12
	Mothers of Disabled Children 
	as CBR Workers

	Barney McGlade and Rita Aquino

In the Philippines, there are an estimated 4,500,000 disabled people.  This figure does not include family members who are also involved and affected by the disability.  Yet fewer than one per cent of disabled children attend school and at best only one in four of people with disabilities participate in any form of programme.  In rural or urban poor areas, rehabilitation services are very limited or non-existent.
	The Philippines has been one of leading countries in the promotion of Community Based Rehabilitation, although it is not yet part of the country's community development plans (de Jesus, 1992).  A Filipino handbook  on CBR  implementation is currently being field tested under the aegis of the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP) (Aportadera et al., 1994).  This semi-state organisation attempts to co-ordinate the estimated 207 existing CBR programmes run by government and non-government agencies.  Their plans include working closely with schools on integrating children with disabilities in mainstream education and in promoting the active participation of disabled people and their families in the decision-making, planning and evaluation of each CBR  programme.  
	This chapter describes our experiences in developing and running a CBR programme in an urban poor area of Metro Manila which is  based around mothers of children with disabilities as the family support workers.

Kasamaka CBR Programme

In 1989 the authors, along with the Columban Fathers (an Irish congregation of priests) helped to establish a small outreach programme within the parish of Malate Catholic Church in Manila.  We aimed to assist local children and youth with intellectual disabilities.
	At that time, we were only vaguely familiar with the emerging CBR approach.  Rita had no previous experience in the field of disability but had worked extensively as a community organiser.  Barney's experiences were with intellectually disabled people, but mostly in Ireland or in centre-based projects in the Philippines.
	However, we were strongly influenced by the Zimcare programme in Zimbabwe (McConkey, 1988).  This inspired us to consider alternative methods of meeting the needs of intellectually disabled children who could not gain access to either special or mainstream schools.  Initially, we established a Portage style, home-based programme and began to train local church workers and volunteers as the 'home visitors'.
	Due to work commitments, these people soon dropped out.  Perhaps the inappropriate lecture-style training sessions - carried out in English - may also have been a discouragement.  Or it could have been that some were not disposed to work with disabled people.  
	The programme was in crisis even before it had started!  Rita then hit on the brainwave of enlisting the help of the mothers of the disabled children.  We were soon to wonder why we had not considered this option from the onset.  
	With surprising ease, we soon had a core group of four volunteer mothers acting as home visitors.  Training was given in Tagalog (Filipino) and became more interactive, employing a wide variety of teaching methods.  It was based on the needs of both participants and volunteers, rather than some irrelevant, western, prepackaged training manual.  
	From this inauspicious beginning, five years later these same mothers are now running the programme.  Armed with personal qualities, such as empathy, and  knowledge from their own experiences and their training, these mothers are teaching classes, devising lesson plans, using physical therapy exercises, teaching sign language and Braille, counselling families, organising support groups, networking with other agencies, and preparing and implementing home based programmes in unison with the families.  
	They learn from each other's experiences as well as from in-service training and attendance at different courses.  They are trained health workers who organise prevention and intervention workshops on disability, health and integrated education curricula for the community and local relevant professionals.  They also have an advocacy role in the community; highlighting disability issues.
	We learnt as we went along.  What we didn't know, we sought the solution locally or through our network of appropriate agencies.  The personnel in schools, hospitals and  rehabilitation centres were all more than willing to offer training and advice, regardless of the academic qualifications of our workers.  
	Other developments also took place.  While working in the communities, we met children and adults with sensory and physical disabilities and they became incorporated in the programme.  We were asked to start the programme in a rural parish (Morong), and later we joined forces with a Columban priest in another province who had already initiated a similar programme.  
	There are now seven KASAMAKA ('you belong') CBR  programmes, sharing the same philosophy and long term goals, but with aims based on the unique needs and situation of each community.  The programmes have catered for 646 disabled children and adults, plus their families, on a long term basis.  But whereas mothers manage and work the CBR programme in the urban setting, the six rural projects employ local community and church personnel.  However, disabled people and their families are gradually gaining a stronger voice in the implementation and management of activities.
	Perhaps the most profound development in all the programmes is the emphasis now placed on the active participation of disabled people and their families in the planning, decision-making and work activities; all of which are based on the self-expressed needs of the participants.  In each of the seven programmes, participants have decided to form a 'peoples'  organisation', made up of disabled people and their families.  Non-disabled people are classed as technical advisers, trainers and supporters.
	The goals of KASAMAKA CBR  are those stated by Werner (1988): we aim to establish a situation whereby disabled people and their families empower themselves to live as self-reliant and as 'whole a life as possible' in the company of other community members, who, in turn, are helped to accept disabled people as equal partners, appreciating their abilities and possibilities.  
	In sum, KASAMAKA CBR  is an attempt not only to meet the challenge of the numbers of people with a disability, but also to work for change in attitudes, access and opportunities within society, particularly in areas where there is no access to facilities or rehabilitation. 

