VOLUNTARY AID Child sponsorship |
|

|

Photo: Camera Press
|
One child at a time
Sponsoring just one child in the Third World is a very
appealing prospect. But, as this
report from CEDOIN
in Bolivia points out, there can be undesirable side
effects for the
children themselves.
VICTOR Pacheco Fila lives with his parents and his four younger
brothers and sisters in a two-room house on the bleak, arid plateau which overlooks the
Bolivian capital, La Paz, Victors real baptismal god-parents - who are
neighbours and old friends are effectively a part of his family.
But until last year he also had another godparent - a padrino: a
young Australian television worker who sent him postcards, a small sum of money each month
and occasionally a special gift of a larger amount. In return, Victor wrote monthly
letters to his sponsor which were checked by the local social worker for Foster Parents
Plan International.
Victors mother, Roberta Fila, first heard of the sponsorship
programme through a neighbour who knew that the family was very poor. Immigrants from a
mining district who settled on the outskirts of the city fifteen years ago, they have
found it hard to penetrate city life, Victors father is a carpenter and Roberta
prepares food to sell to local factory workers, Their adobe house has no running
water, electricity or sanitation. The younger children run around the yard barefoot and
poorly clad, while Victor, aged 18, works alongside his dad,
The social workers told me we were poor enough to apply for a
"padrino", said Roberta. There are people abroad who want to help
poor families here. It took me about three months to get all the documents and papers
together, They came and took a photo of us all, and also one of Victor - he was 13
then - with a number pinned on his chest. I was lucky, really - some families
wait over a year to get accepted.
Foster Parents Plan (often known just as PLAN) is a private,
independent organization, funded by the voluntary contributions of individual sponsors
from Holland, Canada, Australia, Great Britain, Japan, Belgium and the USA, where its
international office has been based since 1941. It was originally founded in 1937 during
the Spanish Civil War by two English philanthropists who organized the sponsorship of war
victims. But in the 1960s it began to work specifically with children in developing
countries. A quarter of a million children are now fostered in 22 countries in Latin
America, Africa and Asia. PLAN started its Bolivia programme in 1969 with 57 children
and 19,000 are now sponsored, most of them in and around La Paz.
PLAN works in a similar way to the other child sponsorship agencies
such as World Vision and Action Aid, Its main aim is help children in poor countries by
raising their families standard of living. But it also meets a need for individuals
in industrialized countries who are concerned about Third World poverty and want to do
something concrete so at least one particular child, somewhere, will be better
fed, clothed and educated because of their monthly contributions. We know we
cant change the world, but we wanted to do our bit to help, said one donor
asked about her familys motivation to foster a child,
The ads looking for foster parents really tug at your
heartstrings, said H.S., an anthropologist now living in Bolivia. First we
sponsored a child in Bali, but after some years PLAN told us that he had been withdrawn
from the programme because he was too old. We never heard any more about him. For a year
and a half now weve been sponsors to a Bolivian child - a girl of twelve.
A few months ago we arranged to visit her family on their farm by Lake
Titicaca. Frankly, we were disappointed, There was little evidence of where our money
went. The family was incredibly poor and the youngest child seemed malnourished. We got
good feelings from the people, but we couldnt help wondering why so little aid
filtered through to them. They told us they needed more money. We decided to up our
contribution - its now 22 dollars per month, which we send to the central
office in Rhode Island - but now were not so sure this is the best way to
help.
On the receiving end of sponsorship, there are also mixed feelings.
Victor Pacheco dropped out of the Foster Parents Plan last year because his mother felt it
was no longer worthwhile. We had to pick the money up on a certain day, otherwise
they told us off, said Roberta. If we didnt go for any reason, they said
we obviously didnt need the money and theyd take us off the list. Also, we had
to go to meetings where they gave us talks and told us how to look after our children. It
took up too much time and in the end the bus fares got so expensive that it wasnt
worth my while going to collect the money. When Victor was first sponsored in 1977,
his mother received 120 pesos per month, then worth six dollars. But over time the money
has not increased and inflation has reduced it to a fraction of its original value.
That individual families now get less money is actually the result of
earlier criticisms of PLANs policy of one-to-one sponsorship. To be able to say that
their programmes are community-based is more acceptable these days and the
organization has modified its approach accordingly. Now sponsored families are expected to
participate in the educational, agricultural or productive activities planned for their
zone. Of these, the best known has been the experimental farm of Tambillo, situated on the
high plateau not far from La Paz.
The system is changing, said a Bolivian PLAN worker.
We dont want to be paternalistic, so were making the families
work in local groups, and the contributions are going more to those projects now, and
were cutting down the aid to individual families. A lot of them dont like it.
Theyre writing letters asking their sponsors not to send donations for the groups
because theyre afraid of losing their money. But in the end, we think its
better for them to work together on community projects.
However, PLAN still conceives of community activity as a means to
individual and family development, rather than vice versa. The individual family is
the heart of our programme, states a recent report. Group work is the
methodology we are using now to enable personal growth and family stability. The family is
the pivotal point of PLANs activities?
