May 10, 2005
Operation Clean Sweep
You all know that I don't like the new law on abandoned and orphaned children. I've made that clear in the past. Now, you might be thinking that I'm foreign and without understanding and arrogant and all that. However, I'm in good company in my dislike - namely people working in orphanages, people from the National Agency for Child Protection, lawyers, nurses, doctors. All Romanians.
They all hate the new law because it's bad for the children.
Why is the law so bad? It looks like a law with good intentions and I'm sure that the men in the green silk rooms were thinking of doing something good for Romanians left-behind children (and Romania's chances for accession to the EU).
But:
The law requires all abandoned children under the age of 2 to be placed in foster families. This means that the countless private homes for babies are obsolete. The main problem, however, is that there are only foster families for about half of the babies. Half are left... behind, again. Good solution, that.
Remember that international adoptions are now illegal, except under very constricted circumstances? Many of our commenters found this not a problem, even when I pointed out that Romanian society is not very conducive to adoption.
The solution Romanian politicians have come upon is, hm, very Romanian. The rumor says that international adoptions are going to be allowed for a very short while again, in order to clean out the hospitals and get rid of the accumulated human capital. (This is coming directly to me from people inside the Agency for Child Protection. No names can be given, as I'm sure you understand.)
Then, back to square one.
I wonder how many times per year, or per decade, this "Operation Clean Sweep" will be necessary. Last year alone, 2,000 babies were abadonned in Bucharest hospitals. Consider 1,000 babies between the ages of two and newborn up for grabs. Want one?
You may have to wait a little, though. The accession to the EU is not yet certain. If Romania wants to go ahead and lift the ban for a short while, it would be best to do it at the end of the year, after the signatures have dried -- otherwise it could cause a backlash (Brussels having been the driving force behind the new law).
And why do I know about this and why does the EU obviously not?
Posted by claudia at May 10, 2005 01:05 PMBecause the EU as an institution does not care overtly much about local effects when countries want to become members?
As long as Rumania conforms to the demands the EU makes, I don't think it cares much for the consequences within Romania itself.
Posted by: Martin Wisse at May 17, 2005 12:51 AMWell, no, they don't. Which was my point. I was just being very sarcastic.
This topic gets my hackles up, as you can clearly see.
Posted by: claudia at May 17, 2005 08:46 AM