national

Kumamoto baby hatch has accepted 125 babies over 9 years since launch

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

" Controversial " ?!?!

Would you rather find them in Septic Tanks ?!

14 ( +15 / -1 )

The controversial baby hatch set up at a Kumamoto hospital in 2007 to enable parents to leave infants anonymously received a total of 125 babies over the nine years through March last year while it has remained the sole such facility in the country.

If it is supposed to be anonymously, how did they get this information here? Seems to me it's not so anonymous in reality.

As to why parents left their children at the Kumamoto hospital, economic hardships were cited in 32 cases, childbirth without marriage in 27 cases, and fear of how they may be viewed by others and family registry issues in 24 cases, according to the report, which allowed multiple answers for their reasons.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

The baby hatch is not controversial, mothers dumping their children is. They will be dumped no matter what I am glad there is a safe place for them to be cared for.

If it is supposed to be anonymously, how did they get this information here? 

Anonymous means not named, I do not see people being named.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

"...leave infants anonymously...", "...18 returned to their families..."

If it's anonymous then how were some returned to their families?

"...30 children had been sent to orphanages and other facilities..."

What are the other facilities? Hospitals?

I'm curious as to how the investigator(s) came to the conclusion

that 53 babies were born in a car and not in a hospital. Did they

come with an aroma of "new car smell"?

If the babies were the result of consenting adults who thought they were

capable of feeding and caring for their offspring but decided after a few days/months/years

of parenting that they just could not, do those "parents" really need to be convinced by social workers or the police or whoever that they must take back the child they left in the hatch? Any follow up as

to the welfare of the child forced back upon his or her parents? There should be a welfare check

until the child can fend for himself. (16? The age when a child can work? Or until the child graduates from high school?)

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

One a month on average. Better than dead babies, for sure. I imagine they have security cams which can help identify the struggling parent/s.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If it's anonymous then how were some returned to their families?

It is pretty obvious the families went to the hatch to claim them back.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

"Even if you become pregnant unexpectedly, it is best that babies are raised on their own. But in cases where it is impossible, we want them to make a decision after learning about an option of adoption," Shiozaki said at a news conference in Tokyo.

How about early pregnancy termination? Should this option not be discussed with the parties involved? Not saying it is 'the' best option for all but I do think that, for some, it is less traumatising than abandoning your baby.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Convenient for politicians or government minsters to looking down thee nose. Cast Judgement with that tone of sanctimonious moral superiority. New born babies don't get to pick the Mothers/Parents of their choice, or their economic circumstances. This is about saving a life. Though expedience alone, in an acute decline in population.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

My question is what becomes of the unwanted babies? Are they placed in one of those "forgotten child homes" until they are 18yrs old and then dumped unto society without any idea of real life? I don't mind adopting 1 or 2 of these babies. That way they'd have a better chance of a better future.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Anonymous means not named, I do not see people being named.

Just because they are not named here in this article right? Otherwise.....,

It is pretty obvious the families went to the hatch to claim them back.

Which means it's not anonymous, as how would they know whose child to give back in the first place?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I think I read somewhere that they try to track down the parent/s and help them - offer support to make the idea of raising a child easier to handle. There are probably cameras to help identify them. I doubt they force them to take the child back though, which is quite right. Contacting the parent/s must make it easier with documentation - if they give up the child, then adoption will be easier to arrange (yes I know adoption is a tough gig here, but it does happen).

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Which means it's not anonymous

No it means people voluntarily identified themselves by going back. People using this are not identified or named. What is with the conspiracy theorists?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Potentially more than 100 lives saved, I don't see anything wrong with that.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

The baby hatch is a commendable idea. Some people are just not equipped for the responsibility and shock of pregnancy, birth and the raising of children. Hopefully these places will help the vulnerable people who face desperate decisions often in circumstances beyone their control.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I think I read somewhere

yeah yeah, when you remember IF you read it and then WHERE it was, let us know. This is how conspiracies start

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Gosh Dango bong, thanks for telling me how to live my life - oh, wait, no, you are wrong.

