ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 1

Orphanage Differences: The Differences Between Orphanages in Guatemala and Los Angeles

Keila Villanueva

Senior Research Seminar

Mr. Tempinski

March 11, 2016

Abstract
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 2

My topic discussed the differences between orphanages in Guatemala and Los Angeles. Previous

research has shown that children living in orphanages either get many or fewer post traumatic

stress problems, depending on the environment they live in. The method used for this research

project was qualitative research in order to conduct interviews. Four people were interviewed for

this project. Three participants were from Guatemala and the last participant was from Los

Angeles. The data showed that there are a couple similarities and differences in the orphanages,

one of the main ones being that children are allowed to leave the orphanage in Guatemala for

special occasions, while in Los Angeles they aren't. Children can grow up with better health

conditions depending on the orphanage the children are growing up in.

Orphanage Differences: The Differences Between Orphanages in Guatemala and Los Angeles
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 3

The topic of this research project is the differences between orphanages in different

countries. In the research found before conducting the research project, studies showed that

children grow up with many problems depending on the environment they are living. What's

missing from previous research are the differences in the environment the children are living in

and what causing children to grow up with many or fewer problems. The aim of this study is to

find similarities and differences between the orphanages in different countries. My approach in

the study was to interview people from the two different orphanages to obtain an answer to the

question.

Public perceptions may not match the reality due to the public's lack of contact with

orphans and their living conditions. Wolff & Fesseha(1998) examined the children in two

different orphanages. They compared the mental health and cognitive development of the

children. They found that the overall frequency of behavioral symptoms as well as of symptom

types differed significantly between the children in the two institutions. An ANOVA, with

institution, sex, and age as between-subject variables and the rank order of behavioral symptoms

as the dependent measure, indicated that there were main effects by institution but no main or

interaction effects by sex or age. Children in orphanage A exhibited more symptoms altogether

than those living in orphanage B. The most common symptoms in both groups, and the types of

symptoms that accounted for most of the group differences, were mood disturbances, language

delays, and disturbed social interactions with peers (Fesseha, 1998).

The China Ministry of Health has estimated that there are at least 100,000 AIDS orphans

in China. The UNICEF China Office estimates that between 150,000 and 250,000 additional

children will be orphaned by AIDS over the next five years. In this article they reviewed

secondary data and public media regarding children orphaned by aids in China to address their
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 4

living situation. They found that they are living in stressful environments, struggling with

psychological problems. The China Ministry of Health has estimated that there are at least

100,000 AIDS orphans in China. (Taylor and Francis Online, 2010)

Kidman, Petrow, and Heymann(2007) reported on two different models of community-

based care that have emerged to fill this care-giving gap, and highlight the relative advantages of

each. These programs, one centralized and the other decentralized, are an effective means of

caring for orphans and could be scaled up in other communities to meet the magnitude of the

crisis. Even when extended family can serve as guardians, their need to work in the context of

widespread poverty decreases the amount of time they are able to spend with children. Other

children live in child-headed households or with seniors unable to provide adequate care.(Taylor

and Francis Online, 2007)

Researchers aimed to compare orphans development in two different care systems. The

results they got from their experiment revealed significant decrease in the means of total

competence and problem scores over time. Externalizing problem scores and post traumatic

stress disorder related symptoms proved to be more significant in the foster care system than in

orphanages.(Wiley Online Library, 2005)

This article explores a century of pediatric and child psychiatry research covering five

areas of potential biologic and social risk to infants and young children in orphanage care: (1)

infectious morbidity, (2) nutrition and growth, (3) cognitive development, (4) socio-affective

development, and (5) physical and sexual abuse. The data demonstrates that infants and young

children are uniquely vulnerable to the medical and psychosocial hazards of institutional care.

Scientific experience shows that, in the short term, orphanage placement puts young

children at increased risk of serious infectious illness and delayed language development. In the
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 5

long term, institutionalization in early childhood increases the likelihood that impoverished

children will grow into psychiatrically impaired and economically unproductive adults. (Frank,

1996)

My project relates the other researches conducted. Both the orphanages had similar

answers to past research. They showed that children might have different feelings depending at

the orphanage they are at. That's why I wanted to know the differences between orphanages.

Depending on how the child is treated and the environment the live in will determine how they

feel emotionally.

My purpose in conducting this study was to see what the main reasons are for children to

become orphans I became passionate about this because last year I went on vacation to

Guatemala. While I was there I found out that one of my aunts was bringing an orphan on the

trip with us. I was intrigued to know that the orphanage allowed the child to leave for a long

period of time with a volunteer family. I started asking my aunt many questions on the orphanage

and why was the reason for so many children to be living there. This is important because people

have to become aware of the face that there are many children becoming orphans because of

poverty and neglect. Poverty should not be a reason for children to become orphans. There

should be ways to help families that are struggling with finances. There should also be ways to

help the children become successful people because it is not there fault they are going through a

difficult time. The question being researched is, what are the differences between orphanages in

Guatemala and Los Angeles.

Methodology

Participants
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 6

In this research project 4 individuals were interviewed. Two of which I have a personal

relationship with and the other two I had only met through this project. No reward or motivation

was given to the participants, they knew it was for a high school students doing a research

project. The table below shows the description of the subjects.

Subjects Description

Interviewee 1 Interviewee 1 is a 47 year old hispanic women. She lives in

Guatemala City and happens to be my mentor. She is a very
dedicated volunteer at an orphanage in Guatemala called Miguel
Magones.

interviewee 2 Interviewee 2 is a 7 year old hispanic girl. She is an orphan at the

orphanage Miguel Magones. She is a very sweet and outgoing girl.

Interviewee 3 Interviewee 3 is a hispanic female, age is unknown. She is the

owner of the Miguel Magones orphanage in Guatemala. Her and
her family work in the orphanage.

Interviewee 4 Interviewee 4 is a female worker at the Maryvale Orphanage.

Materials

The materials used to conduct the interviews were not many. The voice memos on an

iPhone were used to record some of the interviews. Messenger through Facebook was used for

conducting interviews with people out of the country. While conducting the interviews notes

were being jotted down on a piece of paper and then transferred to a Google Docs for reference.

Procedure

The interviews were all conducted through a cellular device. The reason why interviews

were chosen instead of surveys was because the overall methodology is qualitative research.

Collecting data through interviews was the best choice because people's responses would be
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 7

detailed and not one worded. Finding time to conduct the interviews was difficult because of

different time zones and the interviewees schedule.

Before conducting the interviews the questions were being brainstormed. I already had an

idea of what the questions should, they just needed to be finalized on a google docs. Then I

realized that I could not ask the 7 year old orphan the same questions I was going to ask the

adults. So I decided to create a new set of questions just for the child. They ended up being

completely different from the questions I asked the adults. The questions included in my

interviews were as follows:

Questions for the adults:

1. About how many children live in the orphanage?

2. What are the main reasons for why the children are living in the orphanage?
3. For how long can an orphan be living with a volunteer member and their families

during holidays? How do they know its safe for the child to leave with that family?
4. Do the children attend school? and if they do where?
5. Do the children have chores that they need to complete daily?
6. Can the children's families come visit their children?
7. What happens to the children after they turn 18 years old?
8. Is it a coed orphanage?
9. Where does the orphanage get its finances from?
10. Is it a religious based orphanage?
11. What is done to help children that are emotionally and physically unstable?

Questions for the orphan:

1. How old are you?

2. How long have you been living in Miguel Magones?
3. Do you have friends? How many?
4. Do you like going to school?

5. What do you do everyday?

 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 8

6. Are you happy?

I conducted my first interview on November 30, 2015 through messenger on Facebook.

The first interview was the volunteer from the orphanage in Guatemala, and also happens to be

my mentor. She goes to the orphanage on a regular basis and she is my mentor so I thought it

was perfect for me to interview her. Our interview lasted about 45 minutes and she was able to

answer most of my questions.

On December 4, 2015 I organized the data I had collected from the first interview

because it was all messily written on a piece of paper, so I rewrote it. I also listened to the

interview a second time because I recorded it just in case I missed anything. Then on December

9, 2015 I encountered some difficulty because I couldn't find an orphanage here in Los Angeles

to conduct an interview with someone.

By the end of January, I was able to conduct my four interviews and finish my data

collection. It did become very difficult at a certain point even though it was only four interview

because people were not always willing to answer my questions. I also had difficulty

interviewing the child because even though I had already met her, finding a way to communicate

with her was hard. My mentor was of great help and she had a copy of my set of questions, so

she asked the orphan and the owner of the orphanage my questions. Once she gave me the

questions my mom helped me translate them to English since they were conducted in Spanish. I

then compared the two orphanages, the one here in California and the one in Guatemala for my

data. After I thanked mentor for all the help she was to me on conducting the interviews.

