Departures from children's homes 

According to estimates, some 1.3 million children in the region* live in institutional care. In most cases these are state homes, boarding schools and approved schools. To date, most of these institutions fail to meet the minimum standards, ranging from equipment to the quality of educational guidance, and operate in stark contrast to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The collapse of the communist system at the start of the 1990s has had hardly any impact on the situation in homes, which is appalling in the majority of cases. On the contrary, EveryChild speaks of the catastrophic effects that economic liberalisation has had on children and families. Ugur Zeynally, national director of SOS Children's Villages Azerbaijan, says the same applies to his country. In Azerbaijan, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of divorces**. This has led to a growing number of single parents who are at a far greater risk of not being able to care for their children by themselves.

Many of the comparatively young states are struggling to reach the economic level and standard of welfare safety that prevailed before 1990. Numerous problems have been inherited from the Soviet era, and many have been produced through the collapse of the centralist system and the radical liberalisation of all spheres of life that ensued. The transition plunged numerous families into poverty. Most of the children who are living in homes are actually not orphans - although the term 'orphanage' is still in use.

The reasons for placing children in institutions vary depending on the country, but the most significant underlying factors in the decision are poverty (extended families, single parenthood, alcoholism, sickness or unemployment), the lack of a social welfare network, a weak economic basis and the attitude of society towards children with physical or mental disabilities.

The guardian "state"

Generally speaking, if the birth family does not or cannot meet its obligations in terms of education and care, its first choice is institutional care. This is a by-product of the communist system which has been outwardly shed but is still fundamentally at work. Not only did the state control the economy and politics of the country, it also appropriated guardianship in family matters. According to the doctrine, the state knew best how children should be raised. Accordingly, there were no intermediate authorities such as family helpers or social workers who worked with families in crisis. The first and often only option was the guardian state.

This gap in alternative childcare services still prevails today; consequently, parents who need help frequently see no other option than to entrust state institutions with the care of their children. Experience has shown, however, that there is a wide range of social welfare support that can be given to assist parents. And if a child cannot stay with his or her family, there are far better forms of care that are more suitable for children. Over many years, the reform process has taken small steps forward on a long and tedious path. It goes hand in hand with a heightening of awareness and the transfer of knowledge.

Rusudan Chkheidze of SOS Children's Villages Georgia not only addresses de-institutionalisation on a national scale, but is also well informed of the situation in the entire region. Chkheidze reports that "hardly anyone in Georgia knows of the concept of foster care". And Georgia is not an isolated case. In Azerbaijan, where SOS Children's Villages heads an NGO network that acts as an advisory body to the government to promote the reform process, there have been no real alternatives to state institutions do date.

A long process of reform

The increased presence of non-governmental organisations committed to the interests of children is slowly bringing light into the kingdom of institutional darkness. Over the past three years, Ugur Zeynally has noticed an improvement in equipment and materials in homes; still, these homes are short of everything. "There are not enough toothbrushes, bars of soap or towels. Water pipes and toilets frequently do not work," says Zeynally.

The poor supply of material is only one side of coin. In general, one can say that from the day of children's admission to their discharge - which amounts to seven to eight years on average in Azerbaijani institutions - their rights and needs are not taken into consideration. They are not granted a say in anything and are hardly shown any affection. Seldom are children told of their origins and little is done to promote contact with their birth parents. It is highly unlikely that they will receive proper vocational training, and inquiries are not regularly made into their parents' circumstances in order to enable a return to their families. When these children leave the institution, they are usually on their own. The young adults are left to their own devices to live a life they have not been prepared for.

Rusudan Chkheidze and Ugur Zeynally are in absolute agreement with many national and international child relief organisations in declaring that accommodation in state institutions must not be the first choice but the last resort. Governments, ministries, state welfare offices and society as a whole are now very interested in putting an end to the plight of children in homes and are keen to work with experts to jointly find long-term solutions.

Bringing about change together

SOS Children's Villages has a relatively brief tradition in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union - as brief as that of the independent countries themselves. Bulgaria and Rumania marked the start in 1993; the Ukrainian SOS Children's Village Association was established in 2003 and is the youngest organisation in the region. During the last decade, the family-based concept of SOS Children's Villages has established itself as a real alternative to the conservative model of homes. This is where SOS Children's Villages can provide its expertise from practical experience and show how important it is for every individual child to have an encouraging family-type setting.

In addition to these activities, SOS Children's Villages associations are involved in working groups and networks on the reform of child and youth welfare and are lobbying for child rights in a concerted effort with NGOs. In Georgia, SOS Children's Villages is also a member of a working group on de-institutionalisation and is collaborating with NGOs such as World Vision and Save the Children. In Azerbaijan, SOS Children's Villages is also a member of a Child Protection Network of UNICEF.

Working with other organisations that represent the interests of children, with local authorities, municipalities and relevant ministries is essential if a problem of this scale is to be solved. An integral part of the solution is supplemental support, because in many cases, children need not be separated from their parents if timely support is given. This is the objective of the family strengthening programmes that SOS Children's Villages are carrying out and gradually extending from Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Russia to Rumania, the Baltic States and Bosnia and Herzegovina. On the one hand, the goal is to close institutional children's homes in the long term and create alternative forms of care such as foster care; and on the other, to minimise the need for care outside the family by giving the families the support they need.

* EveryChild: Family Matters. A study of institutional childcare in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Sovjet Union, 2005. 
**  Policy Analysis of the out-of-home care system in Azerbaijan, SOS Children's Villages Azerbaijan, 2006.