The following two letters,
written on 22nd and 23rd July 2012, constitute my
attempt, on my most recent visit to Cambodia, to come to some arrangement with
Citipointe regarding the return of C’s daughters to her care.
Leigh Ramsay
Citipointe church
322 Wecker Rd
Carindale QLD
4152
22nd
July 2012
Dear Leigh
Further to my letter of 27th
Sept 2010 to Pastor Halloran. I have spent a good deal of time with C
this past few days. As you know, she has a home to live in (the rent paid by
me) and her husband has a tuk tuk that he drives to support the family. C is
also selling silk scarves, t-shirts and other items at the side of the road
down by the river. Their combined income is meagre but C’s family is no poorer
than thousands of others in Phnom Penh.
In a very tearful interview
for my filmic record of her life C expressed her wish that R and SM come to
live with her and the rest of her family. She told me that she had not seen her
daughters for two months and that she missed them dreadfully. That C has not
seen her daughters for 2 months was confirmed by the Citipointe staff who
accompanied R and SM on a two hour supervised visit with their mother and
family down by the river on Saturday 21st July. I was told by one
member of your staff that R and SM could not visit C in her home for fear that
she might not return the girls to Citipointe at the end of their weekend visit.
It seems to me that the
time is long overdue when Citipointe church and myself should work together
according to an agreed upon plan to see that R and SM are reintegrated back
into their family. This would involve a plan, clearly laid out in writing, such
that C understands clearly what her responsibilities are and what Citipopinte’s
responsibilites are. The ongoing uncertainty regarding when, how and even if R
and SM will be returned to her, the lack of meaningful contact with her
daughters, whom she adores, is a source of constant emotional pain to C.
R and SM should not, of course, be returned to the family immediately. This
needs to be done in stages and in accordance with a plan that has the girls’
interests primarily in mind.
The first stage should be
to permit R and SM to spend weekends with their family. Were she to have
regular access to them (as was promised 4 years ago) C would not need to be
threatening to take her children back regardless of Citipointe’s wishes – which
in turn makes Citipointe feel that the church must protect R and SM from such
an eventuality by not allowing C access to them. In denying C regular access to
her children Citipointe has created a problem that it now seeks to solve in a
way that serves only to exacerbate the problem.
Whilst I am in Phnom Penh,
I would like to meet with whoever the relevant person is at Citipointe’s ‘She’
refuge to discuss the formulation of a plan to re-integrate R and SM back into
their family and community – a plan that C and Citipointe agree upon. As both
her ‘Papa’ and as the person paying C’s rent and helping the family financially
in several ways, I am in a good position to see to it that C adheres to whatever
promises she must make to put the plan into effect.
best wishes
James Ricketson
Leigh Ramsay
Citipointe church
322 Wecker Rd
Carindale QLD
4152
24th
July 2012
Dear Leigh
Following on from my letter
of 22nd July.
I would like to suggest the
following as the first stage of a plan to re-integrate R and SM back into their
family:
- During the next 12 months
R and SM continue with Citipointe’s ‘She’ refuge as their primary residence.
- On weekends R and SM stay
with their mother, step-father, grandmother and other siblings, sleeping one
night in the family home.
- On at least one occasion
in the coming year R and SM accompany the rest of the family on a visit to Prey
Veng to visit members of their family they have not seen in the past four years
– especially their aged great-grandmother, V’s mother.
- I pay the rent on C’s
family home and provide $100 per month towards helping buy food, clothing and
other household goods required.
The agreement between C,
Citipinte and myself should be put in writing so that there can be no
misunderstanding on C’s part that the agreement is conditional upon her having
R and SM ready to be picked up by Citipointe staff at the arranged time after
their weekend visits.
Such an agreement would
provide C with the security of knowing that she will be able to maintain
meaningful contact with R and SM during the next 12 months and be able to take
them, as she has wanted this past four years, to see their family in Prey Veng.
This is very important to C and V and on each of my visits to Cambodia C asks
me if I will pay for such a trip when Citipointe gives permission for R and SM
to accompany her. Yes, I will pay for such a trip.
It may well be that
Citipointe has some other conditions that it would wish to have included in an
informal contract between C, Citipointe and myself. If so, could you please let
me know C and myself know what these might be. If such an informal agreement
can be arrived at before I leave Phnom Penh on 1st August I would
appreciate it.
In 12 months, if C has
adhered to the terms of this ‘contract’ the next stage of R and Srey Mal’s
reintegration into the family can be discussed and a new ‘contract’ written up.
best wishes
James Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment