Disappointment
I could regale you with yet another post of yet another trip to the zoo (and this one included not one, but TWO, beautiful little two-year old girls from Oscar’s orphanage, which made the day extremely special), but I won’t. Instead, I’ll write about what’s been racing through my mind for the past week.
A terribly upsetting news story was recently broadcast on Australian television focusing on adoptions in Ethiopia. Most of you adopting from Ethiopia or who already have done so probably have seen this video. I hesitate to write this for fear of engaging in hyperbole, but I think it’s fair to say it was tragic. The most upsetting aspect of it (to me) was a clip from a waiting child DVD sent to prospective adoptive parents by an agency called “Christian World Adoptions”. In this segment, a woman sat surrounded by children and seemingly some parents and presented the children to the PAPs watching the DVD as being available for adoption. During this process, she said to the people around her something to the effect of “if you don’t want your children to be adopted, please don’t stay.” I am definitely paraphrasing, since I have watched this only twice and do not plan to watch it again. The gist of it was that she was asking parents to relinquish their children for international adoption and the tenor of the piece indicated that this was unsolicited by these parents.
I don’t know how many of you have seen waiting children DVDs. I have to say that, personally, I believe that they are distressing at best. I understand why agencies make them available, but they are extremely tough to watch simply because of their subject matter. Watching video of children available for adoption who are in need of parents should distress us. Watching video of children available for adoption who actually have parents who may be able to care for them should terrify us. I am not saying that the only children who should be adopted are those with no living parents (and please don’t call those kids “true orphans”). I am saying that the only children who should be adopted are those whose first parents or other surviving family members have made their own decision, free from coercion, to make their children available for adoption.
People are rightfully upset as a result of watching this story. We should be. While I think the piece itself was meant to be provocative, probably even shocking, in order to garner attention and ratings, the clip I referenced above was compelling. I do think that there were some glaring inaccuracies in the story that detract from the overall credibility of the piece, but the seed has been planted. How exactly do these kids end up in these orphanages?
As you might imagine, reactions vary greatly online. Families with the agency in question appear to be standing behind them. Families who have already adopted from Ethiopia appear to be saying that this is a result of the influx of new applicants for adoption and this never would have happened back when they adopted. Families in process appear to be confused and a bit afraid. I’m obviously in that last category.
People keep asking what the answer is here. How can this be prevented? I don’t think there is a simple answer.
I don’t think the answer is to shut down international adoption. We can pretend that there is no need for it, but I don’t believe that is the case. We can say that there are alternatives – people or governments can sponsor or otherwise provide for families living in poverty in these regions and that could prevent the need for adoption. A great idea, but it’s not happening on the scale that would be needed, and more importantly, possibly, is that a great many of us do that in different forms, and it does not appear to be eliminating the need for adoptive families.
People also like to say that the UNICEF statistics of the number of orphans is greatly exaggerated. Fine. I’ll agree with the premise. So there aren’t 5,000,000 orphans in Ethiopia who are available for adoption. Are there 500,000? 50,000? Even 5,000 in a year? Because even if 1% of the overblown number is accurate, there are more orphans available for adoption than are going to be adopted in a given year.
I think one thing we can do is engage in much more pointed conversations with our agencies both before and while we’re adopting. So many PAPs appear timid, as if they believe if they ask the hard questions their agency will blackball them. First, if that is the case, perhaps a second look at your agency is in order. Second, I think we want to know the answers to these questions sooner rather than later to prevent being caught unaware when we hear stories like this. The hope, of course, is that this is a complete and total outlier, and that “stories like this” will not occur again, but I do think it’s useful to have whatever information we can gain in this process. Believe me, as an adoptive parent, you’ll be happy to have the answers in the future. We should all better understand the process of how children are relinquished and brought into the care of their respective orphanages. Where are the weaknesses where impropriety could occur? What do our agencies do to prevent these issues?
I think we also have to also stop being so impatient when it comes to referrals. I get the impatience, don’t get me wrong. I just cringe when I see a post on a group where someone talks about getting a referral in X months and there is an immediate response saying “which agency???”. You know people are then moving to that agency expecting a quick referral. And you know that agency is going to be getting calls from those people, frustrated that their referral did not occur in X months. And the question becomes – are some of these agencies going to become a bit more creative in how they manage their average referral time. I think sometimes it might be prudent to remember what a referral actually signifies.
Many other things come to mind, which I’m sure I’ll eventually bore you with, such as conducting independent investigations prior to travel. But for now, I guess I’ll just keep hoping that people will continue to discuss these issues in a thoughtful manner, without resorting to hysteria. I do not think this story taints all adoptions, although it should make us all think a lot more critically about the manner in which we’re choosing to form our families.
Call to Action
I suspect the majority of the fabulous people who read my blog either have adopted, are in the process of adopting or are close to people in one of these two categories. I think most of us know that back in 2000 a major piece of adoption reform legislation was passed. The Child Citizenship Act of 2000 made it possible for our internationally adopted kids to become American citizens automatically when they hit the United States (before then, they actually had to go through the naturalization process). This was a great start, but let’s face it, we can do better.
The FACE Act (the Foreign Adopted Children Equality Act) has been introduced to pick up where the Citizenship Act left off. First, the legislation would treat our adopted children the same as children who are born to US parents overseas. Instead of getting a visa, those kids get a passportto enter the US. They are considered US citizens from birth – with all of the benefits that fact conveys. The US government would still investigate to ensure that our kids are legally “orphans,” but that process would be the responsibility of the State Department. This would obviously streamline the process, since currently both USCIS and State do these investigations.
Additionally, the arbitrary requirement implemented by the State Department that distinguishes between adopted kids who come home on IR-3 (automatic citizens because both parents saw the child during the adoption process) and IR-4 (green card because there was no pre-adoption contact) visas would be eliminated. This distinction was never part of the Citizenship Act. It was enacted by the State Department to ensure that one parent could not adopt a child and bring him or her into the U.S. without the other parent’s knowledge. I won’t even begin to discuss the stupidity of that. I could spend a day, though, talking about the myriad ramifications of that distinction. It needs to go. There are other benefits of the legislation, but I fear I’ve already lost some of you, so I’ll get to the important part.
I know you’re wondering what you can do to help fix this – I know you want to make your child an equal citizen of the United States. First, consider signing this petition. Second, call your Congressional Rep and both of your Senators between Tuesday and Thursday of this week. Don’t talk with the receptionist – ask to speak with the Legislative Director or Chief of Staff (in all seriousness, you deserve to be heard by one of these people – not some young intern or staffer who is simply going to tally your opinion). Don’t be shy – I know you guys have opinions on this. And even if you don’t know who your Members of Congress are (as if you have time to watch the news), I’ve included links above.
What should you do if you want to help but don’t really know what to say? Personally, I’m just planning on speaking from my heart. I’m going to tell them why internationally adopted children of American citizens need automatic US citizenship and why it’s important to me. You can also ask them to be a co-sponsor of the FACE Act. The bill is S. 1359 for the Senate and HR 3110 for the House of Representatives. This isn’t an exercise in public speaking – it’s just meant to let Congress know that there are a lot of us out here who care about this issue.
I know you might think that I’m asking for assistance with this because I’m adopting from Ethiopia and my child will come home with a green card and not as a citizen. This is truly not the case – it’s highly unlikely that this legislation will help me with that issue. Baby Etta will come home on an IR-3 visa because I’m going to spend thousands of dollars visiting her before court in Ethiopia to ensure that she is an American citizen from the time our plane lands. I’m writing a somewhat political post (which you know I don’t do) because supporting this bill is the right thing to do. There should be no distinction between a child I adopt internationally and a child I give birth to on foreign soil. They’re both the children of an American citizen – why is one automatically a citizen and the other not? Give me a truly justifiable answer and you can explain it to me on our way to Ethiopia.
Like a fox
or, then again, I might just be crazy. I am back from a nice, long visit to my doctor. I adore my doctor. I’ve been seeing her for almost three years and she is usually very tuned in to what I’m feeling. Today, I walked in, she looked at me and asked me if I was having panic attacks. Why, yes. Yes, I have been. And with that, it became pretty obvious to me that I am no longer effective in hiding my anxiety disorder.
I’ve had an anxiety disorder for as long as I can remember (actually, I am lucky enough to have two of them – general and social with a soupcon of performance anxiety – the trifecta!), but I’ve been able to manage them without resorting to medication other than in extreme periods. Seems I might be am in one of those periods right about now. Why am I so sure? Because after leaving my doctor’s office, I ran over to the pharmacy and had a panic attack when they told me that one of my prescriptions had not been faxed over. I didn’t flip out and start screaming or clutching my chest thinking I was having a heart attack or anything, but I did get so dizzy that I almost fell over, had shooting pains down my left arm, could actually feel my blood pressure rising from its tranquil 92/60 and had some pretty impressive ringing in my ears. All this while I felt the entire Target store was closing in on me. Delightful.
I’m not bothered by the fact that I have these problems and even that I need to be on medication. I used to be, but I believe that these issues are simply medical conditions. I just don’t see a reason to be ashamed or hide it. I took medicine when I had pneumonia; I don’t see any difference here.
The one downside to this, though, is that I am going to have to disclose it for purposes of my home study. It won’t be an issue when the condition is under control (which is so not the case right now), but I’m not going to lie to my social worker and tell her it is (or worse – lie and say I don’t even have an issue at all). I strongly believe that all parties involved in adoptions need to be honest. In the same way that I don’t want facilitators or orphanage directors or agencies lying to me, I believe that we as prospective adoptive parents need to be honest as well. I’ve known that my brain wasn’t working perfectly for a little while now, which is the biggest reason I’ve held off on getting my dossier done. So, for the time being at least, this is again just a mommy blog, and not an adoption blog. Hope to change that status at some point in the very near future.
Where’s the balance?
Aside from the obvious fact that I’ll have my child home with me, know why I am so anticipating being finished with this adoption? Simply because I don’t want to be part of the negativity in VN adoptionland.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve “met” some really smart, interesting and funny PAPs and APs out there, and I’ve gathered more information on this process than I possibly could have without this network. I’m worn down from the nastiness on the Yahoo! groups. Clearly, I could stop reading them, and I do try. I find myself getting sucked in time and time again (not participating, of course, less someone attacks me, too).
I fear these fights are going to continue to worsen with the negotiations that will soon begin. I’m frustrated with being told repeatedly of the unethical agencies with all of their NOIDs, almost all of which have been cleared. When someone counters with that fact in defense of an agency it is almost always met with the statement that these APs are fighting the poor over-burdened US government with the APs fancy high-priced attorneys. What? I’m astonished at the fact that people (most of whom I would imagine loathe the current administration) characterize CIS and the DEPARTMENT OF STATE as the underdogs in these fights. Why is this not the case? They are the US government. The final decision lies with them. If they had a basis on which to deny a visa, they would do it. Clearly this is what they wanted to do when they issued a Notice of Intent to Deny. I find myself wondering whether those who think our poor little government doesn’t have the wherewithal to fight these things have ever gone up against a government agency? I’ve seen it from the government’s side. They have the resources.
I’m also tired of this I-600 debacle. I don’t begrudge USCIS and DOS the right to investigate to ensure that the children adopted from VN are true orphans. I understand that we might not necessarily do that in all countries, but here, where there is a history of corruption, I think that if these agencies feel there is truly wrong-doing, they should check it out. The important thing here is that children who are truly available for adoption find homes, not that people who want kids get them.
What I worry about is the apparent presumption that all adoptions are suspect. It creates the environment of a witch hunt, searching for anything in support of that presumption. Taking this position results in every adoption being investigated. Doing so in a timely manner is simply not feasible with the number of employees that have been allocated to the task. I believe these people are working; there are just too many applications and too few employees.
The fall-out from this is that children (many with special needs and many of whom, while not being classed as special needs, have medical conditions that will worsen over time without treatment, which they’re not getting) who should have been released from orphanages (many of which are without electricity and heat during this, a winter of record cold) into the arms of loving parents are still stuck there, growing more attached to the caregivers from whom they will be separated and growing more likely to have an attachment disorder because of their lengthened residence in an institution.
Something has got to be done about this. I don’t believe our government is evil (far from it). I don’t believe the employees of these agencies in HCMC and Hanoi want to keep these children from finding homes. I believe that the basic premise of this new system, to ensure that these kids are true orphans, is of extreme importance. I just believe that perhaps the implementation of this new procedure was a bit reactionary (and possibly motivated by matters not entirely disclosed to us). USCIS could have issued a notice that it was going to put a hold on adoptions from the problematic provinces and given itself additional time to implement the new process. Doing so could have prevented the process from seemingly grinding to a halt.
Just as last fall’s problems with paperwork must be fixed, the bottleneck that USCIS has unintentionally (I hope) created with this new procedure must be remedied. I’m concerned, though, that while a lot of PAPs support the “Orphan’s First” process (just not the extreme delays), our government does not share our desire to balance that process with the interests of these children in finding their forever families. I hope I’m wrong.
What I’ve learned from other blogs
- Anyone who currently uses an agency that (a) has ever received a NOID, (b) refers children from a province where a NOID has been issued, or (c) has referred a child that was the subject of an investigation, is a morally bankrupt (or stupid) person, interested only in a quick referral, and may be willing to engage in corruption.
- Anyone who used such an agency in the past (who probably received a “quick referral” back when agencies had them to give and is now home with the child such agency matched them with) is ok, and their adoption is not tainted, so long as they actively denigrate that agency, attack the agency’s clients or bemoan their naivety in choosing the agency.
- Anyone who is with one of the agencies that has not (yet) received a NOID, referred a child from one of the questionable provinces or been the subject of an investigation (of which we are aware) is morally and ethically superior to all.
Clearly, the subject is now closed. All of you in category 1 need to walk away (well, run, really) from your agency (don’t worry about the fact that you still may not have evidence that the agency (and not others in the provinces or at the orphanages themselves) was engaged in wrong-doing or forfeiting the fees you’ve paid, the righteousness you’ll feel from doing so will more than make up for it) and go sign on with one of the “highly ethical” (according to whom, I’m still not sure) agencies. The only tip I have on finding an agency in category 3 is that apparently the agency has to have signed on over 200 clients, all of whom have paid fees and yet are not going to see a referral for probably 2+ years. Evidently, it’s highly ethical to bank that cash while you’re holding your clients back from even starting on their dossiers, but who am I to judge?
I guess we don’t have to consider the fate of the children in the provinces where the category 1 agencies are licensed. Since those agencies are engaged in baby snatching and coercion, I guess that all of those children will be reunited with their birth parents and live happily ever after. Thank you all for setting me straight.
Cut and run?
An interesting comment from Emanual prompted me to consider again whether adoption is inevitably corrupt. I’ve been devouring material in the past few months trying to understand how corruption occurs and whether it’s possible to have an ethical adoption. I’m certain that ethical adoptions occur, so I don’t believe the answer is to cut and run. I think the answer is for us as PAPs to both be proactive in seeing that our agencies are ethical and for us to make sure that we ourselves behave ethically.
We all need to stand up for integrity in adoption. Check out your agency either before you sign, or if you’re already with them, check them out now. This is extremely difficult work – you are never going to get adequate information – at some point you’re going to have to make a judgment call and rely on your instincts. Ask your agency the hard questions – don’t rely on an assumption that someone else must have asked the questions before you. Demand answers to these hard questions. Don’t let yourself be fed rhetoric that any agency could give you. If you don’t get the answers you need on your first phone call. Call again. The agency should not get frustrated at the fact that you’re checking them out.
