Called

The Ministry of Education proposed reducing the number of children in foster families almost three times. Parents did not understand the minister

A few days ago, the Minister of Education Olga Vasilieva at a meeting with reporters made a statement that most foster families perceived as a personal insult. She literally stated the following: “We submit a legislative proposal to reduce the number of children who are simultaneously adopted or transferred to the custody of children. Now we have a norm of up to eight children [the maximum number of adoptive and native children in the same family]. ” Vasilieva emphasized that the family cannot be "like a kindergarten or a family orphanage."

Even the minister warned that the selection of foster parents would be “very tougher”.

The explanatory note to the bill was clarified by the dragon reduction-firstly, the limitation of the number of orphans will “contribute to more successful education and education of children, will reduce the risks of the return of children”, and secondly, 51 subjects of the Federation supported the initiative.

The reason for the emergence of the bill, according to the minister, became the frequent cases of violence and even the murder of adopted children.

However, the humanistic background of the document, the adoptive parents, discussing it in social networks, did not appreciate it, rightly noting that among blood parents there are ghouls and detailed people.

The very next day after the scandalous statement, the flash mob “#Fourth_ Non_” was launched, which has already collected dozens of stories of large families and the history of adoptions. And this is not only a love story, but also a description of the catastrophic prospects of adopted children, if they had left in the orphanage.

Svetlana Stroganova wrote on her Facebook:

“Let me explain what this will mean in practical terms. The photo is my children. I crossed out those of them who would stay in an orphanage (most likely forever), if such a law was adopted several years ago. Why? Nazar - the child is taken from the child’s home for children with disorders of the central nervous system and damage to the brain. Perinatal encephalopathy, mental retardation, delay in motor development, hepatitis C contact, mother - drug addict, lack of full legal status, upcoming long trials.

Olya - almost 5 years, the child does not walk, does not say, diagnoses - cerebral palsy, hydrocephalus, congenital heart defect, mental retardation, squint ...

Polina - 14 years old, teenager, twice return, regional, mother alcoholic, dad alcoholic and addict.

After all, it is clear that there is no turn behind them, right? And if you reduce the number of adoptive parents several times, then these children would have practically no chance of getting into families.

Now the system has officially 50,000 orphans (in fact more, this is a separate topic). The Ministry of Education, in the past education, reports for 2 consecutive years that the number of children arranged in the families exceeds the number of identified orphans. So, orphans are becoming less.

If this law is accepted, there will be more orphans. Much more. Very much more. And it means that such a child as Olya will simply die in the walls of DDI and never will speak and speak, such a child as Nazar will become a regular visitor to psychiatricists for his violent disposition (this method of education in orphanages is actively practiced), such a girl as Polina will learn the maximum for plasterers. If you're lucky. If it does not sniff and does not rivet.

It is this Ministry of Education that calls the concern for orphans?

In my opinion, this is indicated by another word. Cannibalism".

But in addition to restricting the number of adopted children, the bill proposes to introduce an anti -constitutional norm at all - the guardian and the child will be able to change the residence of the residence only with the resolution of guardianship. Family lawyer Anton Zharov in his blog calls this bill “a nail to the coffin of adoption”: “The bill brings the situation with guardians and partially with the adoptive parents to a situation where they cease to be independent people, and simply become employees of the guardianship authority.”

The bill in Russia does not solve the real problem of the institution of adoption in Russia. Senction of families, as a rule, is limited to guardianship control. And the custody often acts like riot police - bursts without an invitation, claps the refrigerator door: “What is your lunch?”, Suspiciously peering into his mother whose child does not look at this moment as a character in a Christmas card.

The custody in Russia is not about help in the difficult time of the adaptation of the child in the family, but about punishment for the washed tights.

It is noteworthy that the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on the family of Tamara Pletnev opposed the restrictions on adoption. But it was not guided by the interests of foster families, but exclusively the prospect of the abolition of the “Law of Dima Yakovlev”: “If we start very tougher, then again we will have to open orphanage in more or again international adoption, which I would not like.”

In a few days, the initiative of the Ministry of Education caused such a flurry of public negativity that on the horizon loomed the next “Mother March”.

And already on Monday, Olga Vasilieva disowned the quantitative approach in the topic of adoption. She literally told the RNS agency: “I am categorically against quantitative reduction to three children specified in the project. This is a wrong approach, and he, like the whole document, was not agreed with me or the Ministry of Education, the composition of which is formed. ” She assured that work on the bill would continue.

It seems that parental anger in Russia is becoming the most effective weapon of protest. Meaningful and merciless.