Around five years ago we took in four siblings who had been languishing inside Bhimpedi jail in central Nepal. Two boys and two girls, their mother and father were serving life sentences for murder. The children were popular additions to our Bhairahawa refuge and they did very well at school. Then in February 2006 out of the blue there was an amnesty and the parents were released, with the mother coming to Bhairahawa soon afterwards to retrieve her children. We persuaded her to wait for another couple of months until the end of the school year (April) to avoid disrupting her children's education. The children were duly reunited with their parents two months' later along with 15 other refuge children whose parents had been freed from jail or whose domestic circumstances seemed to have improved sufficiently to allow them to care for their children. The reunifications were handled very sensitively by us with the children being given photograph albums as mementoes of their time and of their friends at the refuge, while parents were given our financial support to help with their future education.
Last week one of our field visits to this family found that the father was being conspicuous by his absence from the family "home" in the depths of the jungle while the mother would be away all day tending livestock. The children were malnourished, in poor health and now attending school irregularly. They pleaded to be allowed to return to the refuge and I agreed immediately. They are likely to be with us now until they come of age bringing to 169 the number of mouths that my cash-strapped Trust has to find the funding to feed.
I hate the "children's home" concept with a passion, as children belong in proper family units. It is very necessary though to have such facilities that serve as a vital safety net where there is no state provision for genuinely needy children. Our impetus remains to try to get children back to families, however of the 19 children that we reunited in April 2006 eight have since come back to us. I suppose that remains a success for the other eleven but it reflects the bleak social milieu within which we have to operate in Nepal.
I was very dismayed though to learn that these latest children were last week blaming me for sending them back to their poverty two years' ago. They can of course be forgiven for the child's analysis of the decision that sadly led to their experiencing such grinding hardship. At the time I felt that I was acting in the children's best interests and if I had to do it again (as I do each April) I would make exactly the same choice. Nonetheless their bitterness towards me can't help but hurt after so much of my personal involvement in their welfare which stands in stark juxtaposition to the neglect and indifference of their parents.
