Dear Editor,
I wish to thank Stabroek News for the investigative report published on December 15th, 2019 titled `Single dad, advocate claim system not set up to support men.’
The comments made by Ms. Ann Greene, Director of the Child Care and Protection Agency (CCPA), in that article, need to be addressed.
Firstly, the children were sent to Georgetown with the permission and consensus of their mother and the entire community. It was with great relief that the community saw two girl children being taken out of Mahdia. It is on the advice of the CCPA, because of their internal incapacity for mediation of a simple family dispute that the matter may head to the Family Court. The CCPA are advising people to go to family court because they cannot mediate. Operationally, they react. There is little proactive capacity. I had the misfortune to witness the CCPA transforming consensus into conflict.
An example of incapacity – I requested a meeting with the CCPA and the family members so that a controlled discussion could take place rather than the street brawls, threats and ‘cuss-downs’ that were taking place in the presence of children. The CCPA individual assigned to the case could not chair a meeting with authority. She had no agenda, was not equipped with case history, and she simply followed the instructions of the females she was interviewing about how the meetings should be conducted. This weakness meant that the brawl went from the streets and took over the authority of the CCPA. Because of the CCPA’s incapacity, a problem got worse instead of better. One can perhaps imagine my shock at witnessing this state of affairs since I was the one who went there for help. The persons who were taking care of children – myself and the father – became the enemies at the CCPA. When something like this can happen, it means that something is very wrong at the CCPA. These individuals are preparing probation reports that are affecting the lives of children. The CCPA needs institutional strengthening and this can only be addressed at a political policy level.
To further demonstrate their ineffectiveness, the CCPA officials, and let us remember that these are the people preparing probation reports, listened to the females and concluded that the father, and only the father, needed ‘counselling’ and began persecuting him. Officials from the CCPA saw the father on the street – in a desperate penniless state looking for work – and began hassling him about ‘counselling’ which had to take place at the Agency’s whim and fancy. Once again, I could not believe what I was witnessing. How does one counsel a father who is looking for food for his children? I most respectfully suggest that the CCPA officials are the ones in need of counselling. We need to meet the basic needs of the most vulnerable in society first and after that, then we can talk to them about counselling and self-improvement. Not once, in two years, did anyone at the CCPA or the Ministry of Social Protection ask: “How can I help you, Sir?”
The disrespectful comments from Ms. Greene that state “I want to have it my way” says everything about her stewardship of the CCPA. The sheer deafness of the CCPA and the Ministry of Social Protection to the suffering of people under their care is on full display here. A case of homelessness was presented to the Ministerial Advisor to the Minister of Social Protection. The Ministerial Advisor referred the case back to the CCPA for temporary resolution. The Director the CCPA’s resolution was to split the family up because the institutions under her care are not for men or fathers but only for women and girls. Her answer to temporary relief of homelessness for a single-parent family headed by a male was to take the children into her care. This is a non-solution. How can this be condoned by the State? It should not have even been offered. And herein lies further proof that Child Care and Protection Agency is institutionally biased against males and fatherhood. Instead of attempting to defend her agency, Ms. Greene could have said, “We do not currently have the capacity to support males, which we regret.” That would have been a more progressive statement because that is now an identified problem that can be solved.
Ms. Ann Greene’s statements about “them being the worst” and “if we don’t agree with people, we are the bad ones” are non-technical and simplistic. All that is demonstrated here, in my humble opinion, is lack of capacity for problem seeing and problem solving. Also, on display is lack of creativity and absence of passion for conflict resolution. Her conviction that the ‘proper way’ of dealing with a family case as “through the Court” is a further abdication of responsibility, an indication of the level of incapacity at this agency and its lack of foresight.
What was expected from the Ministry of Social Protection was concern, care, assistance, guidance and inter-agency communication and ownership of the problems facing the vulnerable in society. None was forthcoming. As a citizen of this country, it was within my right to request assistance from institutions of the state empowered with resources to help the poor. Anywhere one turns to for help, one is re-directed to the Ministry of Social Protection as the responsible Ministry. However, this Ministry is limited in its vision and its approach to helping citizens.
It is my hope that all politicians vying to run this country in the General Elections of 2020 do so on the basis of goodness and piety. It is my hope that my experiences shared with the general public can bring awareness of the need for institutional strengthening at the Ministry of Social Protection so that it can improve its responsiveness to Guyanese in need of assistance. There is over-reliance on families, overseas remittances, the Courts, charities and NGOs to support the poor in Guyana and there is no systematic effort by Government to break the cycle of poverty. Our daily newspapers are littered with cases of domestic violence, child neglect and abuse, murder, thefts and imprisonment. This is a direct result of the policy gap at the Government level. Guyanese people are more than votes. We are human beings and a politician’s primary responsibility is for human development. If we continue to try to build a nation, while ignoring its people, we are doomed to be eternally colonised.
Yours faithfully,
Sandra Khan
