JK Rowling urges students not to volunteer at orphanages
Author highlights evidence suggesting that ‘orphanage tourism’ drives families apart and makes children vulnerable to abuse
JK Rowling has called on students around the world not to volunteer at orphanages, pointing to emerging evidence that “orphanage tourism” drives family separation and child trafficking.
Speaking at the One Young World summit in London, the global forum for young leaders, the Harry Potter author and founder and president of children’s charity Lumos, said orphanages do “irreparable harm” and “perpetuate the abuse” of children and communities.
“Despite the best of intentions, the sad truth is that visiting and volunteering in orphanages drives an industry that separates children from their families and puts them at risk of neglect and abuse,” she said.
[...] Rowling was launching a three-year global campaign to challenge attitudes toward orphanage tourism and volunteering, #HelpingNotHelping. The campaign is backed by recently revised travel advice from the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office warning of the potential harm of orphanage tourism and volunteering.
[...] Children in institutions are 500 times more likely to take their own lives, 40 times more likely to have a criminal record and 10 times more likely to be involved in prostitution, the charity claims.
[...] “Most children in orphanages are not even ‘orphans’ – they are placed there due to reasons such as poverty, disability, or to receive an education, and many have a family who could care for them, given the right support,” said Alex Christopoulos, deputy CEO of Lumos.
(Score: 1) by Arik on Monday October 28 2019, @05:44AM
But given that it's a children's book and people are nuts when children get involved, it was completely predictable a lot of people would be bothered by it. And honestly, it seems like a weird thing to do. Why would a novelist announce the sexual orientation of a character in a talk at Carnegie Hall rather than write it into the book?
I mean, if there was something in the books that established it, and everyone was missing it, sure, point it out. But it wasn't like that. She just outed him. As far as I know, there's still nothing in the books to show it's true, it's just a total side-channel assertion. Seems a bit odd.
The fact that these are children's books with no sex just makes it more odd. I mean, just by reading the books, we don't really know anyone's sexual orientation. We can probably guess that a few of the younger characters are either hetero or bi because there are a few suggestive bits to indicate some hetero pairings, at least a kiss here and there. But for most of the characters, particularly the adults, there really just is no trace of this aspect to be seen in the books and there probably shouldn't be. What child wants to read a book with a bunch of old people expressing their sexual orientations in any way? And if it's never expressed in a scene in any of the books, why announce it to the world?
Odd, odd behaviour.