Monday, July 27, 2015

Ways Forward: Recommendations (SoloParents#6)



WAYS FORWARD:

A. Specific Recommendations

  1. The law must be amended to harmonize its provisions with that of the IRR. Not only were there a lot of disparities, there were a lot of insertions and inclusions in the IRR that can be deemed a ultra vires since they have no concrete basis in the original provisions of the law. Such “add-ons” while meant to “correct” certain gaps in the law are certainly “out-of-bounds” and illegal. Such additional requirements and inclusions must now be formalized in the new law.

  1. Currently, the Special Review Committee (SRC) established only in the IRR is operating by virtue of a mere Terms of Reference (TOR). Their legal personality must now be formalized in the law as the primary monitoring and coordinating body for the implementation of the Solo Parents Act. Even as this inter-agency body is functioning already, it would still be better that they finally be “institutionalized” through a clear legal authority mandated under an amended law.

  1. The true intention of the law that is to provide social protection for a vulnerable sector like single parents can be better exemplified if the real target beneficiaries, that is both the parents and their children, are clearly identified and their situation more deeply analyzed before any programs or services are developed in their favor.

  1. As such, it is highly recommended that the bulk of the amendments be focused on the definitions of who can be considered a “Solo Parent”. This would entail some clarifications and considerations such as the inclusion of “adoptive” parents in line with “alternative parental care” similar to foster parents and legal guardians, consideration of “divorced” parents since it is similar to those who are separated, legally or de facto and those whose marriages have been legally annulled.

  1. The existing benefits and privileges granted to Solo Parents and their kids should also be reviewed if they are truly responsive to their current needs.  Any limitations on eligibility for benefits based on income bracket or economic status should be clearly anchored on special or additional financial benefits (such as the social pension and free flu vaccines for indigent seniors) prioritizing poorer Solo Parents. Otherwise, the proposed amendments should simply do away with the poverty threshold as a requirement and provide all Solo Parents applicable programs and services regardless of income. It is highly recommended that counseling, stress debriefing, legal advise and other “general” assistance be provided to ALL solo parents. Since leave privileges and flexible work hours are only applicable to those formally employed, other “responsive and applicable” benefits and privileges should be granted to other Solo Parents such kasambahays.

  1. The proposed discount privileges in the pending bills are not feasible for a variety of reasons discussed above. Besides the expected resistance from other stakeholders, the real clamor from the Solo Parents sector is for more income generating opportunities, whether it is in the formal or informal sector. And this includes ensuring access to opportunities for self-sufficiency and financial independence of both Solo Parents and their children. Thus, programs and services currently provided by DOLE, CSC, TESDA, PTTC under the DTI, and the DA should be emphasized and strengthened.

  1. Speaking of educational needs, the law must ensure that both Solo Parents and their children are able to access formal educational, vocational and technical training opportunities. There are existing programs under the DepEd, CHED and TESDA, and these include scholarships and financial assistance which should be taken advantage of.  Any other new programs seeking to address the needs of the Solo Parent families like quotas and reserved slots in scholarships or MOAs with private educational institutions, must focus on this aspect.

  1. Another major issue of concern of Solo Parents is on healthcare needs. Just like educational needs, there are current government programs, specifically under the DOH and the PhilHealth which may be maximized. Hence, these may harnessed and strengthened further.  

  1. The need for legal advise and counselling must also be addressed by the proposed amendments. This is especially relevant when the Solo Parent has an accompanying case for VAWC under RA 9262 or the Anti-Violence against Women and Children Act of 2003. Even as female Solo Parents enjoy the legal services of women’s rights NGOs, legal assistance must be institutionalized as part of the comprehensive benefits package to be made available to female or male Solo Parents nationwide.

  1. Present leave privileges and flexible work schedule should also be expanded to apply to those under MOAs, job orders, and contract of service in the government service. Already this is being enjoyed without distinction in the private sector as per DOLE guidelines, so it would seem fair for CSC to also consider extending this to the thousands of “non-regular” employees in the public sector.