If you’re able, do a docket search for litigation against your agency. I checked many, and believe me (or don’t – do your own research), there are a lot of cases that have been filed against agencies on the so-called “approved list.” On certain boards, you will see one civil case against one agency cited time after time, as if it is the only salient piece of litigation out there. This case has yet to be decided, and could simply be based on groundless accusations, but it is treated as if it were a decision from the US Supreme Court condemning this agency. But, two considerations about litigation. First, do not assume that just because a case is filed against an agency that the claims made in that case are true – this is America, and we use our civil courts not only for justice but also for satisfying our vendettas. And second, do not assume that just because you hear no references of litigation against the agencies that are considered to be ethical that there is no such litigation. You’d be surprised.
Look at Guide Star for details on both your agency and their charitable foundation (almost all have them). See where the money goes. Understand how corporations work. There’s been a lot on the boards about the “greedy agencies” just wanting to get more clients in the door for fees. But the factor a lot of people seem to forget is that these are NON-profit corporations. These agencies aren’t distributing dividends to their stockholders, they’re not making a profit. The employees in my agency are not well paid and they’re not picking up extra on the charitable foundation side. I’ve checked. The only way they’re pocketing any real money is if they are siphoning off the international fees or getting kick backs from corrupt facilitators. Show me where that is occurring and I’ll do more than point my fingers at them, but until I have something looking like proof, I will not.
We live in a culture where the mere mention of the word “corporation” gets people in a lather. But, people, these are not the oil companies we detest so much. These are agencies whose sole purpose is to find families for children without them. That is what adoption is about. It’s not about you or me or our desire to have a child. It’s not about the fact that you may have been trying to get pregnant for 10 years. It’s about orphans who have a bleak future, who are possibly malnourished and languishing in orphanages in countries that experience poverty at a level you and I cannot understand. It’s about finding homes for children who, if not adopted, are going to be cast aside from the orphanage around age 15, left to fend for themselves in countries that don’t even have the limited safety net we have here. So, do I think we give up on adoption? No way.
My desire to adopt was formed when I was a child. There are millions of children in this world who need families, and I truly believe that those of us who are capable have a responsibility to take care of them. However, there are evil people in this world, people who will prey on those desperate to have a family, who are willing to buy or steal children for a fee. Soon after countries open to international adoption, these monsters come out of the woodwork; that seems to be the cycle. But, I don’t think that these people play a part in the majority of adoptions. I believe they’re fairly rare, but once they’re discovered, we jump to the conclusion that this is the typical behavior. To make that leap, though, I think we have to assume that most people are evil, which I will not do. These people certainly exist, but I will not let them keep me from giving a child a future. Will I adopt from Vietnam? I certainly hope so, but it will be in an ethically sound way. Once I understood more about the gender issue, I became open to either gender (and how crazy was it that I wasn’t before?). I’m going to continue to think critically throughout the process. I’m not going to turn a blind eye to questionable paperwork, ignore red flags or engage in questionable behavior. I believe that if I do, I become complicit in this corruption. That’s just not going to happen.
How much corruption is too much?
The other day, I read on one of the boards a query from a PAP asking for examples of the types of corruption that are thought to be currently occurring in Vietnam (good for her). I was, however, really bothered when she followed that question with a statement that some forms of corruption are worse than others. Really? I think it was an innocent remark and I don’t mean to condemn her, but I think that it does raise an interesting point.
Is it ok to modify forms to slip them through the process, but not ok to pay a birth mother to relinquish her child? Is it ok to accede to a request for an additional $500 at an orphanage, but not ok to pay a finder’s fee? Is it ok to encourage staff at an orphanage to turn away birth parents if they return for their child, but not ok to outright kidnap a child? I’m going to go out on a limb here and say no. It’s not ok to do any of these things.
I understand that international adoption is an incredibly difficult process. That’s probably why they tell you at the outset that it’s not for the faint of heart. I understand that some families come to adoption as a last chance after years and years of attempting to have a biological family. I understand that when in country, after bonding with their child, how unimaginably difficult it must be to leave Vietnam without that child. What I don’t understand is how a person could let the desire (even desperation) to have a child override their sense of what is right and wrong.
*References to unsubstantiated stories ahead* We’ve probably all read the report of the AP in the airport in Asia who had her baby bundled up and in a sling all in an attempt to get the child into the United States without any authorities seeing that the child in her arms was not the child in the passport she was carrying. We’ve also read the stories of PAPs being told that they needed to pay the orphanage another $500 for food for the child they were adopting.
