometimes parents find it difficult to detect bad behaviour in a child yet the household is small, so I wouldn’t want to imagine what happens in an orphanage that has over 100 children. Secondly, foster homes are cost effective in comparison to orphanages that have to rely on government support or other organisations for financial support. When it comes to feeding, medical care and education, orphanages face difficulties in providing these essentials because the children are so many and resources are few. Eventually, this might lead children to look at other options for financial support, which include child labour. Also, in orphanages, young children risk contracting serious illnesses and developing language impairments. This is because they are not closely monitored. Foster homes provide an environment where children are closely monitored and this enables a parent to detect any abnormalities at an early stage. In general, foster homes provide a family setting that gives a child all the essentials that he/she needs. In order to raise children into responsible adults, a family is needed. This is not to say that it is a must because some people never had the chance to be in a family setting but turned out fine, however, it is important if the family approach is used. I say this because when it comes to boys, sometimes a father figure comes in handy for various reasons. Lastly, foster homes provide an opportunity for children to develop self-confidence, an opportunity to know that a parent is not necessarily the one who gave birth to you, but the one who raised you. It provides the chance to learn up-close the basics of a good family and making children become good decision makers since they are involved in daily happenings at home. These important lessons once instilled in a child, grow with them and in the end we end up with a generation that understands the concept of family. dean.karemera@newtimes.co.rw

Lifestyle

DEBATE: Foster homes Vs Orphanages: What is the better option?