  1. Other possible amendments to the law may consider bringing back the additional personal exemption of “Head of the Family” as a different rate from single or married individuals in due recognition of the added burden of “single-income” households.

Related Issues & Implementation Concerns (SoloParents#5)



Other Related Issues and Implementation Concerns

In the course of reviewing the relevance of the law and its current effectiveness, there were a lot of implementation-related issues that were raised. While these foregoing issues are mere details which may be best addressed during the IRR drafting and formulation of implementing guidelines, the context and insight they provide may be worth considering for any other possible amendments.


1. Lack of National Database on Solo Parents

Presently, there is no specific agency or body that can determine the exact number of Solo Parents in the Philippines. While the SRC has been established by the Chairmanship and Secretariat lodged with the DSWD, deriving figures and statistics is not really its primary function. They once asked for submissions about Solo Parent employees per member agency, but that only worked for offices with established Solo Parent organizations and support groups. And this is only for government agencies, not including the private sector which the DOLE does not have available statistics on either.

When the then National Statistics Office (NSO) was asked about the registration of birth certificates which includes the legitimacy status of children, their representative replied that the current practice of registering births to reflect the legitimacy status of kids, may still not be an adequate or accurate system for determining the true number of solo parents.[1]

Meanwhile, the issuance of Solo Parents Identification Cards has also been raised as a basis for determining the actual number of Solo Parents nationwide. However, as in the experience of senior citizens, because the law and the rules specified that the ID issuance be done by the cities and municipalities at the LGU level, there is still no “centralized” database at the national level.


2. Additional Supporting Documents for Solo Parents IDs Issuance

Speaking of Solo Parents IDs, while there are guidelines already providing for the proper issuance of Solo Parents IDs, it has been observed that there is great difficulty in producing the “supporting” documents required, ie., death certificate, declaration of annulment, medical certificate of physical/mental incapacity because these entail additional expense and effort.

While requiring these legal documents as official proof cannot be done away with, LGU social workers are enjoined to rely more on their personal assessment and interview with a Solo Parent applicant especially in cases of abandonment and de fact separation. In addition, procedures must be made flexible enough to allow official referrals from DSWD Field Offices and/or other LGUs, as well as other additional proof as notarized affidavits or barangay certifications to be used as basis for Solo Parents status and ID issuance.

Moreover, this issue is the same for Indigenous People (IPs) and other ethnic groups. As pointed out by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Solo Parents who are IPs also have a problem with documentary requirements such as birth certificates to prove minor children as dependents. It has been recommended that while they are encouraged to still apply for late registration of their kids, additional proof such as certification or affidavit from their local community or tribal leaders may also suffice.[2]


 3. Lack of Awareness on RA 8972 and its Benefits: More Advocacy

A high awareness level about RA 8972, its benefits and relevant procedures is not only necessary but essential for all stakeholders and duty bearers. It is a sad reality that as with many social welfare legislations, not all DSWD employees or LGU social services staff have the proficiency or expertise to fully discuss Republic Act 8972 or the Solo Parents Act of 2000. While many may have heard of RA 8972, not everyone is familiar enough with the laws exact provisions such as its benefits and privileges.

During the 2012 forum-workshops, even the designated Focal Persons claim not to be confident enough because they were newly assigned or because there is really no specific Solo Parents “sector” that is given focus, and it is usually subsumed under women’s welfare or under family and/or community only. Similarly, even focal persons such as City or Municipal Social Welfare Officers at the LGU level are not certain who are actually “solo parents” and who can really benefit under this law.

As such, the correct and uniform interpretation of who should be considered a Solo Parent is critical at this point. This can be taken as a problem and an opportunity at the same time. Without a proper orientation on who is a Solo Parent, some LGUs can be too restrictive and limit the issuance of Solo Parents IDs on technicalities. Some eligible Solo Parents can be “disqualified” because the LGU social worker has a different interpretation.[3]

At the same time, they can be as flexible as they want to be. Presently, since the LGUs issue the IDs and are providing additional Solo Parents benefits and privileges under the authority of local ordinances, they have been given much leeway and flexibility in covering the persons they see fit the profile of s Solo Parent.

4. Institutional Arrangements: The SRC and Empowering the Sector

This brings us to the very important matter of having a centralized authority for implementation and monitoring of the law and its programs. The SRC has to be legitimized under the law through an amendment. It cannot rely on its existence by virtue of the IRR and their current TOR. Their functions and duties must be clearly spelled out. This includes providing the necessary guidance and uniform interpretations of the law and its provisions – be it determining who really is a Solo Parent and what necessary documentary proof are acceptable for the proper issuance of ID cards, to whether or not some essential services like counseling. stress debriefing, temporary shelter and legal assistance should be provided only to those below the poverty threshold and merely granting leave benefits and flexible work schedules to those above poverty level, or to formulating and developing policies that will be truly responsive to the specific needs of all Solo Parents around the Philippines.

To assist the SRC or whatever lead agency or body in studying and reviewing these matters, the Solo Parents sector itself must be encouraged to organize themselves; not just because a support network is important, but having a consensus on issues and a unified voice is essential in articulating their needs to legislators and policy-makers. Organizing and forming networks is likewise very empowering; it can possibly lead to more visibility, as well as more participation and representation in critical venues like Congressional hearings on pending bills, sectoral consultation dialogues and other special meetings.

However, it must be emphasized that Solo Parents groups are encouraged to also formalize their existence and legally register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to have legal personality. Not only will this allow them to be legally recognized by NGAs and LGUs, but this will also enable them to officially transact with government bodies especially in accessing budget allocations or financial assistance. In addition, they may even be invited to sit as regular NGO or People’s Organization representatives in the SRC or similar inter-agency or multi-sectoral bodies.

            Hence, while the law and the IRR may provide for some representation and participation from Solo Parents groups in the SRC, a similar guideline as the one utilized by the National Coordinating and Monitoring Board (NCMB) for senior citizens for NGO/PO accreditation with the DSWD may be formulated.
 


[1] Special Inter-Agency Meeting on the Solo Parents Act or RA 8972, DSWD Central Office, 2011
[2] Statement by the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) at the May 21, 2015 TWG meeting at the House of Representatives
[3] Sharing from the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 held in DSWD-NCR, Legarda, Manila

Actual Needs vs Available Interventions (Solo Parents Part 4)



ACTUAL NEEDS VS. AVAILABLE INTERVENTIONS

Like most social welfare laws, there appears to be some preference given to those who are poor or indigent, hence the “below poverty threshold” criteria stated in the law. What is limiting under this provision is the statement reserving the comprehensive benefits package composed of Livelihood Development Services, Counseling Services, Parent Effectiveness services, Critical Incidence Stress Debriefing, and other special projects like temporary shelter, legal assistance, medical care, and crisis management, to those Solo Parents falling below the poverty threshold. For those above the poverty level, RA 8972 states that these Solo Parents may only enjoy the other benefits under the law like flexible work schedule, parental leave and protection against work discrimination.

Such pronouncement in RA 8972 gives the false impression that those slightly well-off Solo Parents would not require counseling, stress debriefing, and other necessary assistance. It also assumes that most Single Parents are employed in the formal sector where employers and employment contracts allow them to avail of leaves and flexible work schedules. This is ironic since available documentation have consistently shown that a great majority of single parents are in the informal sector because of their inability to keep regular hours in the office. Some of them are forced to stay at home and care for their kids while trying to eke out a living through other available means such as home-based enterprises and small-scale industry endeavors. And now, with the recent focus on Kasambahays and their labor rights, these presumptions and restrictions under the present Solo Parents Act is not only incorrect but also counter-productive.[1]

Evidently, the law miserably failed to address the actual needs of the sector by failing to understand their unique situation. A common thing binds them – and that is the reality of having to care for and raise a family on their own without the support of a partner, and possibly after an emotional and traumatic separation. The government in formulating any interventions must have a genuine insight into this before devising any program or technology. The whole range of emotional, psychological, material and financial concerns of a single parent must be recognized and appreciated before any actual programs or services are developed.