If these reports are true, and I have no way of verifying that they are (and quite honestly, I have a really hard time believing the first, while the second seems like it could be within the realm of possibility(I’m using these for the sake of examples only)), what were these people thinking? What would you do if you were in these positions? I have to hope that, if faced with an orphanage director or an in-country facilitator asking for additional fees to be paid that I would just say no. I know that there’s no way that I would try to SMUGGLE a child out of the country and into the US.
What I continue to read in blogland are accusations against agencies. I read a lot of accusations by APs from the previous round of adoptions in Vietnam of impropriety in their own adoptions, blaming it all on the agencies. And, again, I’ll say that if agencies are engaging in corrupt practices, they need to be shut down.
But there’s another element of corruption that I think we’re ignoring. While we’re quick to point fingers at agencies, I don’t see a lot of analysis of what we may have done to contribute to this. We, as PAPs cannot allow our desire to come home with a child outweigh the absolute need to have the process be ethical. I think we contribute to that in at least a couple of ways. First, we cannot all be requesting HBG AYAP ASAP (healthy baby girl, as young as possible, as soon as possible). I’m not going to turn this into a gender/SN post, but I implore those of you requesting this to think about what you’re doing. You are taxing a system that has broken under the weight of this before. If there is corruption in Vietnam, how are unethical facilitators or “finders” not going to take advantage of our American demand for these girls? Supply is short, demand is high, opportunity for unethical behavior awaits. Unlike here, in VN, there does not appear to be a reliable accounting of where our large international fees actually go. Personally, I don’t want a penny of it to go to people trying to “facilitate” this demand.
Obviously, that is a much more subtle form of corruption, one that I know a lot of people will not agree occurs. I think that we each need to think of the possibility that we might be faced with a situation where our reaction will decide the fate of our adoption. If you knew that the baby in your arms was not the same baby as the one in the passport you were carrying, what would you do? If you were told that you needed to make a “donation” to anyone in addition to the fees you had already paid in order to get “your” child home, what would you do? I know what I would do. I hope you would do the same.
Quite a week
It’s been quite a week in the Vietnam adoption community, what with the Embassy letter and all. If you, like me, need help understanding child trafficking, etc., you might want to take a look at this – http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3679&context=expresso. Of course I’m linking to a law review article, since each of his statements needs to be supported (see “Accountability”). I’m certainly not advocating any position he takes, but I found it useful in the sense of giving me an idea of what this sort of corruption is all about and how cyclical it is (what a depressing thought). It was also helpful to me from the perspective of understanding the economics involved. While other bloggers out there are quick to point fingers at a few agencies, accusing them of wrong-doing, I found it interesting to see how this sort of corruption can easily occur solely in the sending country without an agency’s involvement.
NOIDs are not necessarily a condemnation of an agency. If the Embassy / USCIS are investigating two (or more) provinces, that does not necessarily mean that the agencies that have facilitated adoptions in those provinces are corrupt. The economic incentive to engage in this horrific behavior seems to me at least to lie on the side of those receiving the vast majority of the “international fees,” the largest chunk of money we all pay in connection with an adoption, amounts that are not necessarily going to the US agencies. Might US agencies be directly involved or complicit by turning a blind eye? I’m sure that could be. But, so far, neither the Embassy nor the USCIS has named agencies responsible. Their focus appears to be on the orphanages / provinces themselves (per the Embassy letter). Nowhere in that letter did it state that US agencies themselves are involved in any of the misdeeds that were mentioned.
If impropriety is occurring in these provinces, the US agencies working there (including mine) need to immediately cease placements from there (if the government hasn’t already shut them down, as we’ve heard through the rumor mill). I’m sure they’re all considering whether to do so now. In the meantime, let’s stop the sanctimonious finger pointing and chants of “my adoption is more ethical than yours.” Let’s hope that these events are isolated and we can all get back to the days where our biggest worries were when we would get a referral or travel call.
-
Etta’s Hats
Where I’ve Been
