Who Are 'Solo Parents" under RA 8972

WHO are considered Solo Parents

Any analysis or review should begin with the law’s target or intended beneficiaries. Under RA 8972, there are ten (10) categories of who qualifies as a Solo Parent, and these are the following:

1)    A woman who gives birth as a result of rape or crimes against chastity, but has chosen to keep and raise the child;

2)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood due to the death of a spouse;

3)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood while spouse is detained of serving sentence for a criminal conviction for at least one (1) year;

4)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood due to physical and/or mental incapacity of the spouse as certified by a public medical practitioner;

5)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood due to legal or de facto separation for at least one (1)  year provided he/she is entrusted with the custody of the children;

6)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood due to declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage provided he/she is entrusted with the custody of the children;

7)    Parent left solo or alone with the responsibility of parenthood due to abandonment for at least one (1) year;

8)    Unmarried mother/father who chose to keep and rear her/his child/children instead of having others care for them or give them up to a welfare institution;

9)    Any other person who solely provides parental care and support to a child or children;

10)  Any family member who assumed the responsibility of Head of the Family as a result of death, abandonment, disappearance or prolonged absence of the parents.

Said definitions seem absolute, but there are still a lot of questions and confusion that have arisen. Firstly, there was some reference to those who have been annulled or whose marriages have been declared void ab initio, as well as those who are separated, either legally or de facto. However, there was no mention of “divorced” parents who are technically in the same context of “severed” partnerships. This matter would have significant implications for those who have been granted legal divorce abroad and for Muslim women in Mindanao who are covered by Sharia Law and are allowed divorce by Sharia Courts. Hence, the possible inclusion of divorce as a basis for being a Solo Parent must be duly considered.[1]

It has also been observed that the law considered any person providing sole parental care and support to a child can be considered a Solo Parent. However, the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) limited these “substitute” parents to court-appointed legal guardians and DSWD-licensed foster parents only. The clear exclusion of adoptive parents is quite glaring and it has been reasoned that single individuals become adoptive parents by choice and are not “forced” into the situation of rearing a child alone unlike the other categories.[2] However, such is also the case of legal guardians and foster parents; there is a degree of voluntariness and conscious effort required even if the final pronouncement comes from a court appointment or a DSWD license. Hence, it has been strongly opined that adoptive parents likewise be considered as a possible category of Solo Parents.

(Note that there is already a Civil Service Resolution granting special parental leave to a new adoptive parent who is single, although she cannot be deemed a having given birth under the normal maternity leave benefits.)

Another issue touches on the length of time; the one-year “waiting” period before one can be considered a Solo Parent has been criticized as being too long. Solo Parents cannot wait that long before they are eligible to enjoy benefits.[3] At the first instance they are left alone to fend for themselves and their children, assistance must be made available by the government. After a year, most would have adjusted already and managed to survive by whatever means. In fact, they may have already “moved on”, so to speak. Nonetheless, this is not the intention of the law. Single parents need help here and now. The State seeks to assist the single parent in this life-changing state and must provide interventions at the soonest available time so that the Solo Parent can “recover” fast enough. Therefore, one of the strongest arguments for amendments is on this aspect, reducing the 1 year period to a mere six (6) months. This would certainly have an impact for those who have detained or incarcerated spouses, those who are separated or have been abandoned by virtue or disappearance or prolonged absence.

B. Qualifying for Benefits: Redefining who is a Solo Parent

We must expand and clarify the definition of what is a “Solo Parent” in the context of the evolving Filipino family, especially in the light of labor migration. Previously, there was much resistance to this suggestion because OFW families are presumed to be “rich” and “well-off” due to remittances. However, the harsh reality is that a lot of these families become “abandoned” when prolonged absence lead to eventual complete and total absence of communication from the OFW spouse because they have found new partners or have new families abroad. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working on Migrant Workers Rights like Kanlungan Centre Foundation, Center for Migrant Advocacy and BATIS have all reported an increasing number of abandoned OFW families over the years.[4]

Thus, the issue of “abandoned” OFW families should be looked into in terms of: a) is there really a need to wait for a period of one (1) year abandonment to be declared a Solo Parent, or can it be shortened to three (3) to six (6) months?, b) what can be alternatives to the legal or documentary requirements of “proving” technical abandonment, and c) how about those who are no longer receiving regular financial support from OFW spouses and have completely lost communication with them? Note that this is especially hard for this kind of single parents and their families because they were used to receiving financial support for existing and continuing needs like children’s schooling, and were suddenly cut-off.

On the other hand, termination of benefits under RA 8972 is dependent on the finding or disclosure that the single parent now has a new partner. Once more, this presumption that just because the solo parent now has a lovelife, this translates automatically to having this new partner support her or him and the kids. A new boyfriend or girlfriend, albeit even a live-in partner, does not ensure that the kids will receive financial support or other material benefits from this new household member. Thus, the termination of Solo Parents benefits should depend upon the formal and technical effects of being legally married under Philippine law where mutual financial support can actually be compelled between people whose family relations are by affinity or consanguinity.

