NationStates Jolt Archive

Arr!!! Orphans be a problem, and we be lookin' to fix that.

The Orphans Protection Act


To the nations of the World Assembly;

Recognizing that orphans and homeless children are some of the most vulnerable of all persons in any society and are often ignored or abused;

Recognizing that violence, drugs, war, famine, social chaos, disease and prejudice in many nations have resulted in an unprecedented number of children who are abandoned as orphans or who have become homeless;

Recognizing that the rights of orphans and homeless children are often ignored or simply not recognized;

Deploring the terrible conditions that these children suffer in;

Finding this situation to be unacceptable, enacts the following:

1. Member nations are encouraged in the strongest possible terms to fund the construction and staffing of orphanages and shelters for homeless children as the situation in their nation merits. These facilities should be of a quality that is suitable for habitation on a long term basis and should also provide food and medical attention to all residents. Food and medical expenses may be incurred by the WA General Fund.

2. Member nations are strongly encouraged to establish appropriate child welfare agencies to oversee the well-being of these children and to manage the distribution of aid. Additionally, these agencies are strongly urged to share information to facilitate intranational and international adoptions and to work with other national child welfare agencies to create a strong network of aid distribution to those in need.

3. The World Assembly Child Housing Authority (WACHA) is hereby established to do the following:

(i) Compile a database of all known homeless or orphaned children currently residing in WA nations who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes. The governments of WA member nations shall submit, bi-annually, a report detailing the number of homeless or orphaned children living within their nation who are awaiting placement in a permanant home, either within, or outside their nation. The report shall include the child's age, sex, name (if known), pertinent medical information as allowed by WA law and any other details considered relevent to the child's case.

(ii) Act as a clearinghouse for coordinating the efforts of accredited adoption agencies and child-advocacy groups in WA nations, and to assist in the effort to place these children in permanent, stable homes.

4. Member nations are reminded that many homeless children, particularly runaways, may be reluctant to accept aid and assistance from government agencies or recognized charities due to fears that they will be forced into an unacceptable situation, e.g., returned to an abusive home. Therefore, it is suggested that aid and assistance be provided in a no-threat environment with assured confidentiality for all clients, but with the goal of eventually placing these children in an officially recognized shelter, orphanage or foster home, or if possible, returning them to their parents or an acceptable guardian.

Principally authored by Iron Felix.

First revisions be HERE!!!! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=584948&page=2)
Second Revisions be HERE!!!! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14633771&postcount=37)

Hon. Ambassador, I agree in principle. I shall sort out the minutiae. Delightfully well-written.

Yours truly,

We will be highly in favour of this statute, honoured Ambassador and will press upon our regional delegate the case for approving it in this form should you be inclined to forward it for that purpose.

We will be honoured to offer our support for it should it achieve quorum and be brought to vote.

Yours sincerely,

A fantastic proposal.
Job well done, ambassador.

I myself, being an orphan, know the hardships they must overcome in life.
I shall drink to this proposal tonight, and in the name of Blasted Pirates.
Yarh.


Ambassador of Unibot
Eduard Heir

Credit for the original must be given to that pistol toting commie, Iron Felix. I merely reworded certain things to bring it into compliance with laws that have already been passed. I'm going to submit for a trial run tonight.

Oh, and Arr!! Endorse or be slapped around with a herring.

It will come as little surprise we are sure to note that we are broadly in favour of this act. The WACHA is a useful entity to set up. We are, however, a little bemused that articles 1 and 2 are mere encouragements, given the careful qualifying of their necessity, and are distinctly disappointed by the lack of "Arr!!"s in the good captain's rendition.

In practical terms, may we suggest that "bi-annually" is a slightly fraught word to use. There have been arguments in the past as to whether the term is intended to indicate "twice each year" or "every two years", and we have little doubt that nations who wish to be obstreperous in the matter would choose the latter. Given that the proposal does not appear to be under space pressure, might we suggest spelling out the preferred option out in full?

First, I am obviously in full support of this effort. At the present time it is not possible for me to hold WA membership, but I have the utmost confidence in comrade pirate Dawson's ability to pass this urgently needed legislation.

We are, however, a little bemused that articles 1 and 2 are mere encouragements, given the careful qualifying of their necessity,
When writing the original I struggled over the question of whether those should be mandatory. I eventually opted to make them "strongly urging" clauses since I felt that some nations would be financially unable to comply. With supplementary funding provided by the WA General Fund they could now be made mandatory, and possibly should be.

In practical terms, may we suggest that "bi-annually" is a slightly fraught word to use. There have been arguments in the past as to whether the term is intended to indicate "twice each year" or "every two years", and we have little doubt that nations who wish to be obstreperous in the matter would choose the latter. Given that the proposal does not appear to be under space pressure, might we suggest spelling out the preferred option out in full?
I concur with this suggestion. I will provide more detailed wording this weekend.

Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky
Chairman, Yeldan Committee For State Security

When writing the original I struggled over the question of whether those should be mandatory. I eventually opted to make them "strongly urging" clauses since I felt that some nations would be financially unable to comply. With supplementary funding provided by the WA General Fund they could now be made mandatory, and possibly should be.




We might have made this suggestion ourselves, but we have become accustomed to being rebuked for suggesting that clauses which urge only are no longer necessary if they are important in nature.

Yours,

... and are distinctly disappointed by the lack of "Arr!!"s in the good captain's rendition.



You best believe I thought long and hard about adding one.

I submitted it before I should have, but I think she'll sail as written. This will be a sea trial before she be sent fer active duty.

The concept of bi-annually is suppose to mean twice a year. Semi-annually is suppose to mean once every two years. Bi-annually should be the term to use, but I'll yield to Comrade Felix before a re-work.

As to the strength, it also crossed my mind to make mandates since I've made the General Fund incur some of the costs. In actuality it should probably fund the whole thing, but then we run into a situation like the VRA which could cause concern from some nations, like those damn Froods. :D

There's just something in the back of my mind that makes me think that these shelters will actually end up being built better than some of the homes in many nations, but that in itself opens a can of eels.

*rustles through the mound of paperwork she was just delivered* Apparently, Madam Delegate's opinion runs a bit on the... verbose as far as this one is concerned. In general, she seems to be in favor of the proposal's intent, though it appears.... yes here it is...

"The gross lack of the mandated oversight and inspection of affected facilities, including, but not limited to: 1) general, psychological, and criminal screening of personnel, foster families, and potential adoptive parents; 2) annual review of all financial dealings associated with the facilities and those in its employ; 3) non-scheduled, random, regular visitations and inspections of facilities by qualified personnel trained in rooting out and dealing with cases of abuse and neglect; 4) the formation of a department whose sole priority is to investigate and prosecute any such cases to the fullest extent of the laws of the nation(s) in which they occur; 5) periodic scheduled and non-scheduled visitations of standard inspection personnel to the adoptive families of newly relocated youths; as well as the lack of transitional services for those youths who remain as wards of the state beyond the age of majority, without which this administration will issue a statement lacking in support for this proposal, is to be corrected with utmost haste in order to fully provide and properly care for the affected youths."

There are further details and emotional appeals, but those statements are marked as the core of her objections. She wishes me to "make abundantly clear to all concerned" that children's rights are particularly high on her international agenda, and she "will make all efforts and pursue all actions to that end with the greatest political weight and authority" endowed in her by the office of World Assembly Delegacy. I'm not sure that's really a word, but I couldn't think of a more succinct way to put it. As I said, Madam is verbose.

We have to be careful on some of those issues, trying to define what constitutes someone who is psychologically unsound is tricky business. Abuse and neglect is covered by the Child Protection Act, but not beyond the age of majority, which we take for granted is the age at which a child is considered an adult. I do like the idea of random inspections. At the moment, it's been submitted as is for a trial run, which may have been a bad move on my part. I don't think it will meet quorum without a TG campaign, but rather than withdraw it I'll do a counter TG to keep it from reaching the floor so it can be reworked.

What sort of transitional services did you have in mind? I'd thought about adding something about half-way houses as well, but there's no way to mandate them I don't think.

*taps her new earpiece that allows her to directly communicate on behalf of the Honored Delegate*


*ahem* Madam Delegate would like to point out that the definition of psychological stability, due to its differing basis in various nations, need not be defined in the proposal itself. The individuals being evaluated would be judged based on the standards of the nation in which they reside. Those who are in charge of evaluations would be selected from among the best of applicants from each nation who have been trained to do such analysis according to the highest educational standards of their nation. Nations whose educational systems do not include such fields of study will be objectively evaluated and analyzed in order to determine the societally accepted psychological standards of those nations so that subjective analysis of personnel, foster families, and potential adoptive parents can be achieved.

She also emphasizes that randomized visitations for abuse and neglect inspections impede an abuser's ability to effectively hide their actions and any evidence of these actions, whereas an abuser who knows when the inspection is coming can fairly easily plan ahead and conceal their horrendous practices. This statement has been made for the benefit of those who may object later in the debate.

As far as transitional services, Madam's concerns center around assistance with job placement, educational services on par with the standards of each individual nation, assistance with pursuit of higher education as desired by each youth or exiting adult, assisted living or assisted personal residence searching, financial orientation that instructs adults exiting the system in maintaining intelligent financial self-monitoring and fiscal maintenance, and the assignment of case managers for each individual whose job it is to check in on each individual periodically until it has been determined that they are fully capable of caring for themselves as an adult in their society. Additional provisions may, of course, be included as necessary.

On the subject of halfway houses, Madam Delegate states that she considers them an inappropriate subject for this proposal as they are also instruments for the rehabilitation of addicts, paroled legal offenders, and certain varieties of individuals recently discharged from residential psychiatric facilities. She does not find such locations to be suitable instruments in the transitioning of orphaned and abandoned youths into majority society.


