Home Random Page


CATEGORIES:

BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism






Chapter 2. Literature Review

The words “orphan” or “orphanage” are associated with unhappiness, despair, problems, difficulties and injustice. There are many articles written about Kazakhstan’s problem of parents abandoning their children, orphans’ life in orphanages and challenges they face there, but there is very little literature about orphans after they leave orphanages and problems they have at this stage of their life. It looks like society tends not to see or to notice a problem here. All attention is concentrated on orphanages so much that teenagers, leaving orphanages do not seem to be under threat, while orphans’ problems do not finish here, on the contrary new ones appear. Certain Kazakh newspaper articles provide limited information about this very problem and introduce ways the government can prepare orphans for independent life.

R. Azimova discussed how realizing the fact of being abandoned and life in orphanage destructively influences on a child/teenager, and their perception of life in the article “Mi deti tvoi, Kazakhstan!” (“Kazakhstan, we are your children!”). This article was published in a republic social-political newspaper “Megapolis”(page 19) on February 23, 2009. It is a modern authoritative edition with independent view on situation in Kazakhstan and in the world. The information given here is objective. In her article R. Azimova quoted Nina Balabayeva, the director of Almaty Crisis center “Rodnik”: “Young women, who have been brought up in orphanage, do not have a model of family. These women think: “I have grown up in orphanage, my child will somehow, too”. This article pays attention to the fact that orphanages do not prepare orphans for independent life, family life; it shows that the problem exists; it is essential and needs to be solved.

In addition, R. Azimova informed about the research which has been done by psychologists Inna Khamitova and Viktor Brutman. The research has shown that abandoning children continues from generation to generation. This fact is crucial. Again the author confirms and stresses the lack of preparation for independent life teenagers receive in orphanages. R. Azimova demonstrated how orphans themselves described life in orphanages: lack of individual attention, isolation and limited freedom of movement, insufficient household equipment, stressful communication with adults, conflicts among children. These facts testify that if there is no appropriate attention to orphans in orphanages, they will not receive enough preparation for future life. R. Azimova did not mention that tutors do not pay attention to the fact that in nearest future their pupils will have to face life as it is, enter big world of independent life. The education received by orphans is limited to the present, to provide security for them for the present time.

A journalist Y. Mamyrbayeva in her article “Schastie bit rebenkom” (“Being a child is happiness”) offered a solution to the problem, which was mentioned by R. Azimova. The article was published in “Izvestiya - Kazakhstan” (page 1) on June 1, 2010, a leading national newspaper, which contains Kazakhstan’s and world countries’ news of politics, economy and business, culture and sport. The author described the alternative to orphanages which were offered in the middle of the Twentieth Century – family type homes for children. In such houses children become brothers and sisters, they have a “mother”, women-helpers, and sometimes even a “father”. Each “family” of this kind lives in a separate house, plans their own budget, decides what to buy and what to cook for lunch, children help with housework and actively participate in daily family life. There is an individual plan of development for every child.



This way of bringing up children is much better than the one which is used in orphanages, where orphans are separated from any business. In family type homes orphans see life as it is, they see that “parents” face problems, watch how they solve these problems, they learn from their “parents” and, of course, in their future they will do the same. Children see how things are done in a family, what responsibilities family members have, what kind of relationships there are in families. The obvious advantage of this system is that young people of age 15-21 are not “thrown out of ship”, but stay in special “Youth houses”, get education, look for job. Young people live for free in such “Youth houses”, they are paid twenty six thousand tenge for food and pocket expenses a month. After age twenty one a young person tries “a semi-independent” life, when he is still watched. If by this time he/she has graduated from University, has a stable job, then he/she starts independent life.

The author described the new system of bringing up orphans well, but we have to admit that it is not well developed in Kazakhstan. There are only several such “villages” with family type homes for orphans and there is still a big need for them. Many more should be built and start work if Kazakhstan’s government wants to replace orphanages with these homes.

Mamyrbayeva then wrote about families taking orphans for a period of time, but not adopting them. The goal is to introduce the child to family life so the child has a clear understanding of family life, feels family love; but here the author does not miss the problematic question: what age is the best for a child to enter a family. This is a question which is hard to answer: maybe it is better for children of younger age for them to feel parents’ care in their childhood; or on the contrary young people who are in their teens will get more benefit, lessons, will see a model of a family staying there. Again here is a dilemma: this part-time staying in a family may hurt orphans and their feelings very much, especially if the family is very good and children liked it, but then they have to come back to orphanage, which does not look like family at all. This can become a serious psychological trauma for a child.

In addition there are not many families which would like to take an orphan for a period of time, especially if they have their own children. Even though the government provides such families with money (Mamyrbayeva, 2010), it is also a psychological matter and is still not easy to take orphan to a family even for a period of time. But the author argues that if the government pays more attention to these families: provides them with housing, gives more money, then the numbers of families taking orphans for a period of time, will increase. Then there appears a danger that families will take orphans just because of money and housing and lose the primary aim of this method.

The article of A. Kornilova “Sirotskaya dolya” (“Orphan’s portion”), published on October 19, 2010 in the same “Izvestiya – Kazakhstan” newspaper (page 1), described the situation young people are in, staying in Youth houses after leaving orphanages. In a Youth house in Akzharskiy district in North Kazakhstan oblast, a public prosecutors’ check showed that there was an absence of elementary kitchen ware and household equipment. At the moment of check, at the end of September, 2010, the building was not ready for cold season. One of twelve young people did not received welfare which he was due. Clothes for young people were provided in the wrong sizes. Instead of boots for girls, ones for boys were bought.

This article in full measure shows how orphans are treated after they leave orphanages. It seems like the government does not pay attention to orphans after leaving orphanages, but if there has been a check of public prosecutors, than it means that some attention is paid and maybe the results of the check will make the government make some decisions.

G. Lanskoy, the author of article with the same header “Sirotskaya dolya” (“Orphan’s portion”) in “Megapolis” newspaper (page 7) from October 26, 2010 described the similar situation in one of Kazakhstan’s orphanages, but a surprising thing which his article demonstrated was the response of Rights of Minors Protection Management: “It just cannot be like this!” That was the answer of the officials. They refused to believe it was like that. “It has appeared that it can be like this!”, G. Lanskoy claimed. The article of this author described the situation as it is in real life, not hiding anything from the reader. It showed the reality, in which orphans live.

Even though there is a lack of literature about the problems of orphans when starting life out of orphanage, the articles of “Megapolis” and “Izvestiya – Kazakhstan” appeared to be very useful and relevant for investigating the problem and they still provide information about post-orphanage life of young people and what government does for them. These articles confirm that there is a problem of this kind in Kazakhstan and some of them offer some ways and methods for solving it, such as: introducing family type homes for orphans and taking orphans into families for a period of time. More about the problem and some new solutions were offered in the Chapter 3.

 



Date: 2016-01-03; view: 645


<== previous page | next page ==>
Chapter 1. Introduction | Chapter 3. Description of Results
doclecture.net - lectures - 2014-2024 year. Copyright infringement or personal data (0.008 sec.)