Results
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 9

The interviews conducted for the project were used to find the differences between the

orphanages in Los Angeles and Guatemala. The same questions were asked to both the

orphanages and there were some similarities and some differences. The data was separated based

on similarities the orphanage has and the differences as well. There were more similarities and

minor differences. Table 1 shows the similarities and table 2 demonstrates the differences.

Table 1: Similarities

Guatemala (Miguel Magone) Los Angeles (Maryvale)

This orphanage is also faithful to the Catholic This orphanage is faithful to Catholic social
church. They have a chapel in their orphanage teaching rooted in the gospel of Jesus Christ
and a priest goes every Sunday to teach them. and the charism of the Daughters of Charity.

The main reason for the children being sent to
the orphanage are because of abuse and
neglect. Usually the kids are abused, the
parent are alcoholics, or the parents are in
prison, said interviewee 1 .
The main reason for the children being sent to
the orphanage are because of abuse, neglect
and abandonment. Interviewee 4 said The
orphanage was opened because orphans would
be found roaming the streets living off of what
strangers gave them.

The children do attend school. According to
Interviewee 2 The children study in public
schools but nine of them are sponsored to go
to private schools. According to them
education is going to help them live
rewarding and have successful lives.
Maryvale has two different centers for
learning, one in Rosemead and the other in
Duarte. These schools will establish the
foundation for a lifetime of academic success
and personal growth.

This orphanage has psychologists come work This orphanage has many different programs
with children that have gone through difficult depending on what the child has been through
things in their life. Students from the and their age range.
University of San Carlos visit orphans that are
abused and need physiological therapy.

The orphanage gets its finances through
donations. Interviewee 1 said the orphanage
gets donations from foreign countries,
Guatemalan companies, and individual
people.
The orphanage gets its finances through
donations. They get many donations from
individuals and many families. The Daughters
of Charity also help them because they touch
those in need through education, healthcare,
and many more services.
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 10

Table 2: Differences

Guatemala Los Angeles

The orphanage is a co-ed . Both boys and girls The orphanage is all girls. There are different
live in the orphanage but they live on different programs depending on the different age
sides of the orphanage. ranges of the girls.

The children can be taken on vacation by The children at Maryvale can not leave on
volunteers that go to the orphanage on a vacation with volunteers.
regular basis. The maximum time they can be
out is 2 weeks and the owners have to feel
safe about letting them leave the orphanage.

The childens family can come visit their The children's family cannot come visit them
children at the orphanage. at the orphanage.

It's difficult to say what the students are taught The children receive a very good education.
because not all the children go to the sae They get taught all the subjects from math, to
school. Some go to public school, others go to science, to drama.
private schools.

Discussion & Conclusion

The results I received were through interviews that I conducted. I conducted four

interviews throughout my project. The results may suggest that the main cause for children

becoming orphans, both in the United States and Guatemala, is poverty. The children's parents

are not able to take care of them because they don't want to or they don't have the finances to do

so. I also found out through the interviews that children in orphanages have routines they go

through on a daily basis. They have chores they have to complete, go to school, and have a

certain amount of free time a day.

In Table 1 the similarities are shown. Both orphanages are Catholic based and they get

their funding through donations from organizations and individual people. Based on the
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 11

interviews conducted the main cause for children being sent to the orphanage is because of

abuse, neglect and abandonment. The main goal of both orphanages is to provide the children an

education. This is important because they want the children to have a bright future so they can be

successful people when they get older.

Table 2 demonstrates the differences. The orphanage in Guatemala is co-ed but here in

Los Angeles it is girls only. The main difference between the two orphanages would be the fact

that children in Guatemala are allowed to leave on vacation with volunteers. In Los Angeles the

orphanage does not allow the children to leave with volunteers, just to ensure their safety.

For my results it took me a while to get them because I had many complications. I had a

lot of difficulty trying to get my results because I had to change my questions a couple of times

in order to be able to get some results. I also could not volunteer at the orphanage I had wanted

because volunteers had to be 18 and that was the only orphanage that was somewhat near me. I

also had difficulty going to Santa Monica College because they could not take a look at my

transcripts because I didn't have a school seal on my application. All of these were major

setbacks that made me have to change my question because there was no way I was going to get

any results any other way on my own. I would suggest for any future researchers to make sure

that everything that is required in order to get the results. So that the research question does not

have to be changed or altered in any way.

Reflections

During my project, I had many struggles, but I managed to finish everything I needed.