*taps her earpiece to turn it off* On a personal note, I really don't see why the World Assembly cannot mandate transitional services if it can mandate equal-opportunity marital union, forbid extreme forms of punishment and interrogation, dictate the behavior of self-labeled neutral nations in times of war, determine and require a subjective minimum payment rate for employees, prohibit the treatment of human citizens as saleable property (I'll assume the usage of the word "human" rather than the phrase "sapient citizen" to be an unintentional oversight), establish individual freedoms that effectively prohibit certain methods of national governance, and in general require full and exceptionless compliance with any measure passed by majority consensus of its assembled members, let alone all of them.

Briefly put, sir, we are in the business of mandate governance. It is what we do. To approach these matters with any other mindset is self-defeating and, if you'll pardon my saying so, moderately delusional.

*curtsies* I, of course, mean no offense by my statement. I am merely divulging my viewpoint. Never assume that any statement I make is of a judgmental or personally critical unless such is made blatantly obvious by manner of explicit directional intent. By which I mean if I mean to insult you, I will name names, and there will be no ambiguity. So worry not. *smiles*

The Republic of Quenlong is shocked that there not already such provisions in place. We also agree that the original proposal was a little... lacking.

We feel the "strongly encourageds" should be made into mandates. To not do so is to leave an open door for all manner of excuses for non-compliance. Being that the youth are the citizens of the future it is imperative that the utmost care be taken in their regard, for the benefit of the nations themselves as well as the World Assembly as a whole.

The Illustrious Renae brings a most valid point regarding random inspections for spotting and preventing abuse. We cannot allow WACHA to become an excuse for institutionalized and government sponsored systems of abuse.

As for the meaning of bi-annually Quenlong agrees that this should mean twice a year, and that it should be clarified so no nation can attempt to bypass their responsibilities through semantic misunderstandings.

Without these three corrections the Republic of Quenlong will be unable to muster enough internal support to back this statute. If it can be redrafted with them included I will pleased to announce Quenlong's full support.

Here I have some suggested changes, based on the comments that have been offered so far. We can work on specific wording later, but these things do need to be added.

1. I believe the wording should be changed so that the reports are submitted annually. Just change that part of 3(i).

2. The random inspections are a very good idea. That can be added to Article 3 as a sub-clause (iii). We should probably specify a minimum number of these inspections in a set time frame, a year perhaps, but let the WACHA determine the specific timing of them (to keep them truly random and "surprise").

3. Articles 1 and 2 should be mandatory. Nations should be required to fund the construction and operation of the facilities to the best of their financial abilities and as their local situation merits. Any shortfalls can be covered by the WA General Fund. The amount of appropriate WA funding can be determined by the WACHA. However, we need to specify some sort of guidelines or standards here to ensure that nations that can afford to pay do not attempt to get the WA to fund the entire project. Also we do not want WACHA withholding funds from nations that truly cannot afford the projects.

The object of this is to construct and fund these facilities but we want the financial aspects to be fair to all parties. This part may take quite a bit of work. We also might think about WA matching funds for all nations, even those who can afford to finance the facilities on their own. This could induce governments to take a greater interest in the project.

4. The transitional services would indeed be helpful, especially for older teens who are about to enter either the workforce or higher education. We need to remember that some of these children, particularly the older ones, will enter the adult world directly from these facilities.

Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky
Chairman, Yeldan Committee For State Security

Arr!!! Orphans be a problem, and we be lookin' to fix that.
My government has a question about the current wording of the section that I am emphasising in this clause _

2. Member nations are strongly encouraged to establish appropriate child welfare agencies to oversee the well-being of these children and to manage the distribution of aid. Additionally, these agencies are strongly urged to share information to facilitate intranational and international adoptions and to work with other national child welfare agencies to create a strong network of aid distribution to those in need.
Is this urging meant to increase the number of such adoptions, which is an idea for which we see no need, or simply to ease any that might be happening anyway?


Borrin o Redwood,
Chairbear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly,
for
The High Council of Clans,
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed.

Is this urging meant to increase the number of such adoptions, which is an idea for which we see no need, or simply to ease any that might be happening anyway?
It is hoped that most adoptions would be intranational rather than international. I also would see no need to increase the number of international adoptions unless there simply were not enough willing adoptive parents to place the children domestically. Perhaps that sentence needs to be restructured to clarify that.

Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky
Chairman, Yeldan Committee For State Security

These are the new revisions. I'm trying to find another way to enforce the mandates other than saying "authorized" nothing clicked in my head so I left it.

