Showing posts with label Ethics/Unethical Practices. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ethics/Unethical Practices. Show all posts

Thursday, April 4, 2013

DOS Adoption Notice: Health Concerns in Ethiopia


Ethiopia April 2, 2013

Notice: Health Concerns in Ethiopia

On March 14, 2013, U.S. Embassy Addis Ababa released an important message for U.S. citizens via email to U.S. adoption service providers and a notice on the U.S. Embassy Addis Ababa website about a recent increase in suspected meningitis cases in Ethiopia.  The suspected cases are primarily in the Southern Nations, Nationalities and People’s Region (SNNPR), but the area of concern extends north to include tourist areas around Hawassa and Lake Langano.  The Department of State shares the full text below in order to ensure wide distribution among the adoption community.  As always, we recommend that adoptive parents and other U.S. travelers check Travel.State.gov prior to traveling to Ethiopia or any other country for the latest travel information from the Department of State.

Many adopted children come from SNNPR, and adoptive parents are encouraged to work with their adoption service providers (ASPs) to ensure that children who come from affected areas are properly evaluated by a medical professional, and that treatment or vaccination be given if required.  Given that children from all over Ethiopia live together in care centers in Addis Ababa, all adoptive parents should be aware that the risk of contracting meningitis is not necessarily limited to children who come from the affected region.  The Embassy’s Consular Section can provide a list of pediatricians working in Addis Ababa, but most ASPs have an existing network of health care providers, and general inquiries about your child’s health situation are best directed to your ASP.

On a related note, many adopted children face significant health challenges in Ethiopia that require continuing treatment after immigration to the United States.  While the Embassy’s panel physician evaluates children for their fitness to travel and the likelihood of them transmitting a communicable disease, such as tuberculosis, it is primarily the responsibility of the ASP and the orphanage to ensure proper medical treatment from the time a child enters institutional care until the day he/she travels to the United States.  Adoptive parents should expect that a child’s medical file will travel with him/her from a rural clinic in the village where they were born, to the pediatrician’s office in Addis Ababa, and then to be made available for use by the child’s new physician in the United States.  If such information is not made available as a matter of course, adoptive parents are encouraged to request it from their ASPs.

Embassy Addis Ababa Notice:

Meningitis

According to the World Health Organization, Ethiopia is currently at the peak of the meningitis transmission season, which extends through March and April up to the beginning of May.  Suspected cases of meningitis were reported in Southern Nation, Nationalities, and Peoples’ Region (SNNPR) and Oromia Region.  So far this year cases were recorded in close to 60 woredas (local municipalities) across 14 zones of SNNPR and Oromia, with upsurges of cases in 16 woredas of SNNPR and Oromia.  Woredas reporting increased cases of meningitis include Arbaminch Zuria, Halaba, Hawassa town, Dale, Shebedino, Gorche, and Wonsho in SNNPR, and Arsi Negele, Shalla, Shashemene Town, Shashemene Rural, Dodolla, Siraro, Wondo, and Gedeb Assassa in Oromia Region.

In light of these findings, the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa recommends that U.S. citizens residing and traveling in Ethiopia avoid travel to these areas unless they have been vaccinated against meningitis within the past three years.  If you were vaccinated recently, do not travel to these affected areas for at least 14 days after receiving the vaccination.  (Meningitis vaccinations do not take effect for 14 days.)

You can find detailed information on vaccinations and other health precautions on the CDC website.  For information about outbreaks of infectious diseases abroad, consult the World Health Organization (WHO) website.  The WHO website also contains additional health information for travelers, including detailed country-specific health information.

If you are going to live in or travel to Ethiopia, please take the time to tell us about your trip by enrolling in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP).  If you enroll, we can keep you up to date with important safety and security announcements.  It will also help your friends and family get in touch with you in an emergency.  You should remember to keep all of your information in STEP up to date. It is important during enrollment or updating of information to include your current phone number and current email address where you can be reached in case of an emergency.

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Friday, March 15, 2013

DOS Adoption Notice: Reports of the Removal of Children from Orphanages in the DRC


Democratic Republic of Congo  
March 15, 2013

Notice: Reports of the Removal of Children from Orphanages in the DRC

The U.S. Department of State recently received several reports that children adopted in the Democratic Republic of Congo have reportedly been taken from orphanages by a birth parent or relative after the adoption decree and certificate of non-appeal was issued by Congolese courts. This information reportedly has been presented to adoptive families by their agencies either following the Form I-600 petition approval, or immediately prior to filing the Form I-600 petition.

While there is a specific legal procedure through the Congolese courts for a biological parent or relative to reclaim an abandoned or relinquished child prior to any adoption judgments, once a certificate of non-appeal is issued, the adoption judgment can generally no longer be the subject of appeal or objection. Congolese courts are able to dissolve an adoption at the request of the adoptee or the adoptive parent in exceptional circumstances, but only through appropriate legal processes. Adoptive parents who have already received adoption decrees and certificates of non-appeal, but learn that their child was removed from an orphanage by a birth parent or relative, may wish to seek independent legal counsel in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to learn their legal rights as the adoptive parents under Congolese law.