Parent Involvement

The philosophy of many CBR programmes rests on the notion of a family member being the main trainer within the home  even while it is recognised that not all parents will want to be involved (O'Toole, 1993).  Yet the role of parents is not clearly defined beyond this.  Are they to work only with their disabled child, or should they be involved in mobilising resources in the community, or lobbying governments for facilities and services, or could their involvement be something more, as in management and implementation of the programme? 
	Much has been written on the difficulty of involving parents in CBR programmes (Coleridge, 1993).  A primary reason could be their sense of isolation.  They are made to feel different,  they lack time to socialise given the responsibilities of care, and sometimes they have to suffer the misguided and outspoken advice from neighbours as well as strangers (Woolfson, 1991).  
	But parents are the child's first and natural teachers, and it makes sense to assist them in performing this role to the best of their ability.  The provision of home-based programmes is only a partial answer.  
	Opportunities are needed also for mothers, for parents and for children to meet, socialise and learn from each other.  Coming together with the CBR worker and other families can provide both the support and solidarity needed by parents.  Such meetings can also be the springboard for nurturing the process of 'conscientization'; giving parents a deep awareness of all the influences on their lives (Hope and Timmel, 1984).  
	Many of the emotional and social needs of parents may be met most effectively in parents' organisations.  These can provide a forum for mutual understanding, acceptance, information-sharing and support (see Chapter 9).
	In fact, group work is the root of effective CBR collaboration especially when it extends to include disabled people, communities and  associated professionals and agencies. Groups are a medium for people to discuss their needs, to investigate the generative themes which influence and even control their lives, to look at ways of dealing with their situation, to learn skills, to take on an advocacy role and to act in bringing about change.

CBR Workers

Miles (1990) asserts that mothers are interested in the acquisition of information about their child's disability and what they should do but they are not concerned about where the advice is given or who is the informant.  But we would contend that the identity and interpersonal skills of that informant has a major impact on whether the information will be accepted.  
	O'Toole (1993) states that a number of parents have mentioned the emotional and psychological support they received from their home visitor as friendships developed.  The value of CBR may be rooted as much in the relationship between CBR workers and family members, as in the actual practical interventions carried out. 
	CBR workers have been drawn from community health workers, teachers, rehabilitation assistants and neighbours but a common misconception is that local professionals, those with formal higher education, would make the best volunteers  (Helander, 1993).  But O'Toole's (1991) research in Guyana found that local volunteers were much more effective and acceptable to the participants than were nursery teachers.
	Thorburn (1992)  claimed that the volunteer, or home visitor, could be selected from any background, but should be one who is serious about the work, is motivated to assist others in need, has an empathetic and respectful, but not pitying attitude, has good health, a stable background, and is literate only if the needs of the programme depend on that.  In Thorburn's 3D project in Jamaica, most of the workers are mothers of disabled children (see Chapter 8).  

Women and CBR

It is essential to recognise the sense of isolation, overwork and lack of support sometimes experienced by mothers and families with disabled children.  We in CBR may have to face some difficult moral and political issues.  Does CBR inadvertently prop up the traditional role of women as dependants?  As Coleridge (1993) notes, there is also the issue of remuneration for volunteers.  By receiving little or no salary, is CBR guilty of giving women and disabled people yet another raw deal?  These issues are integral to the CBR  value system and hence, its long-term sustainability.
	Choice, of course, should be available, but, alas, often it is not, unless women take control.  Support groups can help to achieve this.  Selli-Serna (1991) stresses that the difficulties associated with rearing a disabled child should not be secluded within the family circle.  Rather they should be shared with others; not only with those in the same situation but also with those who are unaware.  She relates that as far back as the 1950s in Italy, it was the mothers who organised themselves, informed public opinion, looked for and got, rehabilitation services, and in the process shifted the mother's role from passivity to a more active and dynamic one. 

