Mushrooming orphanages
The use(lessness) of children’s homes in Nepal
By: Wilko Verbakel and
Susan van Klaveren
Many hundreds so-called orphanages are
found in Nepal, raised by Westerners who want to do a project by
themselves. They are supposed to be a new home for kids without
parents. However, in reality some children’s homes are run as
businesses or even fronts for criminal activities while the majority
of sponsored children are not even orphans. Does this
“do-it-yourself” help of Western NGOs really contribute to
development and to reduce poverty?
Many foreigners want to help the increasing number of disadvantaged
and displaced children of Nepal and together with Nepalese partners
they start their own orphanage or children’s home. Last year their
number increased to over 1,000 and 400 can be found in the Kathmandu
Valley alone. If each of them houses 30-40 children, it means that,
in the valley alone, around 15,000 children live in such
institutions, far away from their families.
Only a small portion of these children is really an orphan. A study
funded by USAID in 2005 among 335 “orphanages” in Nepal showed that
only 20% of the 8,821 children in the study lost both parents while
over 50% of them still had both parents alive. With the huge
increase in orphanages over the last three years, the number of
non-orphans has most likely increased. Only 11% of the orphans end
up in an orphanage due to conflict related reasons. Most of them
live in the street because their parents cannot feed them properly
or because they are left alone by the parents and the other family
members are too poor to feed and educate them. We can even question
whether the number of children homes is increasing because the
number of needy children is increasing, or whether it works the
other way around: the availability of free food and lodging attracts
more disadvantaged children.
‘Orphans’ become adults
At first sight it seems a noble venture to bring poor street
children to a children’s home. But is it really an advantage in the
long run for those children, to grow up in an orphanage? In some
homes they still get little to eat and are forced to go begging in
the neighbourhood. Other homes, supported by Western organisations,
are better organised. But in spite of leading a relatively luxurious
life, and having exposure to short term foreign volunteers, the
children grow up without family ties, outside their culture and
without knowledge of their own caste/ethnic background. In a country
as Nepal, family, culture and ethnic background play an important
role in life. For this reason, staying in a children home can even
have a negative effect on the long term. When the children are about
eighteen years old, they suddenly become responsible for their lives
outside their safe home. For most of them it means the end of
prosperity and no possibility to rely on their family background and
ethnic culture. Since the children home business is booming since
only a few years, there is not much experience how well children can
cope with this situation. There is a large risk that after another
ten years, these children will have a higher risk of suffering from
identity crisis and behavioural problems. Considering the large
number of children in children homes in Kathmandu, these ‘displaced
children’ could become another problem for the capital.
Another problem is mismanagement and lack of funding: if a home has
to suddenly close down the
children end up in a worse situation than before: now they have
truly become orphans.
Donations
Typical variable cost for food, lodging, clothing and education for
an ‘orphan’ are at least NRs 3,000 per child per month. Since some
children’s homes are in fact a “business”, some may ask the donors
up to NRs 9,000 per month. To house 40 children, the average cost
amounts about NRs 16 lakh per year, excluding the cost of the house.
In spite of the high land prices, every organisation wants to
purchase its own piece of land and construct its own building.
Typical prices for such constructions vary between NRs 80 and NRs
200 lakh.
Amongst Dutch NGOs active in Nepal it is popular to establish a
children’s home. Around fourty Dutch NGOs contribute to or run their
own children’s home, which means they jointly are responsible for an
investment of more than three million euro or NRs 30 karod. Moreover,
they yearly have to raise more than NRs 5 karod to cover the
variable cost. All this money is collected in the Netherlands from
donors who want to contribute to poverty reduction. Unfortunately,
children’s homes can never lead to poverty reduction because they
will never be self-sustainable.
Profitable business
It is a public secret that people who invite Westerners to start a
children’s home, often have a personal interest. Being the director
of a children’s home means a solid source of income and status in
the community. Many village people are keen on children’s homes or a
hostel near a school as they enable their children to visit a good
school in the city. Instead of investing in rural education, NGOs
bring children to a home far away from the village. In fact, it
would be many times cheaper and much more effective to pay an extra
teacher in the village and to improve the infrastructure of the
local school. With an extra investment of NRs 1 lakh per year for a
local school all school going children in the village will profit,
while this amount covers the expenses of only two children in a
hostel or children’s home.
Criminal activities
Children’s homes also attract other problems. Some people trade
street children between orphanages. For a few thousand rupees
children are taken from their families or homes and sold at higher
rates to an ‘orphanage’. Since foreign donors will pay on average
NRs 5,000 per month for a child the management readily invests in
the ‘procurement’ of another student. Illegal adoption is another
profitable form of trade. Foreigners have been found paying
thousands of euros to children’s homes to adopt an ‘orphan’. Some
orphanages are even cover-ups for even worse practices. Last year, a
Dutch director of an orphanage was jailed after it was found that he
sexually abused almost all children from his home. Like other Asian
countries, Nepal is prone to attract paedophiles. This is a very
serious issue that the Nepalese government needs to address by
making strict rules and improved monitoring of the homes.
Furthermore, there are stories of orphanages that sell children to
the Indian sex industry or circuses. Last but not least, there is
widespread financial abuse by the management of children’s homes.
Last year, a Dutch family lost ten thousands of euros when the
Nepalese director of Ganjala Children Home ran away with the money.
Despite lodging complaints with the Social Welfare Council and
Children’s Welfare Board the home was reregistered as “Peace and
Beautiful” and continues to exploit well intended sponsors.
Responsibility of donors
Unfortunately there is no law that addresses legal responsibilities
if a children’s home fails. Who will be held responsible if the
children are abused, or when they end up on the street? Who takes
care of the children if the orphanage goes bankrupt?
Still, raising funds for children’s homes seems a piece of cake: the
picture of an impoverished skinny child raises more funds than the
image of a hard working parent who needs some extra support to feed
and educate his children. But individual donors should accept their
responsibility. Helping orphans is a noble cause. But if relatives
are too poor to feed or educate the kids, the donor should question
whether placement of the child in a children’s home is the best
solution. Contributing to support the family – not by giving cash,
but by providing means to generate income – the whole family will
have food to eat and is able to send their children to school. The
money that is spent for one child in a children’s home during one
year (400-750 euro) is enough to support several families. For
instance, by providing one buffalo worth 250 euro to a poor family,
enough money can be earned from selling milk and offspring. This is
a much more effective way of poverty reduction.
Hobby home
Having a few orphanages to cater for abandoned children is helpful,
but the present number of more than 1,000 is really too much. Those
who want to help Nepal are advised to join an existing NGO with a
track record in running community based developing projects. Always
be aware of the long-term effects of a project, both at the
individual and the community level. For those who establish a
project or a home, their project is a satisfying hobby, but for the
receivers it determines their future. The best projects address the
causes of poverty, and aim at self-sustainability. Only independence
and self-sustainability can break the vicious cycle of poverty.
Wilko Verbakel (PhD) and Susan van Klaveren (MA) are respectively
treasurer and president of a Dutch NGO, the International Council
for Friends Of Nepal (ICFON). This NGO advises, finances and
verifies developing projects that are carried out in collaboration
with Nepalese partners. ICFON is run by volunteers. More information
can be found on www.icfon.nl .
A similar article has been published in a Dutch journal for
international cooperation, ViceVersa (april 2007)