The Orphans Protection Act

To the nations of the World Assembly;

Recognizing that orphans and homeless children are some of the most vulnerable of all persons in any society and are often ignored or abused;

Recognizing that violence, drugs, war, famine, social chaos, disease and prejudice in many nations have resulted in an unprecedented number of children who are abandoned as orphans or who have become homeless;

Recognizing that the rights of orphans and homeless children are often ignored or simply not recognized;

Deploring the terrible conditions that these children suffer in;

Finding this situation to be unacceptable, enacts the following:

1. Member nations are hereby authorized to fund the construction of orphanages and shelters for homeless children. Funding shall be matched by the WA General Fund to all nations, to ensure nations that are in financial crisis will have the ability to construct said shelters. These facilities should be of a quality that is suitable for habitation on a long term basis and should also provide food and medical attention to all residents. The General Fund shall also incur the expense of food and medicine, as well as the overall staffing and upkeep of these facilities.

2. Member nations are authorized to establish the appropriate child welfare agencies to oversee the well-being of these children and to manage the distribution of aid. Additionally, these agencies are strongly urged to share information to facilitate intranational and international adoptions and to work with other national child welfare agencies to create a strong network of aid distribution to those in need.

3. The World Assembly Child Housing Authority (WACHA) is hereby established to do the following:

(i) Compile a database of all known homeless or orphaned children currently residing in WA nations who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes. The governments of WA member nations shall submit, annually, a report detailing the number of homeless or orphaned children living within their nation who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes, either within, or outside their nation. The report shall include the child's age, sex, name (if known), pertinent medical information as allowed by WA law and any other details considered relevent to the child's case.

(ii) Act as a clearinghouse for coordinating the efforts of accredited adoption agencies and child-advocacy groups in WA nations, and to assist in the effort to place these children in permanent, stable homes.

(iii) Shall conduct, at a minimum, three inspections per annum to households that have adopted a homeless or orphaned child within the previous five years. These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA, and no notice is to be given to the adoptive families prior to said inspection.

(iv) The number of inspections per annum shall not exceed five. The criteria involved in the inspection shall be left to the administration to determine on a case by case basis. However, these inspections shall include; cleanliness of the home, overall health of the adopted and the state of well being of the family on the whole.

4. Member nations are reminded that many homeless children, particularly runaways, may be reluctant to accept aid and assistance from government agencies or recognized charities due to fears that they will be forced into an unacceptable situation, e.g., returned to an abusive home. Therefore, it is suggested that aid and assistance be provided in a no-threat environment with assured confidentiality for all clients, but with the goal of eventually placing these children in an officially recognized shelter, orphanage or foster home, or if possible, returning them to their parents or an acceptable guardian.

Principally authored by Iron Felix.

On the subject of transitional services, perhaps that will be best left in another resolution since this one is getting a bit long. My way of thinking is that until they reach the age of majority they will be in one of these houses. Then the Fair Living Wage kicks in after they get a job. Something for the time between the age of majority and the time in which they get a job would need to be covered by something else. My opinion.

" Authorised " could be replaced with " enjoined " honoured Ambassador.


Yours,

Yes, I think "enjoined" would work well. Also, iii.a? The People of Aundotutunagir oppose this and recommend the use of iv or iiii.

Indeed we would concur with the Noble General " IV " would make much more sense than " IIIa "

(iii) Shall conduct, at a minimum, three inspections per annum to households that have adopted a homeless or orphaned child within the previous five years. These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA, and no notice is to be given to the adoptive families prior to said inspection.

Just to point out a slight flaw that I see... What occurs if the family is on holiday? If no notice is given, then how will the family know not to go out of town? Or are they barred from doing so due to the nature of these surprise inspections?

I do believe it's going a little overboard to require 3 per year for 5 years. 3 for the first year I can understand. Then once a year after that. Personally I think 3 per year for 5 years is likely to actually discourage adoptions from taking place. Would you want to be under a microscope 3 times a year for 5 years?

Paula Jenner

Yes, I think "enjoined" would work well. Also, iii.a? The People of Aundotutunagir oppose this and recommend the use of iv or iiii.


Is there nothing you aren't opposed to?:D

I started to make it (iv) but it didn't seem right because it's not a new clause so to speak but a continuation of clause (iii). I'll change it though.

Just to point out a slight flaw that I see... What occurs if the family is on holiday? If no notice is given, then how will the family know not to go out of town? Or are they barred from doing so due to the nature of these surprise inspections?

I do believe it's going a little overboard to require 3 per year for 5 years. 3 for the first year I can understand. Then once a year after that. Personally I think 3 per year for 5 years is likely to actually discourage adoptions from taking place. Would you want to be under a microscope 3 times a year for 5 years?

I thought the same thing as I was writing it. I suppose if the family is not home, the inspector would return at a later date. The WACHA would be in charge of making the call, I don't want to put that in the proposal since that would be micromanaging the organization.

As for the number of inspections, I put that out there to get a feel for what everyone thinks is acceptable. I admit three times a year for five years is a bit much. Perhaps 3 times for the first, and once a year for the next three? Again, I just want to see how everyone feels about it.

I thought the same thing as I was writing it. I suppose if the family is not home, the inspector would return at a later date. The WACHA would be in charge of making the call, I don't want to put that in the proposal since that would be micromanaging the organization.


Ahh. Perhaps whether or not the visit is without prior notice should be left up to each nation to decide. It seems rather harsh to not give notice. If notice is given and the family is not around, then there's reason to worry.


As for the number of inspections, I put that out there to get a feel for what everyone thinks is acceptable. I admit three times a year for five years is a bit much. Perhaps 3 times for the first, and once a year for the next three? Again, I just want to see how everyone feels about it.

Yes, something like 3 times the first year and once a year for two or three years afterward would be best. At least for a minimum. If the situation warrants it, then by all means, they should have the right to inspect more often. My concern is that it will cause resentment as written among the families who do adopt. No one likes to be put under a microscope. The less they feel that way the better for them and the child.

Paula Jenner

Ahh. Perhaps whether or not the visit is without prior notice should be left up to each nation to decide. It seems rather harsh to not give notice. If notice is given and the family is not around, then there's reason to worry.

Which is why I think Felix and myself would rather have unanounced visits to prevent families from fleeing, or presenting a false representation of their lives.

Yes, something like 3 times the first year and once a year for two or three years afterward would be best. At least for a minimum. If the situation warrants it, then by all means, they should have the right to inspect more often. My concern is that it will cause resentment as written among the families who do adopt. No one likes to be put under a microscope. The less they feel that way the better for them and the child.

Paula Jenner


That's what I had in mind with this, "These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA..." I could clear it up a bit. Right now, I have a couple other things that I'm working on, so I'll give it another day or so to get more input before I revise again.

We are inclined to agree with the 3 in the first year, then go with one guaranteed inspection in years 2-5, but with more or less at the discretion of the WACHA.

If you would so choose to go with the 3 but no more than 5 in a year approach, would the WACHA have authority to do more than five should a case warranted it??

Either way is good with me, I mean its nice to see someone actually wanting to take care of the childrens in placement.

In Article 1, rather than build an small hospital in any of the shelters in my nations why couldnt we take them to any of our hospitals to receive any/all the medical attention they would need. Then when their condition is stable or they're released, we bring them back to the shelter.

We have no problem feeding the children, but to limit liablility concerns and lawsuits against our Shelters we would proivde in this statute; we would rather take the ill/injured to the Hospital where they have(or should) everything thing at the ready for any medical emergancy that should arise.

In Article 1, rather than build an small hospital in any of the shelters in my nations why couldnt we take them to any of our hospitals to receive any/all the medical attention they would need. Then when their condition is stable or they're released, we bring them back to the shelter.

We have no problem feeding the children, but to limit liablility concerns and lawsuits against our Shelters we would proivde in this statute; we would rather take the ill/injured to the Hospital where they have(or should) everything thing at the ready for any medical emergancy that should arise.

That is an idea, but I think the medical personel working in the shelter's clinic should be able to determine what they are capable of doing and what is a case that needs to be handled by a hospital. I can add something to that effect, but I think most will take it for granted that's how it works. Maybe I should add something about qualified medical personel in the shelter.

As far as inspections, I think five is plenty. Six would be once every two months, so that gets a little predicatable, if you make it an odd number the chance for randomness is increased. Besides, I don't want the WACHA to become discriminative, we have to restict them to an extent.

Which is why I think Felix and myself would rather have unanounced visits to prevent families from fleeing, or presenting a false representation of their lives.

Understandable. If fleeing or false representation is a potential problem, why not make foster or adoptive families take parenting classes and counseling prior to adoption or fostering? Inspections prior to allowing the child in the home is also a possibility. Also, are private adoption agencies required to follow these rules? There may be many nations that have such private agencies in a high number that it may be difficult to regulate them all. Just a thought.

That's what I had in mind with this, "These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA..." I could clear it up a bit. Right now, I have a couple other things that I'm working on, so I'll give it another day or so to get more input before I revise again.

Yes. A minimum is good. A maximum is not. If, by chance, a child is placed in a home that is not up to standards, which the home should be by the time a child is placed with them, then the WACHA should have the right to go in and inspect as often as they like in order to ensure the health and safety of the child.

I am very pleased that someone else has drafted this piece of legislation. It was on my tablet of things to do after the Child Protection Act, but I had gotten distracted. I thank the honorable Ambassadors for drafting this and working diligently to see it completed.

Paula Jenner

1. Member nations are hereby authorized to fund the construction of orphanages and shelters for homeless children.I rather thought that we could do so already...

I rather thought that we could do so already...

I couldn't think of another way to put it, we'll likely be going with enjoined.

So the clauses are to be optional then?

No, they're going to be mandatory, but now that I'm looking at enjoined it isn't really better than saying "urges". I'm trying to figure out how to say "you are required by law to build these" without saying "We demand that these be built." Right now I'm still drawing a blank, mind you I haven't had much time in the past few days to work on it.

What exactly is the problem in saying "mandates"?

