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
No comments:
Post a Comment