Family must come first -
Western systems
lose sight of familial ties when dealing with children
One-year- old Indrashish Saha, an
Indian citizen, has been in foster care in the United States since September
last year. Indrashish’s parents are contesting his confiscation by the New
Jersey child protection authorities. They want him sent to his grandparents in
India instead. At the family’s request, the Government of India has demanded
that Indrashish be repatriated. Since then an extraordinary investigation has
been conducted by US authorities into the Saha family in India.
The US questionnaire for evaluating
relatives requesting custody of children removed from their parents is
revealing of what the country’s child protection system finds relevant. The
questionnaire asks for descriptions of the relative’s “physical appearance” and
“salient personality traits”. It requires relatives to state their annual
income and level of education. It asks whether household amenities include
air-conditioning. There are fourteen pages of questions in this vein.
The worst thing about this
inspection of the Sahas is not the type of questions asked, but the fact that
there has to be an investigation at all. It should be enough to decide the
matter that these are Indrashish’s grandparents and they want him back. But in
the philosophy of these Western child protection systems it is not self-evident
that children belong with their families.
This casual approach to family ties
is also apparent in the manner in which children are taken away from their
parents. The system allows children to be taken away before any trial, and in
some countries, like Norway, without any judicial inquiry. Parents are allowed
virtually no access to their children while they await trial, which can take
months, even years. The Sahas have been separated from their baby since
September 2012 without trial. In allowing this easy and indefinite confiscation
of children before any proper determination, the system ignores the enormity of
the wrong that results from an unjustified separation of parents and children.
We also have to question the
brutality of child protection systems that punish parents by taking away their
children for good. Even assuming the worst allegations of child protection
authorities against them, the suffering of parents asking for their children to
be returned is undeniable. Unless you believe all such parents want their
children back only to abuse them. Do the feelings that prompt parents to
clamour for the return of their children not demand that we think about
allowing for second chances instead of this reckless ripping up of parenthood
by the State? Is this system protecting children or doing something unutterably
horrible when it acts, as in England, to take babies away at birth when their
mothers are assessed by care workers — at pregnancy — to be unfit for
parenting.
There are some dangerous parents who
must be separated from their children. But the proper response in such cases is
to remove the offending parent instead of snatching away the child. The solution
to such a child’s troubles is not just a matter of relocation from one
custodian to another in a foster home or adoptive family.
The child protection model adopted
in the West has been a terrible mistake. A gentler and more discerning response
needs to be devised for helping children in troubled families. A response that
does not involve wading into families, devastating all its relationships, and
engaging in the absurd conceit of remaking so-called “good” families for
children through foster homes and forced adoption.
Suranya Aiyar is a lawyer and a mother who has been campaigning to reunite families separated abroad by child protection authorities. The views expressed by the author are personal
No comments:
Post a Comment