Over the summer, I had many difficulties in trying to find ways to get my data for my project but

in the end I had to improvise and find a new way to get my data. So I got most of my information
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 12

from an orphanage in Guatemala. When I was getting my information I was very surprised at the

results I was receiving from my mentor. I had my mentor conduct one of my interviews because

the person I needed to interview lives in Guatemala. So I wrote out the questions and she gave

me the results. So I feel like I would have liked to conduct that interview because I wanted to see

the way she answered the questions, and how she expressed herself when she would answer the

questions. I would have also liked if my mentor could have recorded the interview but she didn't

have the right equipment to do so, so she just wrote down the answers for me. Another thing I

would have wanted to do was interview more children, but since I was in Guatemala for only a

short period of time I only got the chance to interview one child. I also think that the journals

helped a lot with keeping what I did organized because I got my information from my journals,

and put it into my written assignment. Doing this research project with the deadlines that were

set up for us really helped because it gives the students a specific date to turn things in. One of

my weaknesses was time management. If I would have worked on my project at least once a

week I would not feel as stressed right now. If it wasnt for those deadlines I think that I would

have procrastinated a lot and I would have left all the written assignment for the last day which is

not a good thing. One of my strengths throughout my project was being able to compromise on

things that did not work out and think of new ways to get what I needed. I didn't just stop

working and give up, I thought of new plans and ideas. Another strength I would say I had was

actually completing all the work. I pushed myself to get everything accomplished. I also think

that the incentive of not being able to graduate actually was a wake up call that this was not a

joke, and that it should not be taken lightly. Since then I have taken the project more serious than

I did before because time is running out fast. Overall this project has taught me many things

about myself because as a researcher it is not easy to find answers to your research question. It
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 13

takes a lot of time and dedication. I couldve conducted my interviews in an organized manner if

I would have actually planned it out. But I am happy to know that I got to step into the shoes of a

researcher and see all the struggles but also the accomplishments they go through.
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 14

References

Wolff, Peter, A.A. (1998). The Orphans of Eritrea: Are Orphanages Part of the Problem or Part

of the

Solution? The American Journal of Psychiatry. Retrieved from

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/ajp.155.10.1319

Kidman, A.A. (2007). Africa's orphan crisis: two community-based models of care. AIDS

Care: Psychological and Socio-medical Aspects of AIDS/HIV. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540120600608396

Ahmad, A.A. (2005). Child: Care, Health and Development. Family and Child Studies.

Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-

2214.2004.00477.x/abstract;jsessionid=C4ADAB581E9CF9EF4D69D00B222317EC.f01

t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false

Deborah, A., Klass, A., Earls, A.,& Eisenberg, A. (1996). Infants and Young Children in

Orphanages: One View From Pediatrics and Child. Pediatrics. Retrieved from

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/97/4/569.short

Zhao, A.A. (2010). Care arrangements, grief and psychological problems among children

orphaned by AIDS in China. AIDS Care: Psychological and Socio-medical Aspects of

AIDS/HIV. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540120701335220#.VWv9VP5FBdg
ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 15
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 16

Rubric rating submitted on: June 5, 2016 at 9:24:33 AM PDT by

jason.tempinski@larchmontcharter.org
Expert Proficient Apprentice Novice
4 3 2 1

Introduction Clearly identifies Limited discussion Minimal Little or no

[Abstract, and discusses of research focus discussion of discussion of
introduction, research focus and question. research focus research focus
literature review, and question. Research focus is and question. and question.
reasoning for Research focus is less well-grounded Research focus is Research focus
research, and clearly grounded in previous not well-grounded not grounded in
research question] in previous research. in previous previous research.
Proficient3 research. Significance of the research. Significance of the
Significance of the research is not as Significance of the research is not
research question clearly identified research is not identified (how it
is clearly identified (how it adds to clearly identified adds to previous
(how it adds to previous (how it adds to research).
previous research). previous Hypotheses/predic
research). Hypotheses/predic research). tions are poorly
Hypotheses or tions are Hypotheses/predic articulated or are
predicted described but not tions are not well absent.
outcomes are as well articulated. articulated.
clearly articulated.