There is nothing conspiratorial about the authorities wanting to find the parent/s - they need to deal with legalities and they want to help someone who is obviously struggling. If someone has gone as far as to give away their child, don't you think they need help, or you think they should be left to carry on as they have been doing, ie not well?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

No government involved in the babyhatch, private effort by a christian run Hospital.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

125 babies over nine years in one prefecture. Japan has 48 prefectures. If these hatches were in every prefecture there could have been up to 6,000 infants dumped in them nationwide. I'm curious to know how these statistics stack up to the amount of infanticide, abandonment and child abuse in those prefectures without the hatch. Has this hatch resulted in lower rtes of infanticide and child abuse in Kumamoto? That is the real question!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If we all look the picture; there are phone numbers, business cards, and a speaker phone located next to watch. Given there are likely cameras near the area, a person could give as much or a s little information they want. Also likely is some type of form (voluntary completed) to inform the hospital of the infant's name, sex, and other necessary info. There is also the possibility of a letter being provided by a parent, family member, or friend.

As for the usefulness of this baby hatch, if it provided 1 infant a reprieve from a quick death, I can live with some of my taxes being used to cover the cost. I would think the goal of allowing options like abortions/ volunteer custody release is to give people options rather than create limitations that could do more harm than good.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It is pretty obvious the families went to the hatch to claim them back.

Which means it's not anonymous, as how would they know whose child to give back in the first place?

There are investigative ways to identify whose the owner of the baby (like proving at the koban the owner of the missing item, DNA, etc.)

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There is nothing conspiratorial about the authorities wanting to find the parent/s -

Oh ok Maria, so this is a big trap for unwittingly mothers to drop of babies and get tracked down by authories later right? Give me a break. Who reported this?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

like proving at the koban the owner of the missing item, DNA, etc.

Yes let's take DNA samples from every person in Japan and compare the DNA of every baby in the hatch, I am sure the government is spending through the nose on projects like this. My god people do you read what you write? I give up

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Reading the comments in here, I notice that many people lack the ability to grasp the meaning of "anonymity" and how information is managed.... also, I assume several commentators here are not able or not care to read Japanese... since on the board there are clues on how and why some childs did go back to their families.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The launch sparked controversy, with advocates calling it a "last resort" to save lives, and opponents regarding it as giving the green light to parents to abandon their children."

I think anyone who finds it controversial should get pictures of the babies abandoned in coin lockers, rivers, and bathroom stalls DESPITE the (one) baby hatch. Obviously the parents who abandon their infants to die see a green light. And just to be fair, those who support the baby hatches can get pictures of the babies saved.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Dango Bango: "No it means people voluntarily identified themselves by going back. People using this are not identified or named. What is with the conspiracy theorists?"

Actually, there's a camera. THat's the one part of it I've always been against, since it will keep some from using the hatch instead of just throwing the baby in the river.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

like proving at the koban the owner of the missing item, DNA, etc.

Yes let's take DNA samples from every person in Japan and compare the DNA of every baby in the hatch, I am sure the government is spending through the nose on projects like this. My god people do you read what you write? I give up

I think it's more apropos to ask: did you read the conversation before you wrote that?

Because here's how the conversation unfolded:

*It is pretty obvious the families went to the hatch *to claim them back.

*Which means it's not anonymous, as how would they know whose child to give back in the first place?*

There are investigative ways to identify whose the owner of the baby (like proving at the koban the owner of the missing item, DNA, etc.)

Obviously, only those people who want the babies back will be asked to prove it. Not every person in Japan.

Context, people. Conversations have context.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

No it means people voluntarily identified themselves by going back. People using this are not identified or named. What is with the conspiracy theorists?

How do you determine which baby left behind is the parent who voluntarily identified themselves?

Oh this is my child...wait... how about this one...oh no, this one......

If they dont identify themselves from the beginning its not so anonymous is it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites