“Mom, please take me to the orphanage”
Svetlana Drozdova, a social worker at a Moscow school, notes that proposed state support measures could provide meaningful help for many large families in need of additional financial aid. Yet, she cautions that risks exist for entrepreneurial mothers who may be tempted to misuse funds in an effort to gain wealth.
“Almost every day I encounter difficult teenagers whose root problem is a lack of parental care. Our school currently has five children from large, dysfunctional families. In three cases the mothers withheld state payments, neglecting basics like shoes or notebooks, all while continuing to seek government assistance,” shares a teacher with three decades of experience.
Drozdova clarifies that this represents a segment rather than the entire population. Families with many children who take on caregiving duties are common, yet there are still cases where extra support is needed.
“I once spoke with the mother of one troubled student in a candid chat. The boy looked into his parents’ eyes and said, ‘Mom, please take me to the orphanage.’ I explained that if the situation did not change, I might have to remove him and perhaps other children from the home. The mother responded with anger, insisting she would not jeopardize her livelihood because of what she called stupidity.”
From a professional perspective, the speaker notes that the boy sometimes poses challenges as a way to provoke the family. The broader issue includes a mother who drinks, while other stepfathers and partners contribute to a volatile home environment that the child must endure.
He smeared his face with vomit, dipped his head in a pot
Elena Petrasheva, a primary school teacher at another Moscow school, recalls families with multiple children where danger was so extreme that even the youngest had to be kept at the teacher’s home overnight. About ten years prior, she faced a case where a child’s safety could not be assured within the family unit.
“A single mother with several partners and a harsh stance toward the children was a common scenario. The elder son, Tolya, was in the ninth grade and held nationalist views. He wore a swastika tattoo on his toe, roamed the streets with peers, and harassed immigrants, committing robberies and intimidating adults,” Petrasheva remembers.
She describes two other children in the family, first grader Sasha and four-year-old Artyom. Concerned about visible bruises on the children, the teacher visited the home and found the youngest being beaten.
“Sasha opened the door; the floor was stained with bruises, cigarette ashes scattered about, and Artyom crawled and cried while a drunk mother slept in the kitchen beside a vodka bottle. I quickly gathered the children and brought them to my home,” Petrasheva recounts. The next day, she alerted the school’s social worker and guardianship authorities. The most frightening details emerged when teachers and psychologists spoke with the children directly.
Describing routine abuses, she recalls instances where children were forced to swallow food, harshly treated if they refused to eat, and where Artyom faced humiliation and bodily fluids as punishment. Tolya later explained that his mother had received minimal money and frequently cursed the children, calling them worthless. At times Artyom faced extreme mistreatment, including being forced to drink urine when asking for a drink while on the potty. Petrasheva notes that the family later relocated to another arrangement, though she fears the new situation remains precarious.
Now, the teacher witnesses that the boys are growing up within a different family, accompanied by additional siblings. She maintains contact for a few years, but the children eventually left the country, and she remains concerned about their happiness and well-being in the long term.
“Grow up new faces”
Social worker Anastasia Mikhailovskaya cared for the Petrov family for nearly seven years before retirement. She recalls the parents of six children with a sense of dread, certain about the lasting damage such upbringing may cause.
“Pasha Petrov and his sister Nika gained notoriety in the region. Veronica used to steal classmates’ phone calls and sell them on the street. At one point, he wore another child’s jacket to school, claiming it as his sister’s. He struggled to walk and became known as a troublemaker. Older peers described him as someone who would drink, drag others into risky behavior, and extort money from peers. He often lived off meals provided to the younger ones.”
Pasha’s behavior intensified as he grew older. He had many younger friends and was part of a group that together caused trouble, carrying weapons and threatening bystanders. The teacher recalls an incident where a school acquaintance recognized Pasha and his friends, and when confronted, a knife appeared. The children scattered in fear.
“Nika once demanded money, objecting to the removal of a child from her mother and arguing that others should roll their lips in response. She claimed that once they grow up, they will have to manage on their own if they do not work,” Mikhailovskaya notes.
He stole a car and urinated on the police
Oksana Kharina, who worked as a social pedagogue, recalls Alexei Nikolaev as the most memorable difficult teenager from large families. His mother publicly asserted that he and his sisters would not be excluded from the home simply because they were useful.
“An incident occurred when a narcotic wrapped in foil fell from his pocket. He showed up after drinking and skipping school, sometimes arriving intoxicated to class,” Kharina says. The boy’s behavior, she explains, stemmed from parental rejection, bullying, and ongoing hostility, which fueled his protests.
The teen was registered with guardianship authorities, yet he continued to commit illegal acts. Kharina sometimes covered for him in minor offenses, but eventually he moved to a private school. A year later, she learned that he stole a car with friends and, in a shocking moment, urinated on police. He received a suspended sentence rather than a jail term. The teacher fears a harsher fate could await him in the future.
Help for prosperous families is not an incentive for the marginalized
Yulia Zimova, deputy head of the Civil Chamber of the Russian Federation, explains that current state support is aimed at encouraging births in the first and second-child categories. While exceptions exist, approval of new payments would unlikely spur the marginalized to have more children, though ordinary families could benefit significantly.
“There are always different kinds of people and families. Some try to profit from state support, yet many others do not. The proposal represents a meaningful step forward for those who truly need help,” Zimova notes.
She adds that when a family is unsafe or life-threatening, authorities typically intervene at the level of the first or second child. If a family escapes attention, the cycle of births continues unchecked.
Large families, however, could allocate funds to essential needs. Zimova mentions that the survey of such families indicates a desire to use government payments for travel, housing, vehicles, and other child-related necessities. She also points out that current measures are not uniformly extensive. In some districts, families benefit from utility discounts, priority kindergarten access, and targeted payments for low-income households. If the Public Chamber’s proposal is adopted, it could strengthen confidence among large families, who remain a central demographic hope for the country.
Note: The perspectives above reflect interviews with educators and social workers; figures and anecdotes illustrate broader concerns about child welfare, family support, and the effectiveness of public policy in stabilizing fragile home environments.