Difficult conflict: the inhabitants of Minsk accuse child abuse, the guardianship authorities – the family is committed

The confrontation between the Pryazhnikov family and the guardianship agencies is very ambiguous and has already gone beyond private history. The parents say that they will meet the Attorney General. The guardianship authorities paralyze the results of the checks and explain: neither the family nor the children have been deprived of attention. We give vision from both sides so that the caring and critical reader can understand the situation by himself.

Family history: six children, three withdrawals and two cats

In a small "dvushke" in the street, Liliya Karastoyanova is suitable for two parents, six children and two cats. Alex, Vadim, Artem, Zhenya and Pasha returned home from their mother, father and sister Nastya, one year old, on 3 September. The oldest of them is 11 years old, the youngest is 2 years old. For more than two years, the children saw their parents from time to time, while they could go to them first at the social and educational center and then at the family-type orphanage.

Svetlana comes from a small village in the Minsk region. She is 30 years old. She has barely worked after marriage and the birth of children is almost always on leave to care for her children. Alexey, her husband, is 47 years old. By profession, he is a driver.

The first time the children of the family were retaken in 2009. In this regard, the Pryazhnikov do not speak with too much eagerness. They say that there was for it and no complaints.

Since that time, six and eight years have pbaded and, again, the socially dangerous situation is looming on the horizon. At that time, there were four boys in the family. They were taken for six months. The reason – again, spousal conflicts and material hardship. But the couple think that the second time, the children were selected for reasons very sought after.

In March 2016, the Pryazhnikov family was again included in the list of socially disadvantaged people. Alexey was fired from his job due to the termination of the contract. The family was found almost without a breadwinner. Svetlana in demolition: waiting for the fifth. The guardianship authorities write in acts that there are material support problems and that the children do not have enough food.

– The reason for setting up the standard action plan – low-income material in the family, – says Alexey and explains that the family's money for food was: – I was looking for a job and in parallel I was earning money under a contract. But according to the law, a formal job was necessary and I had to go to the job exchange. Yes, I have refused many vacancies that have been offered. Mainly because of low wages.

"We had our own interpersonal conflicts, our problems, but that did not concern children."

In June 2016, the Pryazhnikovs' apartment came back from the juvenile affairs commission. Already five boys were abducted from their parents, the youngest was only one month old. The decision of the Central District Administration stated that "on June 21, 2016, because of parental behavior, a threat to the life and health of minors was created, the children were seized urgently due to police actions. "In addition, guardianship indicates that at the time the commission came to pick up the children, the mother was drunk with a one month old baby in her arms.

In this case, Svetlana and Alexei describe differently the history of this withdrawal, they say they are sober. (To be fair, we note: in the court documents that the couple provided us, nothing says that they were examined that day.)

– For you to understand, we are neither alcoholics nor drunkards, – Svetlana shows a certificate of a narcologist.

– That day, my wife received a call and said her father was dead, so she could not say anything in shock. – explains Alexey. – When they started taking the children, the woman did not want to give them and organized a fight, called the police. You see, she has hearing loss and does not really understand why the kids are being taken away, which was the reason. They did not explain what the problem was this time. Then we tried to ask the police why they had taken the children, we had not received any documents, we could not understand why they had taken our boys, but they did not get anything.

In any case, the removal of children from the bodies of Pryazhnikovy tutelage revealed the existence of conflict between husband and wife. He got to the point where the couple called themselves the police, Svetlana collected things and left the family, and so on.

– Yes, I do not argue, we have already done, and then there were conflicts with her husband, we quarreled. Yes, there were situations where I collected objects and left. Such situations occur in all families – explains Svetlana. – We had our own interpersonal conflicts, our problems, but they were not about children. No fighting, no violence in the family was not. Nobody beat me or my children, nothing like that happened.

Svetlana and Alexey say that they did their best to correct themselves: they took out a big loan of 2.5 thousand dollars to repair the apartment. Visited the children, tried to fulfill all the requirements of guardianship. Alexey says that for a long time he tried to find official work. He worked as a contract driver but his salary was low.

Through the inspection of juvenile affairs, Svetlana set to work in August 2016: she got a job in a museum of a university of Minsk. In December, she spoke with management. The university resumed official work and her husband, who became a janitor. At the same time, the family did not have parents who could help. They say that they tried to fend for themselves, even if after all, after deductions for the maintenance of children (70% of salary), they had a little more than 130 rubles for two .

– The debts on the loan rose like a snowball, in fact, we could not pay them, – explains Alexey.

In December 2016, the Juvenile Affairs Commission decided that the family was not going to be corrected and that it was worth depriving Gingerbread's parental rights. The case has been brought to court.

"The family is not able to live economically on its own, totally depends on the support of the state social services, the emotional atmosphere in the family is unstable and unpredictable, – the supervisory authorities have written to justify their decision. – The birth of a child in this family is only an opportunity to solve material problems: parents can not rationally distribute the sums received and use them for the needs of their children. According to educational institutions, neither today Svetlana, nor Aleksey realized the responsibility of the situation of the family, the direction of the school, the specialists of socio-pedagogical and psychological services of the school and the head teacher: it is unacceptable to dismiss five minor children The situation in the family is extremely unstable. "

The court supported guardianship. Four children were placed in a family-type orphanage and the youngest pasha was placed in an orphanage.

– I decided to appeal the decision, – said Svetlana. – They helped me write the first call, and then I did it all myself: I read textbooks in the evening, I wrote complaints to get the children back. I've learned in two years.

The litigation lasted more than a year, but no matter how hard Svetlana did, they could not win. The decision of deprivation of parental rights remained in force.

