Dear Editor,
As a person who strongly opposes abortion, I have a deep respect for single parents. Single parents, by their action have said, “I shall take responsibility for my action and will not destroy life for my own comfort.” This is why I am always happy when I hear of efforts intended to offer some relief to this group of citizens. So when I heard of the Ministry of Human Services and Social Security’s intention of providing this group with some relief, I was thrilled. I prayed that this ministry would come up with a programme that was well thought out and offered the greatest good to these courageous citizens. Sadly, the first aspect of the plan as revealed by my favourite minister Ms Manickchand and reported by Stabroek News in its edition of March 29 was extremely disappointing and, I am afraid, reflects the absence of careful thought. By way of about four letters to the editor during 2008, I sought to emphasize the importance of seeing many of the social problems that we face here in Guyana, as village/community problems, rather than isolating each problem and seeking solutions independent of the community.
Thus it seems to me, that the Ministry of Human Services and Social Security would have been better advised to see the single parents’ need for assistance with the cost for day care as a community problem. Had they done this, then the following approach would have been possible. Single parents who needed help with day care and live in a specific geographic area would have been brought together. Based upon the number of children involved, a specific number of unemployed mothers or retired nurses or teachers, living in the specific community/village would have been trained in child care.
A number of day care centres would be established in selected communities, by helping persons to add a wing to their homes or to construct a bottom flat where preferable. All this would be done by way of self help and use of the $8M set aside for offering single parents this $1000 per month. The women who benefited from the training in child care would provide the day care services. Responding to the need for help in this manner, would yield the following positives: a) The community/village would have added to its stock of resources; b) Some members of the group would have learnt a skill and gained a job which allowed them to use that skill while providing a needed service; c) A greater community spirit would have been fostered. Thus in the future when faced with challenges the community, with its newly found self confidence, would not readily turn to government for hand outs, but rather, would first look to its own ability and efforts to bring relief.
d) Since mothers would no longer have to find money for travelling to and from the day care facility, they would be able to save a significant amount of money each month, far in excess of the $1000 the government plans to give them each month. e) Mothers could much easier keep abreast with the progress of their children, since the day care facility would be in the village or neighbouring village. She could spend more time talking with the care giver about the child’s progress when collecting her child, or she could visit at weekends. The fact that the care giver is a fellow villager would make this discussion much more comfortable.
Instead the government chose an approach that isolates single parents from the communities, while offering them a hand-out that the very government defines as inadequate, and which does not empower communities or individuals.
Since the first part of the programme has been handled so badly, one has to be worried about the other two aspects of it, namely the skills training component and the plan to help single parents start their own businesses.
What will inform the decision on what specific training is to be offered each single parent? Stabroek News of March 29 reported that Minister Manickchand in defending the government’s approach said that “some parents said they wanted this.” Well, while poor people can say they want help, it is for us as administrators to sit with them to work out the most effective ways for bringing about the desired relief. As we consider options a focus should be that whatever we do must empower these poor people and their communities/villages.
This also should be our thought process as we move to implement the skills training programme. Thus for example, if in Grove village we have about two hundred female residents aged 16 to 45 and there are twelve hair-dressing saloons located in the village or its proximity, it might not be sensible to accede to requests from single parents living in that area to be trained as hairdressers. We must attempt to tie training to community needs.
The plan to give the single parents resources to start their own small business after they have accessed training, must also be given careful thought. During last year, if my memory serves me well, during the month of either September or October, a representative of the Institute of Private Enterprise Development appeared on the morning show on NCN. She informed the nation that of all the business ventures her agency gave start-up assistance to, 80% failed within a year.
In other words giving persons the skill to make a product and training in business management is not enough for some specific groups in this society to have a fair chance of succeeding at business.
The one hundred million dollars total that is said to be set aside for initiatives to help single parents can do immense good if we only give careful thought to how we use it. For example in the Chronicle of April 6 we read the following: “The programme will complement the interventions currently being made by the government which include providing uniform vouchers to over 30,000 students …” Why vouchers? Why this seeming comfort with reducing our people to lining up in front of the Ministry of Human Services and Social Security every year, with upturned palms to receive hand-outs? Why not assist our brothers and sisters to regain their functioning and pride by giving them the ability to solve their own problems?
Why not for example, see Annandale and Buxton as a community, train a certain amount of single parents who are residents of these two villages to make uniforms, give them the machines and have them satisfy the need for uniforms of the families of that area. Thus, if for any reason Buxton can’t satisfy its market, it knows that it must first turn to the folks of Annandale to satisfy the shortfall in uniforms and vice versa. With this approach, the single parents’ initiative would not only create employment in the villages, but through it, we would have made an investment in the promotion of better race relations. For it is truly hard to really hate those you are visibly dependent on.
Yours faithfully,
Claudius Prince
