https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nuns-linked-to-mother-teresa-halt-adoption-services-to-avoid-single-divorced-parents/2015/10/10/338111fe-6ec2-11e5-91eb-27ad15c2b723_story.html
The
link posted above is to an article written by Rama Lakshmi for The Washington Post. The article
discusses how thirty orphanages, run by a group founded by Mother Teresa called
the Missionaries of Charity, have decided to stop their adoption services in
India due to a new government system that makes it easier for single and
divorced people to adopt children. According to Sister Amala from Nirmala
Shishu Bhawan, an orphanage in New Delhi that is run by the Missionaries of
Charity, are doing this because they, “believe our children may not receive
real love,” and that these children, “need both parents, male and female.” This
new system was created to boost India’s low adoption rates. India has
approximately 16 to 30 million orphans and out of those high numbers, only
2,500 were adopted last year. In comparison to the 5,700 orphans that were
adopted four years ago, the recent numbers are substantially lower. This new
system is reviewed by valuable, good people that have extensive experience in
adoption, according to Maneka Gandhi, the minister for women and child
development. Gandhi is trying to persuade the Missionaries of Charity to agree
with this new system because she believes it will change the adoption process
in a positive way.
This
article made me think about the idea of the “general will” that we discussed in
class. I reread the article numerous times trying to figure out who I believed
to be “right” in this situation in regard to the “general will.” The
Missionaries of Charity disagree with the new system, where the government
believes their new system will only bring positive change. When determining the
“general will,” which is the common interest of a community, I considered the
orphan children to be the community. Since it is the children that are going to
be placed with new families, I believe that what is best for them should be the
primary goal of this situation. That being said, I believe that if this new
system is going to be for the greater good of the children, then the
Missionaries of Charity should ignore their religious beliefs and comply with
the government’s system. In regard to Rousseau and his idea of the “general
will,” what do you think he would say about the Missionaries of Charity refusing
to partake in the governments new system? Thinking even further back to our
class discussions, what do you think Plato would say? Consider Plato’s beliefs on justice. Do you think he would consider the Missionaries of Charity’s
decision to be unjust?
I believe that general will can be applied to subsets of the populous, when the decisions of the sovereign do not apply some of the populous. In this example I would agree with you that the general will of the children should be what matters. However, it is possible that the children do not have the capacity to make decisions on what is best for them. I believe it is difficult to decide what the children would want.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very good point. I agree with you that it is difficult to figure out what is best for the children. Not many children even know how to make such hard decisions when they are young. This new system is supposedly supposed to place the children with parents that are best suited for the children. I think the goal for the new system is to make the hard decisions for the children and to place them in better circumstances than the orphanages.
DeleteI think that Rousseau would think that the Missionaries of Charity were being unjust and going against the general will as would Plato. The country made this law in order to help the children. That was their primary goal. The children need to be adopted, and the religious views of the charity should not get in the way of that, because in the end, that is their primary goal. Plato would think it was unjust because it is going against the set law of that country. He says that breaking any law is unjust. I personally believe that they should not allow their religious beliefs to impede the children getting adopted. They are there to help them, not impose their own views.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that both Rousseau and Plato would say that the Missionaries of Charity were being unjust and going against the general will. I also agree with you that the members of the charity should leave their religious views aside and do what is best for the children. I do not think that it is the correct thing to do to let the children remain in the orphanages when there are eager parents that want to adopt them and give them a better life.
DeleteI agree with you that both Rousseau and Plato would support the new system and regard the Missionaries of Charity as unjust. Since the ultimate goal is to make better lives for those children, we should prioritize the new system which will offer more qualified parents to those children instead of caring about the statistics. I believe Plato would consider the Missionaries of Charity’s decision to be unjust, because the Missionaries of Charity’s does not represent the expert. After all, for Plato, it is the expert decision that matters.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that they should prioritize the new system in order to place the children with more qualified parents. By them going against the new system, they are not helping the children at all.
DeleteI agree with you that both Rousseau and Plato would support the new system and regard the Missionaries of Charity as unjust. Since the ultimate goal is to make better lives for those children, we should prioritize the new system which will offer more qualified parents to those children instead of caring about the statistics. I believe Plato would consider the Missionaries of Charity’s decision to be unjust, because the Missionaries of Charity’s does not represent the expert. After all, for Plato, it is the expert decision that matters.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the new system is for the good of the general will. The Missionary of Charity must realize that it is better for a orphan to be adopted by a single person rather than not being adopted at all.
ReplyDelete