Dear director of Famiglia Cristiana,
A short time ago a dear friend of mine informed me that her now adult daughter had expressed the will to “work in the social”. I told her that in my work I often have to deal with the “operators” and that I would have gladly brought it with me to start seeing “how it works”, because it knows, unfortunately, sometimes, it doesn’t work well …
Then, by coincidence, they send me your article where you read the version of a foundation, to which I would like to replicate, providing one full view That it can be useful, tomorrow, even to that young woman who wants to operate in the social.
Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifettasaid the Latins.
Nobody had ever mentioned that foundation in the two only published articles.
Nobody had ever accused or attacked that foundation.
So, I asked myself first of all: why does this intervention? To what pro?
The explanation they give on how a custody works is clear and financed school. We thank.
But when we start talking about the story of “Luca” the inaccuracies and volute omissions.
It is written that “In the history of Luca the “prompt welcome” has expanded over time until the completion of his four years”. Right. But it is not said why four years (in the face of a “bridge period ”, the brief time necessary to evaluate the evolution of planningwrite)? Because, unfortunately, the Juvenile Court, like many other courts in Italy, is work overload and the practices are “disposed of” slowly. In Milan there are 974 pending practices for each judge (Nine hundred and seventy -four) (source CSM – Management program for the year 2024 Civil Sector Court for minors).
Luca’s story is then called “complex“.
I don’t dislike it, it was made to become complexWhy before it was not. Son of parents considered fragile and not suitable for growing it up, he was lucky enough to arrive in the foster family at only 30 days. If everything had gone like regulations and common sense, within a few months it could have been given to adoption to a family that would certainly have cared for and raised with love. It is known (unfortunately or fortunately, it depends on the points of view) that the more a child is small, the more “desired” on couples who choose the adoption path. I do not allow myself to judge their desires, but statistically it is so. “Luca” would therefore have met a peaceful future, IF Everything had been managed carefully, carefully, with professionalism and with respect for the laws (which are there). So it was not and not because of the foster parents. But because of the institutions and, also, of those who gravitate around these institutions.
So far the omissions and inaccuracies.
But then we move on to the statements that hurt humanly and professionally.
They say that “The dissemination of the general public, in the absence of all the elements – does not help, throws shadows on a virtuous and important institution as the family custody is“.
So, in addition to the damage, the mockery? As was told to my clients “So you take responsibility for the fact that people will no longer want to have children in foster care“…?
Not only is the immense pain, because the laws have not respected, but we want to attribute responsibility to two people who have been a foster family for 10 years and who have always worked to carry out joyful and full of pure love for all the children they have had. But did they really say, think and written this?
The shadows on the virtuous institute threw those who last for four years without giving indications and/or explanations, not the foster parents.
The shadows threw those who managed the approach to the new couple in a badly and brutal way.
The shadows threw those who did not know how to truly accompany the child in this frankly, lacerating, sudden, distorting, traumatic and, precisely “brutal” passage (as a operator said).
The shadows threw those who decided that it should be placed in a new family within 24 hoursnot even a dog puppy to give to Christmas.
Why then, “to the necessary protection of all interested parties“The foundation you write has decided to express itself only now? To things done, to the pain caused, to the trauma that have occurred, to the newspaper articles released.
We come to the philosophical considerations, to the wisdom of Baci Perugina (who fortunately write about anything else): “It is necessary not to lose sight of the possibility that pains and trauma are remediable “. We have been told, on several occasions that “Children are elastic, they adapt“. You also write that”Most of the children placed in new families come accompanied by important traumas“.
Real. Right. But those children have the bad luck to have those important traumas caused by fragile, unsuitable parents, caused by adverse, often unspeakable situations of life, but not caused and decided on the table.
Luca’s story is not complex, it is not divisive, it does not hardly contrast jurisprudence and real life, reasons and feelings, right laws and questionable applications.
Luca’s story would have been simple because fortunately he had been entrusted to only 30 days.
Luca’s story is not divisive: except for a couple of subjects, all the rest of the world Think that a massacre is being perpetrated in the life of this little one. And it is not necessary to be graduated in law or in psychology or in medicine. Common sense would be enough.
But, even if you want to intervene as a jurisprudence graduate, I tell you that the law is there and it would be sufficient (e duty) Apply it: it is called the “law on affective continuity” L. 173/2015. They made it on purpose. Think a little.
Even if you want to have medical graduates intervene, there are 94 pediatricians who signed an open letter filed in court in which they express the serious concern for the trauma that is causing the child. There is a child neuropsychiatrist who drafted an opinion on the matter. There is one pedagogist who did the same. Above all there is the Regional Guarantor for children and adolescenceDr. Bettiga, psychologist and psychotherapist and there is Guarantor nation for childhood and adolescence which has widely supported it. So? Who contrasts jurisprudence and real life? Reasons and feelings? Who?
We summarize that the contemplation of the “let go“It has always been put in place for All children who were entrusted in that house, everyone. But this case is different: here it is a child who has passed all his little life with two people who are mom and dad for him (not that calls, but what I am: it’s different); he lived in one only housethat; He had brothers and sisters; He attended a kindergarten that he now had to leave suddenly; He expressed dreams of holidays, birthdays, gifts, Christmas; He did his little projects with mom and dad; He left toys in the house, saying “later Torno”; He said clearly “I don’t want to change the house, I don’t want to change asylum“. Has anyone listened to it? He was told, by those who dealt with this matter: “Tell me what you feel, I listen to the children“.
No, I’m sorry: none of those people listened to it. Nobody is doing his “primary interest”. Nobody is understanding that there is no “here”a transformation that can enrich, rather than breaking“. They are only beautiful and empty words that should be used when tragedies happen, for a disease or an accident, for when a child loses his parents and then yes, Vivaddio, he has ability to resist, resist, adaptation and elasticity.
But, director, this is not the case.
Sara Cuniberti