No, they're going to be mandatory, but now that I'm looking at enjoined it isn't really better than saying "urges". I'm trying to figure out how to say "you are required by law to build these" without saying "We demand that these be built." Right now I'm still drawing a blank, mind you I haven't had much time in the past few days to work on it.If you do make it clearly mandatory then please reinstate the qualifier "according to their needs" that an earlier draft contained, too, so that nations where the situation is already well under control through other means (such as by having networks of such large extended families, or clans, that there's always somebody to adopt an orphan if necessary) -- so that they have no need for orphanages -- aren't forced to build places that will never actually be used...

No, they're going to be mandatory, but now that I'm looking at enjoined it isn't really better than saying "urges". I'm trying to figure out how to say "you are required by law to build these" without saying "We demand that these be built." Right now I'm still drawing a blank, mind you I haven't had much time in the past few days to work on it.

You sould say "requires" honoured Ambassador ..


Yours,

You sould say "requires" honoured Ambassador ..


Yours,


That's more than likely how I'll word it, with the provisions that Bears Armed mentioned.

{OOC}If I seem dumb, it's because pollen is starting to fall here with the warm weather. And, it looks like this year it's messing with me more than usual. Just the light from the pc screen bothers me more than usual, and I just haven't been thinking clearly. I'll have another revision done tonight though.{/OOC}

The Orphans Protection Act

The nations of the World Assembly;

Recognizing that orphans and homeless children are some of the most vulnerable of all persons in any society and are often ignored or abused;

Recognizing that violence, drugs, war, famine, social chaos, disease and prejudice in many nations have resulted in an unprecedented number of children who are abandoned as orphans or who have become homeless;

Recognizing that the rights of orphans and homeless children are often ignored or simply not recognized;

Deploring the terrible conditions that these children suffer in;

Finding this situation to be unacceptable, enacts the following:

1. Member nations are hereby required to fund the construction of orphanages and shelters for homeless children as the situation in their nation merits. Funding shall be matched by the WA General Fund to all nations, to ensure nations that are in financial crisis will have the ability to construct said shelters. These facilities should be of a quality that is suitable for habitation on a long term basis and should also provide food and medical attention to all residents, and that medical practices should be carried out by qualified persons who meet or surpass the medical standards as set forth by the nation. The General Fund shall also incur the expense of food and medicine, as well as the overall staffing and upkeep of these facilities.

2. Member nations are further required to establish the appropriate child welfare agencies to oversee the well-being of these children and to manage the distribution of aid. Additionally, these agencies are strongly urged to share information to facilitate intranational and international adoptions and to work with other national child welfare agencies to create a strong network of aid distribution to those in need.

3. The World Assembly Child Housing Authority (WACHA) is hereby established to do the following:

(i) Compile a database of all known homeless or orphaned children currently residing in WA nations who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes. The governments of WA member nations shall submit, annually, a report detailing the number of homeless or orphaned children living within their nation who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes, either within, or outside their nation. The report shall include the child's age, sex, name (if known), pertinent medical information as allowed by WA law and any other details considered relevent to the child's case.

(ii) Act as a clearinghouse for coordinating the efforts of accredited adoption agencies and child-advocacy groups in WA nations, and to assist in the effort to place these children in permanent, stable homes.

(iii) Shall conduct, at a minimum, three inspections per annum to households that have adopted a homeless or orphaned child within the previous five years. These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA, and no notice is to be given to the adoptive families prior to said inspection.

(iv) The number of inspections per annum shall be at the discretion of the WACHA. The criteria involved in the inspection shall be left to the administration to determine on a case by case basis. However, these inspections shall include; cleanliness of the home, overall health of the adopted and the state of well being of the family on the whole.

4. Member nations are reminded that many homeless children, particularly runaways, may be reluctant to accept aid and assistance from government agencies or recognized charities due to fears that they will be forced into an unacceptable situation, e.g., returned to an abusive home. Therefore, it is suggested that aid and assistance be provided in a no-threat environment with assured confidentiality for all clients, but with the goal of eventually placing these children in an officially recognized shelter, orphanage or foster home, or if possible, returning them to their parents or an acceptable guardian.

Principally authored by Iron Felix.

This is the latest version. I think I covered everything we had discussed, if not let me know.

Hon. Captain, this draft receives my full support.

Gnoria suggests the addition of language to the effect that WACHA could promote safety and efficacy of international adoptions.

Douglas Moore
Secy. to the WA

I'm going to re-submit this tonight, but I wont have much time to TG for it. If anyone would like to do so, I will have the generic TG posted later.

I'm going to re-submit this tonight, but I wont have much time to TG for it. If anyone would like to do so, I will have the generic TG posted later.
Sunday would be better. Activity drops off on the weekends.

It's already in, but I plan to resubmit after the weekend if it doesn't go through. I figure with a resolution coming to vote tomorrow, I can catch some delegates, and then catch more as the vote draws to a close.

It's already in, but I plan to resubmit after the weekend if it doesn't go through. I figure with a resolution coming to vote tomorrow, I can catch some delegates, and then catch more as the vote draws to a close.
That might work and I can probably send some Sunday night. Let me know who you've contacted by Sunday or where you stopped or whatever.

John K. Lanting Secretary of State gives reads a message from Stephen Lockett dictator of Droa

The Dictatorship of Droa strongly supports this motion, and hopes to have gain support from the Andar.

Having temporarily acquired the delegacy of another region, I am proud to approve this proposal.

While I'd love to give this my approval, the WA has seen fit to strip me of my delegacy so I can't.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

This is going to expire tomorrow, and after it does, I will be re-submitting it and will go forward with the TG campaign. So far it has gained half the number of approvals needed to reach quorum on it's own which is a good sign. We only need 52 to get to vote so it shouldn't be too hard. There are 410 pages worth of delegates. For the time being I'm going to split the first 100 up into 20 increments for anyone that wants to help. I'll take the first 20 myself. If you want to do more, post it here, I don't want to get some of the more sensitve delegates all pissy about spam.

I'll have a generic TG posted here after it expires. Here's to luck.

We ask that the protections assured sentient orphans are also extended to abandoned animals.

Just so we're all clear on the text, I had to cut it down a bit. Most of what was deleted was in the preamble due to character limits. This is the version ready for vote.

The nations of the World Assembly;

Recognizing that violence, drugs, war, famine, social chaos, disease and prejudice has resulted in an unprecedented number of children who are abandoned as orphans or who have become homeless;

Decrees that;

1. Member nations are hereby required to fund the construction of orphanages and shelters for homeless children as the situation in their nation merits, the WA General Fund (WAGF) incurring all costs. These facilities should be of a quality that is suitable for habitation on a long term basis and should also provide food and medical attention to all residents, and that medical practices should be carried out by qualified persons who meet or surpass the medical standards as set forth by the nation. Food, medical supplies and staff shall also be paid for by the WAGF.

2. Member nations are further required to establish the appropriate child welfare agencies to oversee the well-being of these children and to manage the distribution of aid. Additionally, these agencies are required to share information to facilitate intranational and international adoptions and to work with other national child welfare agencies to create a strong network of aid distribution to those in need.

3. The World Assembly Child Housing Authority (WACHA) is hereby established to do the following:

(i) Compile a database of all known homeless or orphaned children currently residing in WA nations who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes. The governments of WA member nations shall submit, annually, a report detailing the number of homeless or orphaned children living within their nation who are awaiting placement in adoptive homes, either within, or outside their nation. The report shall include the child's age, sex, name (if known), pertinent medical information as allowed by WA law and any other details considered relevant to the child's case.

(ii) Act as a clearinghouse for coordinating the efforts of accredited adoption agencies and child-advocacy groups in WA nations, and to assist in the effort to place these children in permanent, stable homes.

(iii) Shall conduct, at a minimum, three inspections per annum to households that have adopted a homeless or orphaned child within the previous five years. These inspections will be conducted at the discretion of the WACHA, and no notice is to be given to the adoptive families prior to said inspection.

(iv) The number of inspections per annum shall be at the discretion of the WACHA. The criteria involved in the inspection shall be left to the administration to determine on a case by case basis. However, these inspections shall include; cleanliness of the home, overall health of the adopted and the state of well being of the family on the whole.

4. Member nations are reminded that many homeless children, particularly runaways, may be reluctant to accept aid and assistance from government agencies or recognized charities due to fears that they will be forced into an unacceptable situation, e.g., returned to an abusive home. Therefore, it is suggested that aid and assistance be provided in a no-threat environment with assured confidentiality for all clients, but with the goal of eventually placing these children in an officially recognized shelter, orphanage or foster home, or if possible, returning them to their parents or an acceptable guardian.

Principally authored by Iron Felix.

We sit at 26 approvals with about 3 hours left until it expires.

Approvals: 26 (The Artic Republics, Superdemocracy, Sionis Prioratus, Kingsley Bedford, The Jacksons of Mize, Horiutza, Sydia, Wilkshire, Bears Armed Mission, Quintessence of Dust, Candelaria And Marquez, Buffett and Colbert, Zurarich, Star Isles, Moonsingers, Jordanda, Achalya Santis, The Valdesian Frontier, The Brewsters, Ventei, Canadadopolis, Ascendas, The Templar Holy Order, -Hellkite-, Nobitta, Worldia555)

Wit regards to animals, if the animals are sentient, they should be covered by this resolution since it does not specifically state the orphans or children must be human.

I have approved this before and will do so again, but honestly, with the Child Protection Act already in place, I do hope there aren't too many more children-related pieces of legislation. It's obviously an emotive issue, and I am as horrified by the prospect of street children sleeping rough as anyone, but I feel, in general, many of the problems that affect children do so mainly as a result of systemic factors that also affect adults. In all the UN's history it never, so far as I know, did anything for the elderly, and I wonder if the fantastic bias in legislative attention children get is induced more by a desire to seem charitable than to be charitable.