A.  Proposed Amendments - Discounts for Solo Parents?

The current bills filed before Congress propose the grant of discounts on certain transactions like a 10% on baby’s clothes, a 15% discount on milk and other food supplements, a 15% discount on medicines, and a 12% discount on basic necessities and school supplies.[2] These proposals seem to be anchored on the current discount privileges being enjoyed by senior citizens.[3] Nowadays, all the other sectors are so envious of these senior citizens discounts, everybody now seeks to have the same rights and privileges. They forget that the only reason this was granted was because of the recognition that our elderly, after having retired and having diminished earning capacity due to physical incapacities and various other disabilities, no longer have the same financial resources as others given their higher and more expensive healthcare needs. People also forget how difficult it was to get the private sector to agree to this and cooperate in providing these benefits at great cost to business establishments. We must recall that the Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) who also have discount privileges are not really enjoying it that much due to implementation problems. And the proposed Centenarian law granting an additional 75% discount benefit to senior citizens 100 years old and above has been vetoed and cannot seem to pass because the private sector is now resisting. It is expected that the representatives of the various business industries will certainly resist, if not oppose this.

Nonetheless, should these proposals for discount privileges push through, the business sector will surely not allow a 12% discount on basic necessities. Senior citizens only enjoy a 5% privilege on prime commodities and basic necessities, and considering the very low profit margin allowed for the groceries and supermarket industry, the business sector will not go any higher than 5%. Also, with all the limitations imposed by the Milk Code, pharmaceutical companies supplying formula milk might not take too favorably to this 15% discount as well.[4]

Thus, besides the possible lowering of the discount rate and limiting it to certain transactions, this may be the only time the current poverty threshold/criteria for support provision becomes highly relevant, thereby restricting the benefit to those who are poor or most in need.


B. A Clamor for Programs and Services:

1. Livelihood and Income-Generating Opportunities
It must be noted that based on the feedback from the 2012 forum-workshops conducted and on-going discussions with different Solo Parents groups, they are not expecting discounts or dole-outs. Their clamor is for more income generating opportunities, be it in the formal or informal sector. So instead of discount privileges, legislators and policy-makers should consider providing alternative or supplemental income sources or livelihood opportunities to augment or enhance their income-generating capacities.

Hence, the relevance of current programs and services providing educational, employment, and livelihood skills training opportunities, in both the formal and informal sectors, must be carefully harnessed and strengthened to cater to the needs of Solo Parents and their kids. As such, present programs and services being offered by the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Civil Service Commission (CSC), the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), and the Philippine Technical Training Center (PTTC) under the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), as well as the Department of Agriculture (DA) must be revisited if they are indeed responsive to the issues of Solo Parents and if need be, carefully amended to address Solo Parents concerns. Besides possible discounts on skills training fees, these can also be given for free if the enrollee or applicant is a Solo Parent or a child of a Solo Parent. This has been quite effective with the senior citizens sector.[5]


2. Educational Needs and Scholarships

Once again, this is an area where both the Solo Parent and the kids can benefit. Presently there are available scholarships and financial assistance for formal, vocational and technical education under the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), and the TESDA. These services are important because proper education and/or technical training assure them of continuing self-sufficiency and financial independence in the future. Moreover, these benefits can be maximized by both the solo parent and the children.