Mothers of Disabled Children as CBR Workers

O'Toole (1991) identified a mother as one of the most effective workers in the Guyana project;  her tact, devotion, sincerity, empathy and compassion made up for her lack of formal education.  These same qualities were found to be more effective than knowledge and skills, when working with both families and communities, whether in Jamaica (Thorburn, 1992)  or in Kenya (Oakley, 1991).  Yet in the literature, only Thorburn (1992) has advocated  the recruitment of parents as community workers. 
	When we conducted recent research on the factors influencing long-term sustainability of our CBR  programmes, the mothers were perceived by the respondents (themselves mothers or fathers of disabled children) as playing a major role, second only to the acceptance of their disabled children in the community.  Unity among families, disabled people and workers was also considered essential.
	However, while we were able to recruit mothers as  CBR  workers in the urban setting, we were not able to repeat this in the CBR programmes started in rural areas.  This has always baffled us: it seemed so easy in Manila!  Although the rural programmes, had a very effective workforce, there has always been a problem with high turnover of staff and a lack of participation by the 'clients' of the service.  Despite workshops, counselling and establishing local committees, we could not entice the mothers to become volunteers, although they were involved with their own disabled child's development.
	Perhaps we failed to consider the mothers as workers when the programmes were being initiated or perhaps they preferred to wait until satisfied with the direction and achievements of the programme.  But what our experiences tell us, is that if there is no other workforce, then mothers will surely get involved as they did in the city.
	It is therefore not possible to declare that mothers, as a resource, are available to all communities.  What must be considered are the cultural, familial and socio-economic conditions in each location and country, and whether local facilities and parent organisations are available.  

The Personal Qualities of Mothers as CBR Workers

CBR planners have often failed to recognise the cultivation of personal qualities as crucial components in the training courses for both CBR  workers and professionals, although this is well recognised in the literature on sustainable development (Oakley, 1991).
	What are the special characteristics which a mother of a disabled child can offer as a CBR  worker?   We first realised  their special contribution when we had difficulty convincing some families to work with their disabled child.  But when another  mother visited the family, invariably the parents paid more attention; they were more likely to listen and to follow and share suggestions.  
	A mother will take the time and effort to give simple  explanations and be realistic in her expectations for other mothers, whereas the professional may not.  Mothers may be more responsive to the needs of other mothers and less inclined to impose their own views (Thorburn, 1992).  Bean (1994) expands on this theme, saying that mothers of disabled children on the 3D projects act as good role models; they accept their children and they make them feel part of the community.  Moreover, the mothers are willing to share skills and knowledge, and they have become confident in doing this.  They also seek new forms of solidarity and feel empowered.    
	In the recent participatory evaluation of our programme in Manila, the mothers of disabled children considered the home visitor's personal qualities, such as empathy, to be more important than having skills and knowledge.   Nonetheless the ability to communicate and to teach were considered essential and to have personal experiences to draw on.  This research also confirmed that mothers,  more than most other type of worker, are willing to work collaboratively with families, thereby promoting a grassroots, participatory approach to CBR 