Individual sponsorship is also an extremely effective way of obtaining
funds for Foster Parents Plan International. It plays on Western individualism and the
donors desire to visualise and obtain feedback from the recipient of the aid. So the
same promotion methods continue whilst local and international pressure is forcing a
change of orientation in PLANs programmes in the Third World.
The one-to-one approach favoured by the Foster Parents Plan
is not, however, as personal or bonding as it might appear. Direct correspondence between
sponsor and child is not permitted and the letters which pass in both directions are
vetted and translated by PLAN staff. The social workers told us what to write
about, said Victor, and sometimes they gave the letters back for us to do
again. We had to write about the weather ... how we were studying in school , . . fiestas
and processions, that sort of thing. Not about the news. Then we would say that wed
like to meet our padrino some day.
When K., a university teacher from the US, visited her foster child,
she was disconcerted to see letters and photos proudly produced by the family - of
another sponsor, not herself, PLAN employees explained that this was a previous donor who
had been unable to maintain their contributions, but K. found it hard to convince the
family that their sponsor had changed. I felt a bit uncomfortable about the visit
- like a lady bountiful, she said.
The sponsored families themselves tend to regard the allocation of a padrino
rather like a lottery. I didnt have much luck with mine, said one
mother whose sponsor had written apologising that he couldnt send more special
gifts because of his limited resources. One of my friends has a godmother in
the United States, said Victor. I think theyre the best they send more
presents. She came to visit him and bought him new clothes, and took him on a trip. All
the other kids were wild with envy. My friend says maybe hell go and study in the US
when hes older. It must be nice there, better than here where there are lots of poor
people.
One-to-one sponsorship does not create genuine personal bonds between
donors and foster children. It can, however, distort the recipients vision of an
unjust economic order and create aspirations far removed from the reality of their lives,
Children and their families may be permanently marked by psychological and material
dependence on their padrino from the North, However well-intentioned such aid
may be, the kernel is the creation of a paternalistic relationship which is unnecessary
and potentially harmful.
Foster Parents Plan does organize community projects. But they require
a certain degree of coercion for sponsored families to participate. There are much better
ways to carry out such activities. Health education, productive projects or group work to
obtain basic local services are all best undertaken by local Bolivian organizations which
can foster a spirit of dignity and social awareness in their members. If people in the
West wish to contribute to such projects they can channel their help through a number of
aid agencies. Effective aid means allowing disadvantaged groups to define their own needs
and priorities, and to allocate resources as they see fit. When this occurs, padrinos do
not enter the picture.
CEDOIN is a research and documentation centre in La Paz.
To subscribe
to its regular bulletin in English write to:
CEDOIN, 418 Wardlaw Avenue, Winnipeg,
Manitoba R3L 0L7, Canada.
|
The sponsorship storm
Three years ago the New Internationalist launched a public
debate on
child sponsorship. And the organizations concerned
have since made significant changes.
But, as we explain
below, the essential problems remain.
When the New Internationalist devoted its May 1982 issue to the sensitive
subject of child sponsorship it provoked an immediate response. Perhaps the front cover
was provocative:
Please do not sponsor this child. But it was a subject
about which we felt strongly - and still do.
Reactions varied: indignation from the child sponsorship agencies,
surprise from many of our readers who were sponsoring children in the Third World. Yet the
criticisms were not new. Doubts about the principle of singling out individual children
for special attention had been circulating for years among the voluntary agencies. Such
aid was felt to be clumsy, divisive and ultimately demeaning for families or children who
had to pander to the wishes of their benefactors.
Many people who have worked in the Third World have been distressed to
see all this. But the average donor can hardly be expected to be aware of the problems
- all the publicity for such schemes naturally concentrates on the benefits, such as
they are, to the children and above all to the donors.
As a direct response to the New Internationalist many people
gave some thought to the issue for the first time and rapidly came to the same conclusion
that we did - that they would be better off making their contributions through
agencies who did not make such demands on the people they were helping.
The leading article in that magazine has since been reprinted many
times around the world - and always produced a strong reaction. In Canada, for
example, the United Church ran it in their own magazine and started a coast-to-coast press
and radio debate on the issue. Our edition is now out of print but we have reproduced a
summary of the arguments below.
The child sponsorship agencies argue that there are people who will give to sponsorship
agencies argue that there are people who will give to sponsorship programmed who would
otherwise give nothing at all. This grossly underestimates the intelligence and
sensitivity of the average donor. Our experience is that people immediately understand and
appreciate the issue once it is put to them.
As a reaction to the criticism the agencies have responded to say they are now
switching over to community projects. But still they retain the personal link
and the sense of dependency that goes with it. The logical next step would be to drop the
notion of personal sponsorship altogether.
|
The other side of the coin
For every advantage that sponsorship brings to the donor
there is a
corresponding disadvantage for the recipient.
| Helping one identifiable person |
ALSO |
Causes divisions and creates
more inequality |
| A correspondence that helps you
learn more anout the Third World |
ALSO |
Create Western aspirations
that cannot be fulfilled. |
| Getting a direct response from
the person you help |
ALSO |
Maintains a consciousness of
aid and dependence |
| Having your own aid directly
supervised |
ALSO |
Ties your help to conventional
and less economical projects. |
| Paying for regular information
about you own child |
ALSO |
Leaves less available for the
project |
|
|
|