Meanwhile, to ensure that Solo Parents and their kids are able to access these educational, vocational, or technical training opportunities, a possible quota of slots may be reserved for them by these implementing agencies. In addition, LGUs and private educational institutions are encouraged to have their own initiatives in addressing this need. Already, some LGUs provide scholarships to needy students to their city and community colleges.[6] Some private colleges and universities have Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs) with LGUs or organized Solo Parents groups/networks themselves for scholarships and other financial assistance.[7]


3. Medical Expenses and other Healthcare Needs

            Just like educational needs, another major expense for Solo Parents is for medical and healthcare needs. Especially for very young kids where regular check-ups and mandatory vaccines are required, most Solo Parents often face emergency pediatric care and hospitalization.[8]

            At present, the Department of Health (DOH) offers free medical check-ups and vaccines for babies and may be availed of at local health centers. However, it has been said that these services are only applicable for “well” babies. Having a sick baby is a completely different matter and the expected medical expenses is very hard to estimate. Meanwhile, the PhilHealth also offers a “maternal health package” for pregnant women and newly-born babies. These also include regular check-ups, provisions of essential vitamins, as well as newborn screening. However, as correctly pointed out by Solo Parents themselves, these health services are “time-bound” and can no longer be availed of by Solo Parents with older children.

            It has been noted that under the joint National Household Targetting System (NHTS) and PhilHealth program, many indigent or poor Solo Parent households are able to enjoy these services under the the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps). Meanwhile, others are still covered by the Sponsored program c/o their respective local government units (LGUs).

One may also say these government health programs are applicable to female Solo Parents mostly and not to males. Nonetheless, it is the children who are deemed to benefit most from these available health services. Thus, Solo Parents are encouraged to maximize and take advantage of these current programs by the DOH and PhilHealth for their medical needs.


4. Legal Assistance

Another common issue that cropped amongst Solo Parents is their need for legal advise and counselling. Most of them do not know their basic rights and entitlements under Family law.[9] As such, they never claim or assert their right to these legal protections even as Philippine civil law grants them.

Based on the 2012 Forum-Workshops conducted in the seven (7) regions visited, both male and female Solo Parents need to be familiarized about the exact terms of parental authority, custody, and financial support under the Family Code. Another glaring concern is that a great number of Solo Parents are females who have accompanying cases of VAWC or domestic violence, with particularly instances of economic abuse or deprivation of financial support. 

While the women’s rights NGOs have apparently answered this need among female Solo Parents for now, government agencies must still mandate the relevant offices like the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO), the Commission of Human Rights (CHR), and even the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to provide legal advise and assistance to Solo Parents and their cases.


5. Formal Sector Employment: Flexible working hours and parental leaves

Besides financial resources, the most valuable asset Solo Parent have is their time. Because they have no substitute of “alternate” co-parent, they are oftentimes forced to take care of everything themselves – from everyday care, to school enrollments, to hospitalization. Thus, they often say “the hours of the day are just not enough” and that “they sometimes wish they could chop up themselves in little pieces to divide up all the responsibilities they need to attend to.”[10]

Thus, it appears the special parental leaves and flexible work schedules is still a very relevant benefit to be extended to Solo Parents. Based on various feedback, this is the most “popular” and most taken advantage of benefit under RA 8972. And since this has proven to be quite advantageous for Solo Parents, similar work arrangements must be encouraged in the formal sector.[11]

These must not just be limited to flexible work schedules and parental leave credits, but could also include “work-at-home” options that can be institutionalized in all work environments, public or private. It would do well to look into the Civil Service Commission’s pronouncements on this as a model, and have the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) review existing employment policies for the private sector.

