In Johannesburg this week, a legal battle is unfolding that could shape the future of baby safers in South Africa. At the centre of the fight is Door of Hope, an organisation that has cared for abandoned babies for more than 25 years. Their mission — to provide a safe, dignified alternative for mothers in crisis — has now landed them in the High Court, where they are fighting for the right to keep their doors open .

At issue are baby saver boxes: stainless steel hatches built into places of safety, where mothers can anonymously place infants they cannot care for. For decades, these boxes have provided desperate women with a last resort — a way to relinquish a baby without exposing them to the dangers of being left in fields, drains, or rubbish sites. Hundreds of children are alive today because of them .

Yet, the Department of Social Development argues that the boxes encourage abandonment, deny children the right to a culture, and strip fathers of their rights. Attorney Nicola Irving, part of the Norton Rose Fullbright legal team representing Door of Hope, calls those claims disingenuous. She stresses that abandonment happens regardless of government policy — but baby savers ensure survival.

“Abandonment has always happened. What these boxes do is give mothers a lifeline,” Irving says. “There is a definite distinction in intention between a parent who places a child in a safe box and one who abandons a baby unsafely.”

Read More: How Hot Cares turned a rescue dog into a real-life hero

The case also highlights deeper social realities. Irving points out that the law’s current framing is highly gendered, disproportionately criminalising women who are often left unsupported by absent fathers.

For now, the High Court is being asked to keep Door of Hope’s registration valid until the Constitutional Court can decide the future of baby savers in South Africa. Behind the legal arguments lies a stark truth: without these boxes, many infants will not survive their first days of life.

This is just the beginning of a story that will unfold across the week — a closer look at the people, the policies, and the stakes behind the fight to save South Africa’s most vulnerable.

Baby savers battle moves to Constitutional Court

The future of baby savers in South Africa is now headed to the Constitutional Court. Government has ordered these lifesaving devices be shut down, even attempting to revoke Door of Hope’s registration for refusing to comply. But the High Court has given the NGO a temporary reprieve, extending its court order until January.

The Department of Social Development argues that other safety nets exist for mothers, but experts point out these systems consistently fail women. Attorney Nicola Irving says mothers are routinely turned away by social workers and police, leaving them with no real options.

The first baby saver box was built into the Berea Baptist Church wall 25 years ago, and since then hundreds of infants have been safely surrendered. For 26 years, Door of Hope has cared for abandoned babies and is now preparing to take its fight all the way to the country’s highest court.

A child saved, a voice returned

One of the strongest arguments for keeping baby savers open comes from those whose lives began there. Grace Ingram, now 25, started life at Door of Hope in Johannesburg before being adopted and raised in the United States. Today she has returned to South Africa, training as a field guide at an Eastern Cape game reserve, and lending her voice to the fight to protect the very organisation that gave her a future.

“I was adopted from the Door of Hope in 2000,” she explains. “My birth mother relinquished me at a hospital in Limpopo, where Cheryl Allen, the founder of Door of Hope, collected me. Two months later, my adoptive parents welcomed me into their home.”

Grace’s younger sister also came through the stainless steel baby saver box built into the wall of Berea Baptist Church — a direct reminder of how these boxes offer mothers a safe, anonymous option when all others fail.

Looking back at the file her birth mother left behind, Grace has come to understand the desperate circumstances so many women face: raising another toddler without support from family, an absent father, the pressure of studies, and overwhelming stress.

“It parallels the same choices that a lot of other mothers make when they use the Baby Saver option,” Grace says. “I’m forever grateful that my birth mother had the courage to let me go. It’s given me a family, siblings, and opportunities I probably never would have had.”

For Grace, seeing government efforts to close down baby savers is devastating. “They aren’t looking at the real issues — gender-based violence, rape, poverty,” she warns. “Door of Hope is part of my origin story. It’s a sacred place where I was received, held, and wanted before even my adoptive parents met me.”

Families plead: baby savers give life, not loss

Families who’ve adopted through Door of Hope say the prospect of losing baby savers is unthinkable. Andrew and Kieran remember the moment they first met their daughter, describing how “she wasn’t someone else’s child, she was mine.” Kathy and Craig recalled how their little girl, placed in a baby saver as an infant, has since flourished into a bright, confident child who fills their home with joy — living proof, they argue, that shutting down these lifesaving boxes “makes no sense.” Lee and Doug spoke of their son’s biological mother and the courage it took for her to relinquish him, explaining how they often pray for her and hope her circumstances have improved. For them, the Department of Social Development’s argument that theory should outweigh reality falls flat when faced with the desperation many women experience, and the grim reality of unsafe abandonment. These families insist that what is truly at stake is not abstract policy, but the survival of children, the dignity of mothers in crisis, and the creation of families built on love rather than loss

Keep up to date with the latest here: