by candy » Sun Feb 02, 2014 5:49 pm
This is terrible story about discrimination of Pokrovsky family made me think about the future of my family in Latvia. The juvenile justice begins to spread in Latvia to the fullest extent. What seemed before only theory, becomes evident reality.
In Latvia, the cases concerning withdrawal of children from families hardly make their way to the public interest. Parents are bullied, like it was with Nikolay, and the press is under pressure of influential stakeholders.
I am going to tell you “classic” incident with the withdrawal of children from family in Ikshkile in February, 2013.
In Ikshkile village the representatives of the local police together with the representatives of the guardianship court took a four-month baby from the mother. The reason for these actions was that the living conditions of young mother were poor, and she could not take care of the baby properly, besides the doctor “found” underweight and rickets. And the decision of the guardianship court: the woman of 20 years old was deprived of parental rights of a 4-month baby.
I should mention that previously the representatives of social center announced that the family doctor discovered - the mother had irresponsible attitude to the child and to his health. It was concluded that the mother had no skills to care for the baby. These accusations were not recognizes by the girl, but she did not have the documents about the baby’s vaccination and development. The baby was delivered to a branch of the State social center for child care in Latvia.
But how could they take away a child without depriving parental rights?
These are main argument: “No skill", "have not been vaccinated”. Can that mean that the family cannot provide "appropriate care"? I cannot understand that.
This is an ordinary young family with no bad habits. Such stories you can find anywhere- a young girl after school (most likely) is getting married and giving birth to a child. Her husband, a little bit elder but he is still young, having official work, but money is not enough. The financial situation leaves much to be desired! After the child is born no social services do help them.
We usually see such families in Latvian suburbs. Ikshkile is a town with a population of approximately 4,000 people. A lot of men living there are unemployed. So, the father is still the lucky to have job !
Can we judge the standard of living directly based on o family income? Can a factor of well-being of the family become the reason to leave or take away a child from your family? No?
Now let us look at Latvia in the European "microscope": " In Latvia 30.9 % of the population live in deep poverty, we take the second place in the EU for poverty, according to the European statistical office Eurostat». Social position of the family may be one of the reasons for withdrawal of kids. Almost in every third family the fridge may be too incomplete for child nutrition . Just think - the family income does not allow you to have a child or parent official salary is lower than the actual income - you will immediately find yourself at risk
In the near future the poorest part of the population in Latvia will be asking a question to themselves – to have a baby or not to have? And if a child is born, the probability of its "loss" for parents on the basis of some social problems increases dramatically. Lack of family budget, of course, affects the decision of juvenile courts. But there are other factors too.
Skills. What skills should have the 19 -year-old mother? If you have a second child and you are 30 years old, does that mean that you have grasped the basics of motherhood and all your skills will not cause suspicion among the bystanders? Can you prove it after your child is taken away?
The interpretation of opinions about your abilities significantly simplify actions of juvenile courts. But the situation with Pokrovsky show that withdrawal of children does not depend on the mother's age and number of children.
Vaccinations. The mother of 4 -month baby had no proof of vaccinations. The representatives of guardianship administration cold make sure in them by calling to the hospital where the baby was born. May be the young mother refused to do vaccinations: some really can be postponed due to underweight of a baby or some Illnesses. This is a strange reason to take away a child.
Redness, rashes, inflammation, weight ... can anyone remember how his baby was developing during the first months of life? A child is adapting to the new environment, and there can be some reaction as redness, rashes, allergic reactions ... And the baby weight is so unpredictable during the first months….
But there is one fact –the baby was taken away from his mother's breast, now imagine the problems of mother and child because of the violent separation. Biological and psychological ones.
Do you regularly go to the pediatrician, and he will popularly explains why rash, what vitamins to drink and what to do and what not to do - without discussing your skills motherhood. The doctor also knows about natural phenomena and the nature of such failure to the mother of the child to know all the sores in advance.
The Juvenile Court withdrew the baby based on a report of a paediatrician, who said that the child lacked care. The official representatives, without carefully studding the situation, just solved the problem by giving the baby in the hands of the state. The paediatrician instead of helping the young mother decided to solve the problem like that. For the doctor it was easier to write the report full of blaming than to watch a child and give advice to the young mother.
“Rickets". The mother is convinced that the baby just does not weigh as much as necessary, but he was gaining his weight. “The child is slowly gaining weight, he needs a special diet that parents cannot afford” - it is according to the doctor. Is this a reason to remove a child? Is not it better to give the baby some time to get stronger, and let the mother to continue breastfeeding?
Let us assume that the doctor saved the boy from starvation. This was an ordinary family, not alcoholics / addicts / homeless, they are adequate people. Or "rickets" was used as an excuse to pick up a normal child from healthy parents?
My suppositions is that this can be child Mafia. They find a healthy child, report about carelessness of parents, hang diagnose and then the juvenile court withdraw a child from parents, the child is being later adopted by another family. This is a child trafficking. All for the money.
Parents of a really sick child are unlikely to be in the lists of children's Mafia, their customers do not need really sick children!
The family of Pokrovsky may have another reason to be separated from their children. But I am sure the Mafia influenced the situation – they have people in the Administration of Children Services, the adequate normal person cannot withdraw children from their parents.