Speaking of DOLE and the CSC, Solo Parents leaves are available to all Solo Parents employed in the private sector regardless of employment status – whether regular, permanent or contractual. But It is different in the public sector where the CSC depends its policies on a strict employer-employee relationship. Currently, many employees under the government service are employed under Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs), job orders, and Contract of Service (COS) only. It has been a clamor from the solo parents support groups in many government offices that CSC reconsider this policy and likewise extend Solo Parent leaves to employees hired under MOAs, Job orders, and COS status. And based on initial discussions of the SRC and the statement from the CSC representative at the recent TWG meeting of the pending bills in Congress last May 21, 2015, the CSC is amenable to extending this leave benefit as a special leave privilege similar to the Anti-Violence against Women and their Children (VAWC) leave.

However, we must not forget that these leave privileges only benefit those employed in the formal sector. It must be reiterated that many Solo Parents are in the informal sector because it is difficult for them to hold regular 9 to 5 jobs. Most of them are forced to become stay-at-home parents to care for their children while trying to make ends meet by engaging in non-formal enterprises such as buy-and-sell of small or basic items. We must also not forget that with the dawning of the Kasambahay Law, Solo Parent-Kasambahays must also be considered. Given the nature of their job, they cannot really benefit from Solo Parent leave credits.


6. Taxation and Single-Income Families

We must remember that financial concerns are still the main consideration for solo parents and the single, most common issue amongst all of them regardless of gender or economic status. Single-Income families experience concrete disadvantages because the family’s basic needs are the same as others, but the capacity to answer these needs depend only on a single individual. And we are not even talking about the human toll, the emotional stress and the psychological pressure that falls on one person.

To mitigate the impact on single income families, it has been suggested that the category “Head of the Family” again be restored as a possible basis for additional Personal Exemption on income taxes. The “Head of the Family” distinction may be appropriate especially for some who even have additional dependents such as elderly and sick parents.[12]

The current tax code merely imposes a P50,000 personal exemption for single or married individuals, and an additional P25,000 per child for up to four (4) kids. Still, it has been asserted that “Heads of Families” with multiple dependents should be considered as an altogether different class. An amendment to the tax code should not only bring back this “Head of the Family” as a higher personal exemption, but also acknowledge the existence of elderly sick and disabled parent as additional dependents.


7. Maximizing Child-Minding or Day Care Centers

On the other hand, many forget there are existing programs and services, facilities even, that may work for Solo Parents. Child-Minding and Day Care Centers are one resource that must be fully harnessed once again to add to the benefits of Solo Parents. One of the original purposes of these facilities is to provide a safe, and conducive child-caring, learning and socialization venue for parents and children alike. Since the passage of the Day Care Law, this system has been encouraged to be established and institutionalized in many private corporations and government offices. Hence, its importance must be revived once more as part of the many programs and services that must be properly harnessed and harmonized to add to the Solo Parents benefits.[13]


[1] Issue raised by the Solo Magulang ng Brgy. San Lorenzo (SOMA) representative during the April 2014 Round-Table Discussion on RA 8972 Implementation
[2] House Bills Nos. 596, 2658, and 2914 by Reps. Carol Jayne Lopez, Diosdado Macapagal Arroyo, and Emmi De Jesus, respectively
[3] Response of Atty. Alnie Foja of the Offfice of Rep. Emmi De Jesus/GABRIELA
[4]Statement from the private sector representative, Atty. Edsel, legal counsel of Mercury DrugStore
[5] Sharing of the TESDA representative during the regular quarterly NCMB meeting, Jan 2015
[6] Sharing of LGUs during the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 in Iloilo City, Region 6
[7] Sharing of the Solo Parents organizations during the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972in San Fernando City, Pampanga, Region III
[8] Sharing of Ms. Liezl Po of HAIN, Solo Parents Organization
[9] Sharing by the representative of the Bulacan Federation of Solo Parents during 2012 Forum in region 3
[10] Discussion during the RTD on RA 8972 implementation, April,24, 2015, DSWD Auditorium
[11] Sharing during the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 Implementation, Iloilo City, Region 6
[12] Sharing during the Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 in Tacloban City, Leyte, Region VIII
[13] Special Inter-Agency Meeting organized by the Social Technology Bureau, 2012