– You know, I think if I could hear everything, then I could win the case. No matter how much I asked to speak loud, no one listened to me … – sighs a woman.

Then the couple went the other way – sued for the restoration of parental rights. His court was satisfied and the five boys returned home in September. In the family at the time when the girl Nastya was already born.

"Lesha was hit on the head and called a moron"

Svetlana and Alexey say that they would not have used reporters and would not have talked about the situation without the way they treated the children in a family-type orphanage. The couple said that the children's stories about what was happening were a turning point for them to tell the story to the public.

– You see, not only were there questions about the removal of children, so they became allergic, although we warned the guardianship about it, – shows Svetlana photos. – When the children were in the shelter, we saw them often. But when they found themselves in a family-type orphanage, the meetings almost stopped, apparently because the guardian was not at the time. At that, I have repeatedly attracted the attention of the guardianship. When the children returned home, it turned out that we had told them that we had abandoned them, that we had abandoned them, that they would never return home.

They were threatened not to obey, they would go to a special institution where there are barbed wire and a high fence. In addition, the children started telling how they had been beaten, how handcuffs and crackers had been distributed. Lesha was hit on the head and called a moron. How is that Zhenya was afraid to eat meat after his arrival: it turned out that he was afraid that they would eat it. The children who cried and did not obey were transported to the bathroom and filled with cold water – boys are always afraid of the soul.

The family has written complaints to the prosecutor's office and she will now see the Attorney General.

– school, education management – I can forgive them all, we are also partly responsible for somewhere, – explains Svetlana. – I forgive for many things: for the inconvenience, for the fact that children were taken away like that. But for the fact that it's what they did with children, I can not forgive. For being beaten, for being called, for not following his health. The children really came back with psychological trauma, all of which is very strongly reflected on the psyche. Therefore, I will not leave so easily.

Officially: "The information on family calls has not been confirmed"

– The family in question is very specific. They are people who do not want to critically evaluate their own behavior and correct the situation; in which claims to all government agencies, health care, – commented on the situation of the central district education management.

– Before the third withdrawal of children from the family, these already controlled the school, the father having lost his job and having taken no action to carry out a search, the mother was on leave parental. Children do not always have enough food.

During the third withdrawal, when a commission of school specialists and police officers returned home, the children were in life-threatening conditions. It was decided to urgently seize children for the third time, for which there were grounds.

Then, instead of visiting the children of the orphanage, the parents went to write, they filed a complaint with the police, saying that he was short of money and d & # 39; other objects in the apartment, but these facts have not been confirmed. The parents claimed that state authorities had almost deliberately removed the children from the family in order to deliver them to adoption. But it 's just funny to listen! State organs are not intended to specifically remove the family of five children. This measure is applied in exceptional cases.

After the third withdrawal, despite the fact that we were working with the family of all services, we did not see that the family was on the road to correction. It was therefore collectively (ie, not only the Education Department) that it was decided to seek the forfeiture of parental rights. The legal proceedings lasted more than a year and a half. The court decided to deprive a couple of parental rights, the family appealed the decision of the court. During the case review period, the mother was already pregnant with the sixth child.

During the re-examination of the case, the facts of alcohol consumption by the mother appeared, the decision of the court remained unchanged. The family was about to file a complaint in the Supreme Court. This whole period was accompanied by complaints: they wrote that the court had unreasonably decided that state organs wanted to deprive their children.

Later, the family took a different stance and began the process of restoring their parental rights. Other questions to them did not arise. During the period when children benefited from state aid, the father was employed. The employer did not comment on them, they were orderly in the apartment. They have always tried to show that they were doing well.

With regard to complaints concerning the stay of children in a family-type orphanage. The parents immediately stated that they did not want strangers to raise children, they preferred that children go to boarding schools. The entire DDST children's period was accompanied by complaints and calls from the family to the orphanage. They came to see us at the department of education, at the socio-pedagogical center, they wrote to the prosecutor's office, as well as to various government agencies. express complaints about the education of children in DDST.

For all these many calls have been verified. All year long, there were visits to an orphanage, interviews and interviews with children. The children were completely satisfied with their stay in a family-type orphanage. None of the information on the family's requests has been confirmed.

A family-type orphanage does not exist separately, the conditions of raising children are controlled, as in all families under guardianship. The work of a psychologist from the socio-educational center was carried out with the children. We have very good psychologists who are very familiar with the children in this family, at least the older ones. Psychologists interviewed them, various tests, etc. None of the children, even in some pbading sentences, never noticed that they had been inappropriately treated in an orphanage.

According to the survey, the children liked to be there, they were engaged (for information: the two older children had an educational neglect and had managed to overcome it, the children had "stabilized" ). The school spoke well of children: the boys were always well dressed, prepared for clbades, it was not clear to them that they were depressed, uncomfortable etc. We spoke with children ourselves, they did not talk about any problem. It is clear that they missed mom and said that they wanted to go home.

The family gives biased and biased information. Now that they have made the children, the parents pay great attention to looking for the negative moments of life and the education of the children when they were out of the family, and very little in the microclimate of the family.

Currently, according to the family escort algorithm, when children are returned to their parents, specialists visit them to the family. They were informed as early as the process of restoring parental rights and were quite willing to cooperate with the school. Family visits are coordinated with the parents and a psychologist is offered to the family to establish relationships with the children.

Assistance to the lawyers of the service "Onliner. Services "

See as well:

Our channel in Telegram. Register now!

Quick contact with publishers: read the public chat Onliner and send us an email about Viber!

Reprinting texts and photos of Onliner without permission is prohibited. [email protected]