The “educational” scene in which the deputy director general of the Islamic Orphanage kicked and beat a young woman inside the institution’s premises brought us back to the past of welfare institutions in Lebanon. It evoked the numerous violations committed, under the slogan of charity, against children who are victims of an ongoing war.

As Lebanon commemorates the 50th anniversary of its civil war, many children continue to suffer under a failed institutional care system. Despite global recognition of the shortcomings of such models, Lebanon persists in treating institutional care as charitable work. The Ministry of Social Affairs spends nearly 80 percent of its budget on it. On top of that, these institutions raise millions through various fundraising activities. These are all primarily advertising campaigns and are often politically charged and employed. 

Successive governments have adopted a policy of privatizing the social welfare system to serve political and sectarian interests. Each sect runs its own welfare services, and every politician operates a personal social enterprise funded by the state budget—further entrenching the cycle of poverty.

Global studies show that even in the best conditions, individuals who experienced institutional care face serious risks. They are more vulnerable to psychological and physical abuse, more likely to get into conflict with the law, and more prone to addiction. They also have limited access to quality education, reducing their chances of decent work. As a result, they struggle to escape the cycle of poverty that led them into care, and are more likely to place their own children in institutions.

Although statistics on the number of children in institutions are scarce, a 2014 UNICEF report indicates that there are between 30,000 and 40,000 children in institutions for socio-economic reasons, in the absence of a national framework for family and community-based care. This report confirms the findings of an unpublished study (for political reasons) conducted by the Research and Consulting Foundation in 2006, at the request of the Ministry of Social Affairs and in cooperation with UNICEF, showing that nearly 90 percent of children “placed” in institutions are not orphans but only poor, “orphaned” by poverty, and that approximately 21,000 of the 23,000 children living in orphanages have families but lack the means to keep their children in their care. 

In a 2023 interview conducted by Legal Agenda with Ms. Salwa al-Zaatari, in her capacity as head of the National Council for Social Institutions at the time, she indicated that Lebanon has approximately 400 institutions working in the field of child welfare, which focus on areas such as “care for the elderly, children, people with disabilities, vocational and technical training, and addiction treatment,” Zaatari said. In addition to the contracted welfare institutions, some orphanages operate without agreements with the Ministry of Social Affairs. These facilities take in children with little to no monitoring or supervision.

Plans to reform the welfare sector in Lebanon are also stuck in a vicious cycle. International experts were brought in, strategic workshops were held, and a reform plan was drafted to end in 2026. UN institutions spent millions on these efforts. The outcome was a proposal to adopt a family care model and strengthen at-risk families.

These ideas are not new. Between 2005 and 2007, when I was director of a residential care institution, we worked on similar alternatives. Most children were placed in care due to poverty. We launched a family strengthening program to reassess each family’s situation and create individual plans. The goal was to reunite children with their families gradually, with support from social workers. The results were remarkable on three levels:

1. The cost of caring for a child in a family setting is much lower than in an institutional setting.

2. The number of children in the institution was reduced through family reunification.

3. We were able to adopt a solid gatekeeping and admission process, ensuring that institutionalization became a last resort when no other solution was possible.

However, this plan was first met with resistance from within the institution, where many viewed my efforts as a threat to its interests—even if those interests meant separating children from their families. Several similar institutions also launched a campaign against this approach, fearing it would jeopardize their own operations.

The ministry’s strategic plan remains stuck in a vicious cycle, blocked by the stubborn resistance of welfare institutions, often the hidden arm of political and sectarian interests. These interests are activated when needed, including media outlets that run million-dollar donation campaigns for religious welfare organizations. But what if those millions were instead invested in supporting children within their families?

Tactically, however, this approach doesn’t serve the interests of an opportunistic mindset that thrives on clientelism and sectarian services. These “favors” become tools of influence, used to secure votes—something politicians proudly highlight at every opportunity.

It’s the same logic that shields an educator from accountability after her inappropriate and inhumane act of beating a young woman on the orphanage grounds. Regardless of the circumstances, how could she kick someone like that—in broad daylight?

This is the same logic that allowed those rapists in care institutions to escape accountability. It’s the same logic behind an article titled “By the mercy of my mother, I did not commit a crime,” published in Nidaa al-Watan newspaper on Good Friday. Mansour Labaki, against whom an excommunication was issued after a lengthy trial confirming his rape of many children under his care, may not view his actions as crimes, but as acts of experimentation inflicted on vulnerable children and girls in his custody. Labaki seems to forget that he is not God and that children are not his possessions. The author of the article also seems to overlook the possibility that if Labaki was still in power, he might have abused her too. How can anyone look a rapist in the eye? How can one write this article?

As Lebanon marks half a century since the start of the war, the child welfare system continues to perpetuate the same structural violence, disguised as “charity.” Any genuine reform must begin with dismantling this system, which has legitimized the violation of human rights:

Overturning a system that has justified the violation of the rights of girls, children, young women, and men under the guise of protection and care.

Redirecting financial and human resources toward alternatives focused on family and community-based care that uphold dignity and ensure a safe, supportive, dignity-based and violence-free environment.

The battle today is not only to hold accountable those who violated the body and dignity of a young woman in public, but to dismantle a system that protects aggressors and turns poverty into a permanent funding project. It is a battle against the culture of clientelism that distributes “care” according to sectarian affiliation and establishes a welfare system that legalizes discrimination, perpetuates dependency, and prevents possibilities of independence and self-reliance.

Strategic plans will be useless if not grounded in a political will that ends the historical collusion between the state and welfare institutions and restores social justice. Workshops, reports, and calling on international expertise will be useless if they are not based on serious listening to the experiences of those who lived through this system and those who are still enduring health, psychological, and social costs today.