Orphan Care in Russia

Current public opinion about the residential care system in contemporary Russia is extremely negative. A majority of Russians, both citizens and professionals, consider that family placement is the best arrangement for orphaned children. The year 2007 was announced as the Year of the Child in Russia. The majority of officials interpreted it as the year of de-institutionalization of the residential care system for children in Russia. De-institutionalization is mostly identified as reform focused on family placement instead of placement in institutions. Vladimir Fridlyanov, the executive director of the Ministry of Science and Education, announced in May, 2007 that the government is going to transfer 120,000 children from institutions into families every year from 2007 until 2010 and reduce the number of residential care institutions by one-third (Nesterova 2007). But the likelihood of family placement is small, with the exception of the adoption of infants without serious pathologies, and the attempts of precipitant de-institutionalization (when children’s homes are closed and children are distributed among families) have failed (children were returned into children homes). According to the opinion of the Ministry, the key obstacle to effective de-institutionalization is the lack of professionals in adoption and foster care (Vazhdaeva 2006).

Orphan Care in China

Orphan care in China was once provided by the central government as a means of social control. The centralized welfare delivery guaranteed some of the poorest orphans to be protected by the government. Since the economic reform, the central government started to relinquish its control over social welfare delivery, new forms of orphan care were introduced into China, sharing the responsibilities and burdens for caring the orphans. Yet, many issues and problems exist in social delivery due to a lack of finances, professionals, and policy support. In this chapter, we will discuss the background of social welfare changes in China, as pertains to orphan care, focusing on the different types of orphans as a result of social issues, service delivery, barriers and solutions. It is claimed that during the reform, the burden of orphan care in China may not be reduced in the coming future, and we offer suggestions to cope with that.

Orphan Care: An Introduction

This collection aims to cast light on the social work profession and its care for orphans in middle and low income nations. Four countries are profiled in this work, and the focus in each portrayal is the work done by professionals as well as the socio-political context of this work in the area of care for orphaned children. As will be argued later, both our international perspective and our understanding of the needs and care of orphans around the world are limited in the English language social work literature. This work represents an attempt to address these limitations. I whole-heartedly embrace Watts’ urgent call,

Orphan Care: An Introduction

This collection aims to cast light on the social work profession and its care for orphans in middle and low income nations. Four countries are profiled in this work, and the focus in each portrayal is the work done by professionals as well as the socio-political context of this work in the area of care for orphaned children. As will be argued later, both our international perspective and our understanding of the needs and care of orphans around the world are limited in the English language social work literature. This work represents an attempt to address these limitations. I whole-heartedly embrace Watts’ urgent call, “International and comparative social work and social welfare have some catching up to do…In order to seek answers, we need to recognize we have much to learn from each other. We have much to learn about how social work is practiced in countries different from our own. We have much to learn about the similarities and the differences in social work in various countries. Our learning about its many facets and expressions can challenge our own interpretations of reality and our own truth claims and move us to new ways of thinking and new ways of understanding” (1997, p. 5).

Is There a Net Gener in the House? Dispelling a Mystification

The subject of this essay is the so-called ‘net generation’, the ‘generation @’, or the ‘millennials’ and the speculations about the importance of this generation for teaching. This essay represents both a critical analysis of such allegations and assumptions and a discourse, from the perspective of socialization, on the use of media in teaching.

Games as Cultural Heritage: Copyright Challenges for Preserving (Orphan) Video Games in the EU

The long-term preservation of complex works such as video games comes with many challenges. Emulation, currently the most adequate preservation strategy for video games, requires several acts that are technically possible, but closely governed and restricted by copyright law and technical protection measures. Without prior authorisation from the rightsholder(s), it is therefore difficult to legally emulate these works. However, games often have several rightsholders that are in some cases near impossible to identify or locate – particularly with regard to older games. This paper therefore focuses on these so-called orphan video games and examines whether (and to what extent) they are covered by the directive on certain permitted uses of orphan works 2012/28/EU (Orphan Works Directive). As complex works with software and audiovisual components, it is difficult to classify video games in their entirety. The Orphan Works Directive, however, only covers certain categories of works. This paper therefore analyses 1) whether video games in their entirety can be considered types of works that fall under the directive, i.e. audiovisual or cinematographic works, and 2) whether the provisions of the orphan work exception are suitable for the specifics of these complex, “multimedia” works.

EU Copyright Law, Lobbying and Transparency of Policy-Making: The cases of sound recordings term extension and orphan works provisions

The objective of this paper is to discuss EU lobbying in the area of copyright. Legislation needs to regulate the legal position of various different stakeholders in a balanced manner. However, a number of EU copyright provisions brought into effect over recent years were highly controversial and have led to suggestions that powerful lobbying forces may have had some influence. This article investigates the effects of lobbying on copyright law-making in Europe. A specific comparative and multi-faceted analysis is provided of the legislative process for two recently adopted directives: 2011/77/EU which extends the term of protection of sound recordings and 2012/28/EU which introduces certain permitted uses of orphan works (some references are also made to the ACTA case). Firstly, a short presentation is given of the legal bases for the EU consultation process and lobbying. Next, an analysis is provided of the two cases, taking into consideration the policy-making procedures (with special focus on how the consultation process was handled), the legal solutions proposed and adopted and the various stakeholders’ claims. Lastly, it asks why some interest groups were successful and some others failed (the analysis identifies two types of factor for the effectiveness of lobbying: those resulting from stakeholders’ actions and those connected with the consultation process).