In response to the orphan crises that is a result of the AIDS pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa, many churches and individuals in the western world are starting orphanages. I would like to tell you why I think this response, although made with compassion, is adding to the problem rather than providing solutions.

An orphanage is an institution. This in effect means that the child is placed in a dormitory style building or neighborhood house that is a residence for a large number of children and is typically outside of her (or his) initial community. As the child has been orphaned, she is already traumatized by the loss of her parents. The loss of her community is thus an additional trauma. If she comes from a typical African village, many generations of her extended family live there as well as her friends and neighbors who, although not blood relatives, are just as much a part of who she connects with. Added to this is the tribal structure and the traditional leaders she has come to respect. When you remove her from this, you compound her loss and grief many, many times over. She is then faced with unfamiliar routines, rotating care workers and other trappings of organizational care. All these, and many other factors, serve to produce deep seated emotional problems that the child carries into adulthood and from which few may recover.

An alternative option we have seen is the idea of "cluster homes" or "family style care". These have been designed to counteract the disadvantages of institutionalized care. These types of homes may or may not be in the child's original community. In either case, a house-mother is typically appointed to care for smaller numbers of children in a home setting. The house-mother is on duty 24/7 just like any other "mom", the difference being that this "mom" is a paid employee. The idea is good but the implementation has proved to have a very high turnover of housemothers. (They are afterall, employees, not real "moms"). The children are thus still in an institution. Added to this, a recent study shows that these homes become a magnet for families to abandon their children. In many, more than half of the children are actually not orphans and one or both parents are still alive.

(Home Truths: The phenomenon of residential care for children in a time of AIDS)

I believe with all my heart (and from 17 years of experience) that the way to address the care of orphans is to empower the community to care for their own children. The extended family should be the first place to start. Helping them to have acaccess to foster and child care grants is a huge step toward making a real difference. Providing after school centers where children can be empowered with life skills is another way of helping. Training and empowering church and traditional leaders to provide support and counseling to the extended family of the child is another way to help. There are many, many ways in which to make a real and lasting difference at community level. With orphanages you are not only removing the child from the community but you are removing the responsibility for the child from the community and doing them both a disservice. Why not rather give the community the skills to care for their own?

To see how Helping Hands does this, view the Cycle of Life on our home page.

Why not come and see for yourself?
View this short term mission video.

In closing I would like to personally ask you to consider attending our reception as indicated at the top and bottom of this letter. I would truly like to chat to you face to face.

One more thing. I feel so strongly about the case of community care for orphans vs. institutionalized care that I would like to ask you to forward this email to a friend. Let them know how community care can be a lasting way to impact the lives of orphans in Africa. You can use the convenient "forward email" link at the foot of this page.
 
With kind regards
Michelle Tessendorf