Methodology Provides accurate, Description of how Description of how Description of how

Proficient3 thorough the data was the data was the data was
description of how collected, collected, collected,
the data was what/how many what/how many what/how many
collected, data sources were data sources were data sources were
what/how many analyzed, plan of analyzed, plan of analyzed, plan of
data sources were analysis or analysis or analysis or
analyzed, plan of measurement measurement measurement
collection and instrument, instrument, instrument,
analysis research context research context research context
(qualitative or is adequate but is somewhat is very
quantitative), limited. Research confusing/not confusing/not
research context. context and clearly articulated. articulated
Clearly and subject(s)/populati Research context sufficiently.
accurately on description is and Research context
describes adequate but subject(s)/populati and
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 17

research context limited. on is not clearly subject(s)/populati

and Reflections on articulated. on is severely
subject(s)/populati social Reflection on limited or absent.
on. Reflections on positionality/reflexi social Reflection on
positionality/reflexi vity and how it positionality/reflexi social
vity and how it may influence vity and how it positionality/reflexi
may influence data collection and may influence vity and how it
data collection and interpretation is data collection and may influence
results. adequate but interpretation is data collection and
Interpretation is limited. limited and lacks interpretation is
thorough and insight. severely limited,
insightful. lacks insight, or is
absent.

Results [Data Results are clearly Results are Results are not Results are not
Synthesis, explained in a explained but not very clearly clearly explained,
Descriptions, and comprehensive as clearly, level of explained, level of level of detail is
Analysis] level of detail and detail is not as detail is severely
Proficient3 are well- sufficient, and insufficient, and insufficient, and
organized. there are some there are more there are serious
Tables/figures organizational organizational organizational
clearly and issues. issues. issues.
concisely convey Tables/figures are Tables/figures are Tables/figures are
and describe the not as not clear/concise not clear/concise
data. Statistical clear/concise in in conveying and in conveying and
analyses (if used) conveying and describing the describing the
are appropriate describing the data. data.
and are accurately data. Statistical Statistical Statistical
interpreted. analyses (if used) analyses (if used) analyses (if used)
are appropriate are inappropriate are inappropriate
tests but are not tests and/or are tests and/or are
accurately not accurately not accurately
interpreted. interpreted. interpreted.

Conclusions Interpretations/ana Interpretations/ana Interpretations/ana Interpretations/ana

[Conclusion, lysis of results are lysis of results are lysis of results lysis of results
Research thoughtful and sufficient but lacking in severely lacking in
Reflections] insightful, are somewhat lacking thoughtfulness thoughtful ness
Proficient3 clearly informed in thoughtfulness and insight, are and insight, are
by the studys and insight, are not clearly not informed by
results, and not as clearly informed by the the studys results,
thoroughly informed by the studys results, and do not
address how they studys results, and do not address how they
supported, and do not as adequately supported,
refuted, and/or thoroughly address how they refuted, and/or
informed the address how they supported, informed the
hypotheses/predic supported, refuted, and/or hypotheses/predic
ted outcomes. refuted, and/or informed the tions.
 ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 18

Insightful informed the hypotheses/predic Discussion of how

discussion of how hypotheses/predic ted outcome. the study relates
the study relates ted outcome. Discussion of how to and/or
to and/or Discussion of how the study relates enhances the
enhances the the study relates to and/or present
present to and/or enhances the scholarship in this
scholarship in this enhances the present area is severely
area. Suggestions present scholarship in this limited and/or
for further scholarship in this area is limited. absent altogether.
research in this area is adequate. Suggestions for Suggestions for
area are insightful Suggestions for further research in further research in
and thoughtful. further research in this area are very this area are
Self-Reflections this area are limited. severely limited
are thorough and adequate. Self- Self-reflections are and/or absent.
meaningful. reflections are very limited. Self-reflections are
adequate. severely limited
and/or absent.

Documentation of Cites all data Cites most data Cites some data Does not cite
Sources, Quality obtained from obtained from obtained from sources.
of Sources other sources. other sources. other sources. Sources are
Proficient3 APA citation style APA citation style Citation style is disproportionately
is accurately used is used in both text either inconsistent non-scholarly and
in both text and and bibliography. or incorrect. do not clearly
bibliography. Sources are Sources are not relate to the
Sources are all primarily scholarly primarily scholarly research focus.
scholarly and and relate to the and relate to the
clearly relate to research focus. research focus but
the research only in minor
focus. ways.

Spelling, No spelling, Minimal spelling, Noticeable Excessive spelling

Punctuation, & punctuation, or punctuation, or spelling, and/or grammar
Grammar grammar grammar punctuation, and mistakes.
Proficient3 mistakes. mistakes. grammar
mistakes.

Format Title page has Title page Title page deviates Title page
Expert4 proper APA approximates APA a bit more from completely
formatting. Uses formatting. Uses APA formatting. deviates from APA
correct headings & correct headings & Headings & formatting
subheadings subheadings subheadings less Headings and
consistently. almost consistent subheadings
consistently. completely deviate
from suggested
formatting or are
absent altogether.

Comments:
ORPHANAGE DIFFERENCES 19