That won't stop us supporting this proposal, of course.

-- Dr Lois Merrywether

I have approved this before and will do so again, but honestly, with the Child Protection Act already in place, I do hope there aren't too many more children-related pieces of legislation. It's obviously an emotive issue, and I am as horrified by the prospect of street children sleeping rough as anyone, but I feel, in general, many of the problems that affect children do so mainly as a result of systemic factors that also affect adults. In all the UN's history it never, so far as I know, did anything for the elderly, and I wonder if the fantastic bias in legislative attention children get is induced more by a desire to seem charitable than to be charitable.

That won't stop us supporting this proposal, of course.

-- Dr Lois Merrywether

I think we take it for granted that older citizens can take care of themselves which is why these types of proposals tend to protect people until they reach the age of majority. Certainly I imagine there are nations that would leave their elder citizens to their fate, such as elephants do when they know it is their time to die. I wouldn't go so far as to say we don't need something that helps the elderly, but I think we'd need to seriously consider what can be done for them that wouldn't produce such stern opposition.

I think we take it for granted that older citizens can take care of themselves which is why these types of proposals tend to protect people until they reach the age of majority. Certainly I imagine there are nations that would leave their elder citizens to their fate, such as elephants do when they know it is their time to die. I wouldn't go so far as to say we don't need something that helps the elderly, but I think we'd need to seriously consider what can be done for them that wouldn't produce such stern opposition.
Right...let me get this straight. Elephants leave their old to die, so we should too? What other pachydermic traits should we adopt - mating by mounting another and proudly bellowing?

Besides, that had absolutely nothing to do with my original point, which is that we've already spent a great deal of time dealing with 'children' as a distinct category. In the old UN we had Child Labor, Children in War, The Child Protection Act, Outlaw Pedophilia, Child Pornography Prohibition, and the predecessor to this proposal, not to mention most of the education-related proposals. In the WA we've had Restrictions on Child Labor and a new Child Protection Act. It's just a bit...boring to be spending so much time on this one issue. Children will not do well if the world suffers nuclear accident or environmental disaster, if they can't eat or access medicine, if they don't have jobs when they grow up then their education will be for nought. Again, I'm not opposing this proposal; I'm just saying that maybe next we can move onto something new.

-- Dr Lois Merrywether

OOC: I seriously hope that elephant line was IC, because it was fucking disgusting.

OOC: He said "there are nations" that might adopt that policy; he wasn't actually advocating leaving old people to die.

OOC: Alright, sorry BP, in a grumpy mood.

<snip>...What other pachydermic traits should we adopt - mating by mounting another and proudly bellowing?
You got a problem with that? Personally I prefer yelling Geronimo.:tongue::D
Excelsior,
Sen. Horatio Sulla

What other pachydermic traits should we adopt - mating by mounting another and proudly bellowing?

"If the stories out of Mulgore are correct, then that's not just limited to elephants," Silara said.

Terrim's embarassed shuffling of feet and mumbling only brought forth raucous cackling from the blood elf.

OOC: Alright, sorry BP, in a grumpy mood.

Don't worry about it. After I posted, I took a while and re-examined the whole concept of why we focus mainly on children. My rational is, they have no prior wisdom, as they haven't lived long enough. They have no prior real life experience to help them cope with hardships. Children fall into the category of those unable to better themselves without aid. We could argue that they would eventually learn to cope, and it's a valid point since I'm certain many of the nations present here began from humble beginnings when they had no clue about what they were doing.

Anyway, the point I'm getting at is that most assume the elder generations are able to do good on their own. Since many governments want to primarily focus on growth, it seems backwards to extend aid towards the decaying end of your economy, i.e. those that are no longer contributing to growth. We wouldn't oppose such a bill extending economic, social or even an extension of freedoms to the elder generation. It might be a good proposal for someone to look in to. Right now, we can't because we have bigger plans in the works.

With that bit aside, I am about to submit OPA for what I hope is the last time. For those that wish to TG for this, here is the generic TG.

Honored Delegate,

The WA officials from Blasted Pirates have submitted a proposal called The Orphans Protection Act offering aid and shelter to orphaned or homeless citizens within all WA nations. We feel this is a most necessary resolution that seeks to help those unable to help themselves. As an act of humanity, we humbly ask that you approve the proposal so that it may be brought to vote. If you would like, you may view the text of the proposal here:

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=orphans

We thank you greatly for your time, and your approval.

As I said, I will take the first 20 pages of delegates. If you decide to help out, please post where you started and stopped on here so we don't TG the same delegate twice, they can be touchy.

WYMP

We're about halfway their, and I don't know if we'll make it or not. I'm going to be heading out of town early tomorrow afternoon, so hopefully I can get it to quorum before I leave. Would be nice to come back and see this at vote. I plan on TG'ing extensively tonight. Cross your fingers.