Consumer Participation

CBR programmes advocate community and consumer participation.  But what does it mean?  People can participate in the benefits which come from the programme  or in the implementation of a programme; or they can be more involved and participate in the decision making  and even in evaluation.  Control of the programmes is not unduly upset by consumer participation at the level of benefits or implementation but when it comes to decision making and evaluation, questions are raised about who controls the programme's resources and the direction it is taking. Participation here means sharing, not only of duties, but also of power and privileges.
	If consumer participation is to be more than a way of manipulating people to achieve goals predetermined by a dominant group, then its promotion must be seen as dealing with the redistribution of power within the disability field.  The outcome is to enable disabled people and their families gain ownership over the conditions that affect their well-being.  
	Active participation takes times to develop and must proceed at the pace of the members and according to their needs.  The reality has to be faced that people, educated in a long school of marginalisation and non-participation, may be resistant to change.  But far from being a sign of ignorance or backwardness, it may represent a very rational response to what is unknown and unproven!  Is participation what people want?  Maybe they expect a service to be delivered and someone else to make the decisions.  Isn't that the role of government and professional workers?
	Yet disabled people and their families need a service now; they cannot afford to wait for conscientization to occur first.  Our CBR programme was built around a small number of mothers coming together to determine their needs and setting  about solving them.  The service they deliver will attract other families.  What we have then is the participatory process working alongside the delivery of a service; a service delivered by disabled people and their families.
	In all the projects, we ensure that local committees of disabled people and community members are established in each district.  They assume responsibility for the project's management.  We also form PTA and a parents' group in each locality, as well as an association of disabled people, but this can be amalgamated with the parents' group, if members so wish.
	A danger though is for programmes to become too inward looking; relying too much on their own resources and becoming isolated in the community.  Participants in both our urban and rural programmes stress solidarity and teamwork, but also the need to network with local and government organisations, as part of the overall community development.  
	Collaboration also means working in co-operation with  other marginalised groups to ensure equality for all sectors of society and in the promotion of positive personal qualities, including the spiritual.  The role of the Churches is therefore very important; not only for this reason but also because of its place in the Filipino community and the  infrastructure which it offers for promoting and supporting CBR activities. 
	Empowerment of communities also requires devolution of power by the government; decentralising authority to the local level.  A start can be made by government channelling support directly to community level initiatives and helping to establish national and regional networks of support agencies. 

Mobilising Mothers and other CBR Workers

How can mothers believe they will be of assistance to other families?    First there is the role model of other mothers engaged in the work.  There is also the support group which is set up and a belief from the organisers that mothers' personal qualities and experiences are as valuable and useful as skills and knowledge.
	Yet as co-ordinators, we have made the mistake of expecting too much, too soon from mothers and our other volunteers.  We have presented a series of information and training sessions aimed at 2demystifying the numerous theories and therapies.   We wanted the new trainees to have as wide a range of skills as possible and for them to feel confident with the new knowledge.  But after initial enthusiasm, people began to drop out.  Back to the drawing board!
	Had we done our pre-workshop preparation?  We knew that with any community programmes, contact with the families at home is essential.  Before any meeting or workshop, homes should be visited and people informed about the nature of the upcoming activity.  A formal invitation is also required and maybe even a second home visit.  
	But all of this is to no avail if people haven't been consulted as to the relevance of any activity to their needs.  And as each community is different, as the needs of each disabled person and her family are different, arriving in a community with a prepackage of activities and events spells only disaster.  We must first discover what people need and want.  Based on those needs and wants, we can then devise programmes and activities.
	We must spend a considerable amount of time visiting homes, building relationships and trust, immersing ourselves in the life of that community and establishing local contacts.  Only then can we arrange meetings.  Each community will decide if they initially prefer small, intimate groups, or whether they would rather have larger groups which include all interested people in the community.  Both formats have been successfully used by us.
	These meetings serve to build relationships between participants, to provide the information needed, to help people analyse not only their needs but the possible solutions, and to identify possible resources.  The group of informants and trainers includes mothers of disabled children as well as disabled people themselves.
	By now  we have established needs and are providing appropriate information and training sessions, both in groups and at the homes.  Next we want to train local workers and volunteers.  There is initial enthusiasm. We have chosen a time schedule that suits the prospective candidates;  training is appropriate to stated needs; we have immersed ourselves in the community; people know what it is all about because the sessions are relevant to their lives; training is interactive - using a lot of group work, games, songs, role play along with theory and practical demonstration - and people still drop out!
	Further analysis and experience tells us that we are still trying too much too soon.  Rather than organise a complete training course, we alter our approach; minimising the number of formal sessions and instead doing the training in the family homes.  
	Initial training includes discussion on grassroots principles - how to establish a relationship with a family and how to listen - and information is given about disability and about the disabled child's particular needs.  The volunteer is then tasked, that is given an activity to carry out with the family.  It may be to monitor the medication of a child with epilepsy, assist with a range of motion exercises, or with early stimulation games, or accompanying the family for a hospital appointment.  The activity is agreed upon with the family, something they need help with.  
	If the volunteer maintains this schedule and continues to show enthusiasm, the tasks are gradually increased and more theory and training is introduced.  Workshops are arranged, both at the local centre and centrally (in Manila), and with other organisations and institutions.  
	Extended training sessions have also been organised for the workers from all the programmes (and other agencies as well).  These hopefully will become an annual event - not only to develop new skills and consolidate old ones, but also to promote deeper relationships between all the KASAMAKA workers.
	One final comment relating to motivation of workers.  Although the CBR workers are expected to be "all rounders", they obviously have preferences for certain types of work.  They may prefer to work with deaf students, or prefer the physical therapy or enjoy teaching the best.  We try to respect their preferences.