And what about same-sex couples?[5] Lesbian and/or gay partners can never marry under Philippine law, and technically shall never be considered legal spouses bound to provide mutual financial support. Since same-sex partners never enjoy any of the marital benefits or legal protections such as tax exemptions, conjugal properties, mutual social security or insurance benefits, etc., shall they now be precluded from enjoying privileges under the Solo Parents Act because they are now considered “partnered”? Hence, it not just an act of liberality on the part of LGUs who issue Solo Parents IDs to lesbians and gays with kids. It is actually an act of justice because legally and technically, these LGBT parents DO qualify under the law.[6]

In connection with this, we must keep in mind the Filipino “tradition” of becoming “adoptive” parents in the informal, albeit “illegal” sense. It is a common practice and an accepted cultural trait to welcome into the family home abandoned or homeless children, whether they are distant relatives or not. This is the so-called tradition of “pagkupkop at pagpapalaki”. Because of the additional legal expense and tedious process, most parents do not bother to go through the legal proceedings of becoming either adoptive or foster parents, or legal guardians. Such is the case for many urban poor folks and not so-well off families, including alternative household set-ups like LGBT families. Understandably, it is still in the best interest of the child (and the parent) to have some legal basis for the proper exercise of parental authority and custody. But can we not “reward” their good intentions by making them eligible for Solo Parents benefits?

Another issue pertains to pregnant women who will clearly inevitably become single parents. Presently, they appear to not qualify because they haven’t given birth yet, but they already have some immediate material needs. The law seems to require that the child be born already before the mother becomes eligible. The issue brings us to the formal definition of a child for purposes of inheritance and other legal protections. Civil law states that if a child is born alive and survives for at least 72 hours after its birth, it shall have legal personality and all the rights it is entitled to. Nonetheless, it has been suggested that pregnant mothers who are bound to become solo parents should be considered as Solo Parents eligible for benefits starting from their last trimester at the very least.[7]

---

[1] Issue raised in the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 held in Agua Frio Resort, Koronadal City, Region12

[2] Response during a discussion on RA 8972 lead by the Social Technology Bureau, Sept 2012

[3] Raised during the Nov 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972, San Fernando City, La Union, Region 1

[4] Proceedings of the Policy Forum on “The Evolving Filipino Family: Emerging Trends and Related Issues, May 12, 2011

[5]Open Forum, Policy Forum on LGBT Rights/SOGIE Issues in Social Protection, February 2015 

[6] Sharing of SOLO-QC, East Kamias representative on being inclusive and LGBT-friendly, RTD, April 2015

[7] Issue raised at the 2012 Forum-Workshop on RA 8972 held at the DSWD-NCR, Legarda, Manila

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

Single Parenting in the Philippines

Single parenthood may have a variety of reasons and may take on different forms - be it overseas work, abandonment, widowhood, incarceration, legal or de facto separation, annulment, adoption, or a child out of wedlock due to poor education and promotion of methods of contraception.  But in this day and age, as a matter of social statement on the respect for life and women’s reproductive rights, it must be expressed as a State policy that a solo parent’s brave choice and genuine struggle to raise a child alone even in adverse circumstances should be lauded and commended. 

In 2000, Solo Parents constituted 2.9 or nearly 3 million of the country’s population. A more recent World Health Organization-funded study by the Department of Health (DOH) and the University of the Philippines – National Institute for Health (UP-NIH) placed the number of solo parents at 14 to 15 percent of the estimated 94 million Filipinos. Today, around 13.9 or 14 million Filipinos are solo parents struggling to support their families and raise their children alone. According to the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), there are around three (3) million children in solo parent homes in the Philippines today. These are children of single parents, widows, and kids of migrants or overseas workers.

DSWD records show that under the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), 170,000 beneficiaries are Solo Parents. And in the DSWD alone where the organizing and empowerment of Solo Parents was first piloted as a “support group”, there are more than 200 solo parent-employees nationwide.[1]

It cannot be denied that this phenomenon may have dire implications and consequences. Several international organizations involved in the development of Asia are concerned about the high ratio of single moms in the Philippines because it threatens to become a socio-economic menace. For example, some single moms may not be able to afford education for some or all of her kids and in most circumstances, such children can take to drug abuse and/or crime. In view of the existing poverty and low education, such children can also become ideal recruits for any terror network or human trafficking - since job opportunities for these citizens will be lower. Some studies have shown that female children of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) left in the care of grandparents or relatives are also prone to becoming single parents themselves.

Meanwhile, there have been reports of parish priests in Catholic churches turning away children for baptisms because the parents cannot produce a marriage certificate. Some private Catholic schools are also said to be refusing admission to children because their parents are not married or are separated.[2]

Clearly, we need progressive State policies on the evolving nature of the Filipino Family that will acknowledge, recognize and respect the existence of “alternative” families or the varying compositions of the family. In addition, we need policies that must address the issues of stigma and discrimination being experienced by children of solo parents from private Catholic schools which technically deprive them of their right to a high quality education.

---

[1] Concept Note of the RTD on Solo Parents held last April 24, 2015, DSWD Auditorium

[2] Proceedings of the PDPB Policy Forum, “The Evolving Filipino Family: Emerging Trends and Related Issues”,  May 12, 2011