Moldova Child Protection Adviser supports the Moldovan team

Project : Moldova 8 Oct 2011 | protection systems

Neil Whettam started to work as a regional child protection adviser for Terre des homme in July, 2011. His responsibilities are to support, strengthen and develop the child protection safety net in Tdh’s countries of intervention in Central and South Eastern Europe. He visited Moldova in September with the aim of assessing strengths and weaknesses of the program and then to look at the opportunities to improve the weaknesses and to build on the strengths. Neil explained his observations, the problems he found, in an interview.

What were you expecting to find in Moldova?

I’ve been able to visit Ungheni, Soroca and also Chisinau. I’ve met the TdH’s local staff so I had the opportunity to listen about what some of their frustrations have been and also about some of their challenges in supporting the social work systems in the raions and out, in the rural communities. I’ve also had the opportunity to observe the multidisciplinary team, which gathers predominantly in the rural communities with the animators for the parents’ groups, and also the coordinators and animators for the children’s groups. And I’ve also had the opportunity to meet and observe one of the Local Councils for Children’s Rights Protection. Both I’ve found very interesting. But I was rather surprised when I observed the Local Council, because I thought that after 10 years the old soviet style of interviewing the parent, meeting with the parent and discussing an issue would have been erased, but it was still very much alive, in terms of a group of professionals sitting around a table and the mother is sitting in the back of the room and occasionally the group of professionals would turn around to her an verbally reprimand her. So I was a little bit surprised about this. However, one of the good things I’ve seen is the multidisciplinary group, that is smaller group of professionals, who understand the needs of the children in their community and are trying really hard to address some of the issues for the children and the young people within their communities. And that was a joy to see, and also to see that the parenting program is very a successful one.

How did you find the child protection system as a whole?

I think that there are many challenges ahead in Moldova, but the process has begun and the process is a good one. One of the things that I think needs strengthening is the multidisciplinary group, and also Local Councils for Children’s Rights Protection. They need to operate in a more child-friendly and more parent-friendly manner. And also the capacity building of the social assistants is a challenge, because in many cases they have huge caseloads and the cases are treated in a very generic fashion, so child protection matter sometimes is not a priority – so that’s the challenge.

You’ve had the training with the local coordinators. How did it go, did you have any difficulties in talking to them?

The main focus of the training was based on what they have told me about their challenges and frustrations with working with the social assistants. In many cases social assistants don’t feel comfortable or equipped on how to ask a question and what questions to ask. So I did some coaching and training to the coordinators around how they could train the community social assistants on these matters. We were joined by two of their colleagues from “Every Child”, who acknowledged that it is a need and was felt to be important.
There was a little confusion on some of the terminology, but we were able to explain that, modify and simplify that for them, because in many respects, in some cases, what we’re fighting against is the old soviet system, because the soviet system was to just provide financial and material needs, rather than emotional support. So it’s a change in thinking, or an adaptation in thinking.

All the participants were very open to the training. Still, it was very much a shared experience, because they helped me reframe some concepts, so it fitted the Moldovan context, because it would have been very wrong if I was impinging and bringing in a very Scottish model which would have no relevance to Moldova.

What can you tell me about Tdh’s Projects that are being developed here, in Moldova?

MOVE project I think is probably one of the most extremely valuable and I’ve noticed that out in the communities, because it is a big resource that can meet the needs of children and of the parents. It enables the more disadvantaged children to be able to express an opinion and their thoughts and feelings in a very safe place. It allows them to engage in physical activity and it also enables them to feel included within their community and to feel safe to share their experiences of what they’re facing. So it complements the work of the social assistant, because the social assistant, if he/she can identify a very vulnerable child, they can direct them to the MOVE program; and also in terms of the parenting – the programs for parents had to improve their relationships with their children, had to strengthen their parenting role in relation to their children. So I think that the program is very much dove tails, they fit very well and also there is a resource that can be used within the community with the need for little resources and finance.

The CPSN I think is a struggle and I think it’s a longer term goal, because of the caseload the social assistants have. But I have a thought of how we can develop and change it, modify it a little bit.

What differences did you notice between the way these projects are developed here and the way they are developed in the other countries that you’ve visited?

In Moldova there is something quite unique – we don’t have parenting programs in any other programs in South-East Europe and the Balkans. So that’s something that I’m going to discuss with the delegates from other countries, as a future program in each of them and I think it’s a very valuable one. Other difference is that Albania has a designated child protection social worker, who has pure responsibility for addressing, investigating and working with children that are at risk of abuse and neglect. This is a state employee that Tdh has trained.

Can you give me a list of all the strengths and weaknesses that you’ve found in these programs?

Ok. Let’s start with weaknesses, because I always think it’s important to finish on strengths. So here are the weaknesses. I think that community social assistant is a very new concept in Moldova. The salaries the staff are paid are very poor so therefore there is not the enthusiasm to be attracted to the post. In some cases the basic trainings that the governments provides of 40 hours is insufficient. Some social assistants are not able to articulate what their particular job and role are. Some appointments are political appointments within communes and raions and that makes it very difficult. Some lack a basic awareness or basic education on how to interact with people within their communities and in some cases the social assistant is not valued or respected or seen as relevant, because there are cases when the newly elected mayors don’t understand what their role is in relation to child protection so they find it difficult to know what the role of the community social assistant is. So I think these are some of the weaknesses that are stumbling on a rocky path but that can be smoothed out with the support of Terre des homes.

Strengths, as I’ve said – the parenting program, MOVE program, which is very well established and provides a resource to refer children and parents to when there are other systems lacking. I think the program has huge potential to develop. We can develop a faculty of child protection for the university, so every social assistant has a module around child protection and prevention of child abuse and neglect and that can be replicated in schools for teachers, for police officers in the communities. There is huge potential in terms of capacity building, knowledge and awareness of child protection in general. Other strengths would be that the model that we are trying to create is a sustainable one, which the government may be able to take on in a few years time, rather than leaving it to an NGO. But there has to be that political will. So I think that there are more strengths than there are weaknesses.

In a conclusion, what is your overall assessment?

This is my first field visit and I will be back. I will be visiting three to five times a year, depending on funding, but certainly it will be three times. There are challenges which I face, honestly the biggest one being funding from donors, because current funding is coming to an end – so that’s going to be a challenge, but I think the recipe that we have is a right one and it’s a good one. It just needs to be replicated, it needs to be acknowledged and it needs to be supported across the raions where we work. And if we can build capacity and strengthen it, I think the possibilities are huge. So, I suppose my final evaluation would be to continue to do what you’re doing with a few suggestions on my part, as regional child protection adviser, but also acknowledging that some of the staff has some good ideas as well, that perhaps we need to develop and take forward for strengthening the program together.

All in all, how was your visit?

First, I would just like to thank the staff for allowing me the opportunity to observe and discuss. It’s been really good, it’s been very hectic – I’ve been here two weeks and I’ve been in every corner of Moldova and I’ve done two days solid training and now I’m writing up a training manual. We are compiling an action plan and a calendar for the next six months of what needs to be done. So, yeah, it’s been very hectic but it’s been enjoyable. Thank you, Moldova.