Training for CBR

In this section we summarise the training we provide for our CBR workers.  Although poor training is often a criticism levied at CBR programmes; the solution is glaringly simple - mobilise resources, including the professionals, to train local workers.  O'Toole (1991) wonders what the minimal amount of training would be, but to consider minimal levels could create an attitude of low expectations for people.  Training, we believe, should correlate with the needs of each participant and the community she lives in; it should be both practical and theory based, and on-going.  Jaffer and Jaffer (1990) recommend a 'step-by-step' approach to training, growing naturally with the participants' needs, initially tackling the easy issues and working with co-operative families. 
	Training is founded on the premise that everyone has knowledge to offer and to share; no-one is superior.  Learning about the group process is important, aiming to build on the mothers' personal qualities and experiences - and to learn from them.  A grounding in basic counselling skills is provided.  Training also stresses a working knowledge of the participatory process.  Workers, whatever their identity, need training in how to accept, share, take advice and act on the suggestions of parents and disabled people.
	The main components of the intensive training provided to all the KASAMAKA workers, including mothers and disabled people are given in Table 1.  Overall, each participant received over 300 hours of training. 
	A wide variety of training methods should be employed: visual, participatory, 'hands on' experiences, field-work, group work and so on.  Talks and lectures rarely feature!

The Role of CBR Workers

CBR programmes must be concerned with the prevention of disabilities.  Hence many of our workers have been trained as health workers, and are aligned to both government and non-government health groups.  For example, meningitis is a major cause of disability.  Hence it is imperative that our workers recognise the symptoms and can inform the public about them during the community awareness workshops.  They have knowledge of first aid and also the network to get the person into hospital.   

	Table 1
	Topics covered in the Training of CBR Workers

	  what is CBR  
	  disability: types/causes/intervention
	  prevention and health/first aid/primary health care
	  child development and management; early stimulation
	  play therapy; theories of play
	  physical therapy
	  sign language
	  Braille
	  orientation, mobility and psychology of blindness                  
	  principles and practice of integrated, interactive 
	     education
	  making lesson plans
	  assessment and devising plans of action
	  basic counselling skills
	  developing problem solving skills
	  networking skills
	  leadership and community organising skills
	  promoting community awareness and involvement
	  sports and leisure for disabled people
	  making toys/classroom materials/basic orthopaedic 
	     aids     
	  promote philosophy of grassroots participation
	  human relations training/group work
	  employment opportunities - income generating projects
		   open employment; developing skills; interview skills. 

Workers must also be teachers, as school classes are established in each community, especially for intellectually disabled, deaf and blind students.  Many physically disabled children are accepted into the mainstream schools (if they can make their own way), but many receive our home tuition. They must also work closely with local schools and non-formal education groups to encourage mainstreaming of disabled children.  
	Workers must also be community organisers, knowing how to mobilise and encourage participants, as well as the community.  For example, in one rural area, the workers persuaded a group of tricycle drivers to bring disabled youth to their counselling/vocational training sessions each week. CBR workers must also create a more positive attitude toward disability as they establish and maintain effective networks of community support.
	Moreover, it means encouraging families and disabled people to work together, to run meetings followed by action and to utilise all local resources.  Most importantly, it means encouraging the formation of 'people's organisation' so that community leaders come to see CBR as part of overall community development.  The latter emphasis is the next step in the further development of our programmes.
	Workers are also disseminators of information, producing newsletters, visual aids, media, publicity campaigns, workshops, puppet shows and dramas, child-to-child activities, talks and games.  These are directed at school children, the communities, relevant professionals, as well as for disabled people and their families.  
	We cannot stress this enough: information is what families say they need above all else. With information, they can make decisions and plans.  Likewise, information is also for the community, fellow groups and organisations, and the workers.  We produce booklets for general information, but also for specific purposes, such as a pictorial dictionary of sign language (matching the sign to the word and its pictorial representation), cartoons on child development and on teaching self-care skills. 
	Lastly, all these tasks are on top of their key role as trainers of families; in which they are home visitors, counsellors, book-keepers, managers, and students themselves in the rehabilitation or enablement process!
	Two major weaknesses exist in our present programmes.  First  we lack the facilities and skills to produce most orthopaedic equipment.  
	Another major flaw is in the area of vocational training and employment.  We lack the finance to set up our own projects and can only occasionally provide capital for an income generating project.  On the plus side, we try to locate jobs within the community, and we network with other agencies which may provide the training to learn the skills required. 

