Orphanages Without Orphans

New Zealand Listener, Volume 19, Issue 478, 20 August 1948, Page 10

Orphanages Without Orphans

Written for "The Listener"

by

D.M.

M.

THe writer of this article asks whether we should congratulate ourselves when we find enough money to build & new orphanage, or hang our heads in shame. She had been asking herself that question for years when the arrival of the Curtis Report from Britain made her feel that she must ask other people as well. Her initials will be well known to those who take an interest in the difficult problems of | child welfare.

OLLOWING the investigations of a Committee of Enquiry, whose recommenda-tions-published in the Curtis Report-have been accepted by the United Kingdom Government ‘and "become law, the upbringing of nearly 140,000 children will be affected and their prospects in life brightened.

‘These reforms should stimulate us to take stock of the position in New Fealand.

Here, apart from Governmental care, children deprived of -home life are mostly brought up in large institutions. This method is costly, long out of date and in no way a satisfactory substitute

for family life. Institutions are artificial in atmosphere and were introduced in the last century when soci«l conditions were very different. Widows’ pensions were unknown, family allowances had not been introduced, and many families through misadventure found themselves destitute. Although called Orphanages, there are few orphans in these places. In one large Home-a typical example-

about 60 per cent. of the children have both parents living, 40 per-cent. one parent, and _ there

may be oné, perhaps two, orphans. Jhis is a surprise to many people, who naturally conclude that orphanages contain orphans. Uprooted Children The English educationist David Wills said recently, "We must never forget that the child who enters an institution is a casualty-one whose life has been disrupted, and whose emotional ties have been rudely torn." Would it not be a great step forward if we reduced these casualties by refusing to admit children whose only qualification may be that they have lost one parent? Far better to use funds if necessary to supplement the widow’s income and to encourage her in every way to keep her family. intact. The same might apply to widowers and, in suitable cases, to broken homes and divorced parents. Where separation is the result of matrimonial conflict, and unhappiness-per-haps caused by, or leading to, insobri-ety-could not the Marriage Guidance Councils first try to straighten out the tangle? Better surely to patch up the ship than submit to a total wreck. -Haphazard Admissions The crux of/the matter lies with the Admissions Committees. No one should be elected to this office who thinks the children lucky to be placed in such institutions-they are often told how fortunate they are to be there-or that the institution they are interested in is

| an exceptionally good one. Only those who soberly realise that in admitting a child they are causing a casualty should | have these powers, and every possible alternative should be investigated before this last drastic step is taken. It is important, too, that members of Admission Committees should have some understanding of child psychology. . Committees vary in methods of admission. The best I kriow is one where three independent officials investigate the case, and only if they are all finally agreed is a child admitted. There are others so haphazard that a family may be admitted by merely applying to the matron, and we may have the spectacle of one parent putting children in a Home without the knowledge and consent of the other parent. That there are many genuine cases that must be given refuge no one can deny, but if only these were accepted for whom

nothing better is possible, numbers would dwindle and the remaining children would enjoy the individual care and affection so essential to their happiness. Brothers and Sisters Separated’ In most, institutions, except in the case of very young children, the sexes are separated. First a home is broken up, and the children perhaps transported many miles from their home town. We then proceed to break up the family, with brothers and sisters often in different towns. I know one Home where the brothers are in the South Island, the sisters in the North. The parents often become indifferent and these families grow up as strangers and eventually enter the community with no_ social background whatsoever. I know a boy who had not seen his sister for nine years, another of 14 years who has just met a sister for the first time. To watch some of the meetings is pathetic. A little girl who had the unusual experience of spending a few days with a younger brother burst out at intervals with "You are my brother, you are my brother?" as if it were too wonderful for belief. There is a case of a young man and woman who met at a dance and became interested in each other before they discovered they were brother and sister. Is it any wonder that institution children are shy and self-consci-ous with the other sex when they do meet later in the community? It may be argued that they mix in school, but this amounts to very little. It is living together and ‘mixing freely that counts. There are even Homes where mere toddiers are bathed in separate bathrooms and so the natural way of bringing home to them their physical differences is lost.

‘Sex Problems The fear of sex complications is, of course, the reason for this timid policy. But surely it must be realised that the dangers of segregation are much more serious than those. of co-education. To show that co-education is not. impracticable, I could point to at least one Home in this country run on co-educa-tion lines which works admirably. Brothers and sisters, boys and girls all live happily together, until they finally leave to go and work in the community, and in this Home there is a father as well as a mother substitute. Sex apparently has no terrors here and the childrent are friendly and self-confident, The Committee seems unaware that their Home is unusual, and the complacency so common in most Homes is absent. Institutional life is sometimes compared with boarding schools; but people hardly appreciate the difference between

institutions where children live all the year round-except perhaps for summer camps-and the ordinary boarding school from which the children get several months’ holiday during the year and where the delights of home are intensified. The institution child has no such advantage. He feels different, His life is monotonous. He lives in a group apart, separated. in many ways from the main stream of life. I inquired of one old boy why so few of them were asked into: the homes of’ their schoolmates. He looked surprised and said, "Don’t you: know? We are socially inferior." It is horrible that any child should have cause to feel like that. Another point: children in large groups, especially with depleted staffs, cannot be given adequate help with homework. Some get behind and become discouraged, often with serious results to their chances* in life. I have seldom seen these children visited when in hospital. They watch other children enjoying visits from relations, people who belong; and the same applies to school sports-there is seldom anyone to be pleased when they win. Staff workers cannot be expected to attend to these extras, they are hardpressed already and Committees give much time. and thought to administration, but members of parishes might well take a hand in this lovely work. The children need personal friends, and homes to visit where they feel welcome. We should compensate them in every way possible. They should be welldressed. This is very important. Some Committees realise this, others fail, and it is sometimes painfully easy to pick out "orphanage" children. Some, as they grow into adolescence, bitterly tesent their lot, especially when they have many quite well-to-do relations. Their opinion of their particular Home is often very different from the general Opinion, and it is what they think that matters. In one large modern institution, much admired by the public, the boys say, "It’s just a Borstal," and I know girls attending High Schools who try and hide the fact that they live in an orphanage. ; Staffing Shortage of domestic workers is now a serious problem in institutions. The high wages, too, are a heavy drain on funds. Some Homes are struggling along with mere skeleton staffs. No praise is too high for the women who work in these places under such difficult and disheartening conditions. This shortage has another aspect; it means that the boys and girls have te do more and more of the essential work, which is most undesirable beyond a _ certain limit. Even more serious is the lack of trained and qualified staffs. There should be general recognition that the cate of these children is skilled work, just as in the case of teaching, nursing, or any other profession. The new School for Social Studies at Victoria College should prove of great value in this respect and provide a new vocation for women, In England things are moving fast, and already 160epicked women are being trained to become fully qualified House Mothers. America and Scandinavia have special colleges for social workers, and graduates go out into the field fully qualified for the work they have chosen. Great skill and understanding ate needed in dealing with the behaviour problems so common among uprooted children, and unqualified people-with the best intentions-can

do grave harm. Common symptoms such as truancy, stealing, bedwetting, etc., are often punished and the cause unsuspected. I know of two Homes, and there may be others, where tables are set apart in the dining room for the luckless enuretics, and they have to endure punishment and humiliation for acts over which they have no control whatever. Needless to say the number of chronic bedwetters in such Homes is high. Children are caned, too, for lying and stealing. The Curtis Report has some pertinent things to say on this subject. "We have come to the conclusion that corporal punishment (ie., caning and birching) should be definitely prohibited in children’s Homes for children of all ages and both sexes. We think the time has come when such treatment should be considered unthinkable. It should be remembered that the children with whom we are concerned are already at a disadvantage in society. Whatever may be said of this form of punishment in the case of boys with a happy home and full confidence in life, it may be disastrous for the child with the unhappy background." It is admitted that orphanages and institutions to-day provide infinitely better housing for children than was the case once. But we have outlived those conditions and large institutions no longer fit into our social pattern. More normal homes would produce more normal children. I remember attending a large public meeting in New Zealand more than 40 years ago when an overwhelming vote was passed in favour of small cottage Homes. Yet thousands of pounds »are still being spent on large institutional buildings. What hinders progress? Lack of imagination and lack of vision with complacency on the one hand and apathy on the other. ‘There is little personal interest taken in homeless children in this country. The fundamental needs of every child can be summed up in‘a few words: adequate affection and security, and the opportunity to develop full confidence in life. If these are to be our aims, I fear the goal is still over the hills and far, far away.