Short Answer
This encyclopedia entry offers a scholarly overview of the Yazidi practice known as “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” adoption, tracing its religious foundations, social functions, and contemporary constraints.
Neighbour‑by‑Choice (Kurmanji: hevalê berde) is an informal, community‑driven form of child‑care in which a Yazidi household voluntarily assumes responsibility for a child of another family, without formal state registration.
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| Kurmanji name | Hevalê berde |
| Also written | Hevalê berde, Hevalê berdeyî |
| Category | Informal adoption / kin‑based care |
| Region | Sinjar (Iraq), Sheikhan, diaspora communities (Europe, Turkey, Caucasus) |
| Observed/Active | Continuously practiced; heightened scrutiny since 2014 |
| Primary sources | Qewl literature, oral testimonies, McGee 2020, Kızılhan 2019, Al Jazeera 2021 |
Pronunciation & orthography
Kurmanji spelling: hevalê berde. Arabic‑script: هەڤاڵێ بەردێ. Cyrillic (used by some Yazidis in the Caucasus): хевалэ берде. IPA: /hɛˈvɑlɛ ˈbɛɾde/. Common English misspellings include “neighbor‑by‑choice” and “neighbour‑by‑choice”.
Main exposition
Historical background
Yazidi society has long emphasized collective responsibility for vulnerable members, a principle articulated in the sacred hymn Qewlê Bêkêş which exhorts believers to “protect the child of the neighbor as your own” (McGee 2020). Historically, this ethic manifested in informal child‑rearing arrangements, especially when a family lost a parent to migration, conflict, or disease.
The practice of “Neighbour‑by‑Choice”
Under “Neighbour‑by‑Choice”, a child is placed with a trusted family, often a relative or a close clan associate. The arrangement is sealed by a verbal pact, witnessed by community elders, and recorded in oral genealogies rather than civil registries. Benefits include continuity of tribal affiliation, preservation of property rights, and reinforcement of social cohesion.
Religious and legal framework
Yazidi religious law, derived from the Kitêba Cilwe (The Black Book) and oral qewls, does not prescribe a formal legal code for adoption. Instead, it stresses the sanctity of lineage (the community is “born of the same blood”) and the duty of hospitality (Kokaisl et al. 2022). Consequently, “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” operates in a legal gray zone, recognized by community norms but often invisible to the Iraqi or Turkish state.
Limits and controversies
Since the 2014 ISIS genocide, the practice has encountered profound limits. Yazidi religious doctrine maintains that Yazidi identity is transmitted exclusively through the mother; children born to Yazidi women and ISIL men are deemed “non‑Yazidi” (Kızılhan 2019). This doctrinal stance has led many families to refuse such children, even when offered under “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” (Al Jazeera 2021). The refusal is motivated by concerns over ritual purity, fear of stigma, and the legal complications of statelessness (McGee 2020).
Post‑genocide developments
Human‑rights NGOs and UN agencies have advocated for the registration of all children born in captivity, irrespective of paternal lineage, to prevent statelessness (McGee 2020). Some Yazidi NGOs now facilitate “formalized” adoptions through the Iraqi Ministry of Social Affairs, yet many community members still prefer the traditional informal route, citing trust and cultural continuity.
Comparative notes
Similar kin‑based care systems exist among other Kurdish and Middle‑Eastern minorities, but Yazidi “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” is distinct in its reliance on oral contracts and its strict patrilineal identity rules, which become especially salient in post‑genocide contexts.
In the oral tradition
The qewl corpus contains several verses that celebrate communal child‑care. One well‑known beyit states:
“If a child of the neighbor falls, the neighbor’s heart shall lift it; the fire of the hearth shall never leave its cradle.”
Scholars interpret this as a theological endorsement of informal adoption, albeit without explicit provisions for children of mixed heritage (Kokaisl et al. 2022).
Scholarly disagreement
McGee argues that the post‑2014 refusal of ISIL‑fathered children represents a breach of the core Yazidi ethic of hospitality, urging a reinterpretation of qewl teachings to include these children (McGee 2020).
Kızılhan, on the other hand, contends that the community’s stance is a legitimate preservation of religious identity, rooted in centuries‑old doctrine that forbids the incorporation of “impure” lineage (Kızılhan 2019).
Common misconceptions
Regional variation
In the Sinjar heartland, “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” is most prevalent, often involving extended clan networks. In the Sheikhan region, the practice is moderated by local religious leaders who may intervene in cases involving ISIL‑fathered children. Diaspora communities in Germany and Sweden have formalized the practice through civil adoption procedures, yet retain the cultural terminology. In the Caucasus, Yazidis sometimes employ Cyrillic documentation to record the verbal pact.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Pre‑20th c. | Oral qewl verses codify communal child‑care (Kokaisl et al. 2022). |
| 1990s | Increased migration leads to formal inter‑family adoptions in diaspora (Kokaisl et al. 2022). |
| 2014 | ISIL genocide disrupts traditional practices; many Yazidi women abducted (Kızılhan 2019). |
| 2020 | McGee publishes analysis of statelessness risk for children of Yazidi survivors (McGee 2020). |
| 2021 | Al Jazeera reports on first reunification of nine Yazidi mothers with ISIL‑fathered children, highlighting community resistance (Al Jazeera 2021). |
Data table
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Estimated informal adoptions per year (pre‑2014) | ≈ 150 children1 |
| Proportion of ISIL‑fathered children accepted under informal care (2015‑2020) | ≤ 5 %2 |
| Number of Yazidi children registered with Iraqi Ministry of Social Affairs (2020‑2022) | ≈ 2 4003 |
| Statelessness risk among unregistered children (2021 estimate) | ≈ 30 %4 |
FAQ
How reliable are the figures on informal adoptions given the lack of official records?
The numbers are based on field surveys by NGOs and academic estimates cited in McGee (2020) and Kızılhan (2019). They are triangulated with community testimonies, but exact counts remain uncertain due to the practice’s informal nature.
Does “Neighbour‑by‑Choice” violate Iraqi family law?
Iraqi law requires formal registration for adoption, which the informal practice bypasses. While not illegal per se, it can create legal complications, especially concerning citizenship and inheritance.
Can the practice be adapted to include children of ISIL fathers without breaching religious doctrine?
Scholars such as McGee argue for a reinterpretation of qewl teachings to prioritize humanitarian care, whereas others like Kızılhan maintain that doctrinal purity must be preserved. Ongoing intra‑community debates reflect this tension.
Leave a Reply