Monday, July 27, 2015

Republic Act # 8972: The Solo Parents Act of 2000



RA 8972:  The Solo Parents and their Children Act of 2000

On November 7, 2000, Republic Act 8972 or the Solo Parents Welfare Act was signed into law. It mandated the development of a comprehensive package of social, developmental and welfare services for solo parents and their families. The law also mandated the national government agencies (NGAs), non-government organizations (NGOs), and local government units (LGUs) to pool their resources and participate in an inter-agency effort to help the solo parents.

            This law was a mere page and a half; quite short compared to other social welfare legislation intending to address the needs of a whole “new” category of a vulnerable and marginalized sector which also has many cross-cutting and intersecting concerns with other sectors like women and children. Given the many sectoral issues it seeks to face, including a potential gamut of socio-economic problems like family financial support, education and healthcare, it appeared “rushed” and not really well-thought of.

While admittedly, it was passed by Congress as a means to satisfy the clamor for gender equality, women being the more common single parents, it should have been based on more solid evidence, such as a clear assessment of the actual needs and concerns of Solo Parents. The provisions on benefits and privileges were not thoroughly fleshed-out and resulted in the intention of the law getting “lost in translation”.

It is true that every law should provide for a framework, a “skeleton” so to speak, to express the real objective behind the measure. It is upon which the Implementing Rules and Regulations will rely on to anchor its own specific provisions detailing the operationalization of the law, without departing or veering too far from the original and true intent of the legislation.   

Unfortunately, the problem with RA 8972 is that there was not much to hang on to. It failed to cite the specific mechanism by which the different agencies were to operationalize the Solo Parents Act. In fact, because the provisions did not provide clear instructions or directions for operationalization, the comprehensive benefits package supposedly developed, as lead by DSWD, to be extended to single parents was not implemented well. Except for the issuance of Solo Parents Identification Cards and a few referrals for financial assistance and legal counseling, solo parents themselves believe the law is all about leave benefits at work, and did not apply to the majority of them who are not in the formal, employed sector.[1]

In addition, the law failed to mention the establishment of an actual monitoring and coordinating body which will primarily be in-charge of implementation. Meanwhile, Article VI, Section 28 of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the Solo Parents Act (RA 8972) provided for  “a special review and monitoring committee comprised of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Department of Health (DOH),  Department of Education (DepEd), Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Commission on Higher Education (CHED), Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), National Housing Authority (NHA), Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) and other related government agencies and non-government organizations or civil society involved in the implementation of the provisions of the Act”. DSWD was tasked to head this inter-agency review committee for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness and relevance of the provisions of the Act to the current situation of the solo parents.

This act to correct a seeming gap in the law was highly irregular. The Special Review Committee (SRC) was created only by virtue of the IRR, thereby putting the legitimacy of this inter-agency body in question because they were not included in the law itself, and any additional provision outside the original law may be considered ultra vires. Thus, when several member agencies were not active or refused to make any concrete commitments under RA 8972, they could not be compelled by the SRC chaired by the DSWD because there was nothing specific in the law directing them to actually provide clear programs or services.

Other obvious defects are the clear disparities between the law and the IRR. These include the reference to the Department of Education (DepEd) when the law stated Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS), and the poverty threshold criteria as being determined by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) in the law while the IRR assigned this role to the National Statistical Coordinating Board (NSCB).     

It also did not help that the IRR was only finished after two (2) years from the passage of RA 8972, even when the law specifically mandated that the IRR be formulated within ninety (90) days only. This delay could have possibly added further to implementation problems, and could be indicative of the apparent “neglect” of this law.

In 2003, the DSWD issued two (2) Administrative Orders (AOs) namely A.O. No. 38, Series of 2003 or the ”Guidelines on the Assessment of Solo Parents” and A.O. No. 86 Series of 2003 or the “Guidelines in the Implementation of Psychosocial Services for Solo Parents and their Children.” These guidelines were issued to ensure partnership and collaboration among agencies in relation to the implementation of the program at all levels. Roles and responsibilities stipulated in these Administrative Orders are provided for in the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) and presumably agreed upon by member agencies. Still various problems cropped up, highlighting a variety of gaps and loopholes which can be traced back to the weaknesses in the law itself. For certain, the law and its IRR left much to be desired to the chagrin of the poor Solo Parents sector.


[1] Discussion during the RTD on Solo Parents Implementation, April 24, 2015

No comments:

Post a Comment