Conclusions

Participants in KASAMAKA CBR programmes have said they want a service, but on their own terms.  Parents do not want to be consulted about their child's needs and then to be handed a prepackaged rehabilitation plan to 'fit' the child.  Rather, they want to participate in the formation of their child's programme, as do disabled people themselves: they want to be more involved in the planning and decision-making.
	What our experiences have to offer CBR programmes elsewhere is a relatively untapped and effective workforce - the mothers of disabled children - in operating and managing CBR programmes. Whether this option will be considered, never mind accepted, will depend on professionals'  willingness  to give away skills, and the planners' and rehabilitation elite's willingness to give away power to disabled people and their families.   

References

Aportadera, M.L., Bolinas, A., Capadocia, M., Magallona, M.L., Robles, E., Sese, R., and Valdez, L. (1994).  Philippine Handbook on Community Based Rehabilitation. Quezon City: National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons.

Bean, G. (1994).  Women as Carers. CBR News, 17, 6.

Coleridge, P. (1993). Disability, Liberation and Development. Oxford: Oxfam.

de Jesus, N. (1992). The Philippines: Situational Analysis.  Quezon City: National Council for the Welfare of Disabled People.

Helander, E. (1993). Prejudice and Dignity:  An Introduction to Community Based Rehabilitation. New York: UNDP.

Hope, A. & Timmel, S. (1984). Training for transformation.  A Handbook for Community Workers.  Books 1, 2, and 3.  Zimbabwe: Mambo Press.

Jaffer, R. & Jaffer, R. (1990).  The WHO-CBR Approach: Programme or Ideology - Some Lessons from the CBR experience in Punjab, Pakistan.  In, M.J.Thorburn & K.Marfo (eds.).  Practical Approaches to Childhood Disability in Developing Countries: Insights from Experience and Research. Obtainable from 3D projects, 14 Monk Street, Spanish Town, Jamaica.

McConkey, R. (1988).  Out of Africa,  Mental Handicap. 16, 3.

Miles, M. (1990).  Skills Training for the CP Child in Pakistan.  Interlink, 2, 1.

Oakley, P. (1991). Projects with People.  The Practice of Participation in Rural Development.  Geneva: International Labour Organisation.

O'Toole, B.J. (1991). Guide to CBR Services: Guidelines for Special 	Education, No. 8. Paris: UNESCO.

O'Toole, B. (1993).  Community Based Rehabilitation.  In, P. Mittler, R. Brouillette, and D. Harris (eds). Special Needs Education: World Handbook of education, 1993. London: Kogan Page.

Selli-Serna, T. (1991).  Women Assisting Disabled Persons.  In E. Boylan (ed.). Women and Disability, London: Zed.

Thorburn, M. J. (1992).  Working with Parents. London: AHRTAG Disability Information Services.

Werner, D. (1988). Disabled Village Children: Second Edition. Palo Alto, CA.: Hesperian Foundation.

Woolfson, R. (1991). Children with Special Needs: A Guide.  London: Faber and Faber.

Barney McGlade is a child psychologist from Belfast who has worked in the Philippines as programme co-ordinator of Kasamaka CBR programmes since 1988.  He previously worked with the Brothers of Charity Services in Ireland and Manila before taking on his current assignment which is supported by the Irish charity, GOAL and the Columban Fathers.

Rita Aquino became a trade union and community organiser while working with a local micro-chip factory in her home city of Manila.  She went on to become union vice-president and is currently in her second term as elected barangy (local district) councillor.  She is also a co-ordinator of the CBR programmes and chairperson of an organisation of Day Care teachers in the Philippines.

Contact Address 
	Columban Fathers, 
	Malate Parish Church,
	1016, M.H. del Pilar
	1004 Malate, Manila, Philippines