The U.S. Embassy in Kinshasa maintains a list of attorneys who have identified themselves as willing to assist U.S. citizen clients. Placement on this list does not constitute endorsement or assessment of an individual attorney's qualifications by the U.S. Embassy in Kinshasa or the U.S. Department of State.

If you have concerns, questions, or information regarding this issue, please contact the U.S. Department of State, Office of Children's Issues at AskCI@state.gov.

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Sunday, January 27, 2013

DOS Adoption Notice: Notes from Ambassador Jacobs' Meeting with Adoption Service Providers on December 11, 2012 in Addis Ababa


Ethiopia January 25, 2013

Notice: Notes from Ambassador Jacobs' Meeting with Adoption Service Providers on December 11, 2012 in Addis Ababa

During a visit to Addis Ababa from December 8-11, 2012, Ambassador Susan Jacobs, Special Advisor for Children’s Issues, met with the staff of U.S.-based Adoption Service Providers (ASPs).  The Office of Children's Issues posts this notice to provide interested parties with information discussed at the meeting on December 11, 2012.  Meetings between Embassy Addis’ Adoptions Unit and ASPs take place several times a year and are announced to in-country representatives in advance.  This notice recaps the issues discussed.

Administrative Discussion with Embassy Addis Ababa Adoptions Unit

I-600A Validity
An adoptive family’s I-600A petition must be valid at the time that the I-600 petition and case file are submitted to the U.S. Embassy for review.  Currently, many adoption service providers email the embassy at ConsAdoptionAddis@state.gov following initial I-600A approval by the National Benefits Center in order to confirm the case number and the expiration date of the fingerprint approval and I-600A approval.  Embassy Addis’ Adoptions Unit requests that, at the time the adoption service provider (ASP) submits the original I-600 and other supporting documents, that it also provide a printed copy of the confirmation email mentioned above.  Taking this additional step will ensure that the I-600A is valid at the time of I-600 submission, and help us avoid instances where a family might learn their fingerprint clearances are expiring very late in the Embassy review process.
The screening checklist linked on Embassy Addis’ website here has been updated to reflect this new change.

Expedited processing
The Adoptions Unit will consider on a case-by-case basis expeditious processing for children with serious medical conditions that require urgent treatment that is unavailable in Ethiopia.  Cases involving children who have serious but stable medical conditions or who are already undergoing treatment in Ethiopia generally do not qualify for expeditious processing.  More typical medical conditions like asthma or stable HIV/AIDS, which are common reasons for requesting expedited processing, would not usually qualify.


Expedited cases are not exempt from the required review of orphan status through the Form I-604, Determination on Child for Adoption.  We encourage all agencies to inform us as early as possible about cases involving children with serious medical conditions requiring urgent treatment that is unavailable in Ethiopia, even at the time of referral.  The more information about the child’s medical condition we have in advance, the faster we’ll be able to move the case through the system.
For cases that we do expedite, it is essential that the ASP stay in close contact with the panel physician in order to keep the adoptive families informed of how long it will take for a child to be medically cleared for travel.  The Adoptions Unit encourages parents to direct questions about the timing of the medical clearance to their ASPs, so it is important that ASP staff be aware of the status of their respective children’s panel physician clearances at all times.  Doing so will ensure that a child who is cleared for a visa does not get held up because of unexpected delays with the medical clearance.

For some children with confirmed TB or other medical conditions that require lengthy testing prior to issuance of the panel physician report, the Adoptions Unit can work with the ASP to have the child examined prior to issuance of the Ethiopian passport.

Cases from the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People’s Region (SNNPR)
The Adoptions Unit requests that ASPs provide detailed information on the status of any cases which have been delayed for a significant period of time (i.e. 8+ months) because of the new review process instituted by the SNNPR Bureau of Women’s, Children’s, and Youth Affairs (BOWCYA) office.  Embassy Addis Ababa supports the efforts of SNNPR BOWCYA to accurately document all orphaned children within the region, and to follow the Alternative Care Guidelines outlined in an Ethiopian Ministry of Women’s, Children’s, and Youth Affairs 2009 directive on the subject.  However, the Adoptions Unit recognizes that families adopting from Ethiopia’s southern region have undergone an extremely lengthy and sometimes difficult process, and so we will expedite processing of those cases to the extent possible.  As with cases that are expedited for medical reasons, cases from SNNPR are not exempt from the required review of orphan status through the Form I-604, Determination on Child for Adoption.

Addis Ababa Death Certificates
For children who come from Addis Ababa and whose parents are deceased, we still require a death certificate from the Addis Ababa municipal government if the children’s parents died in the city.  In general, a statement from a church or an Islamic court will not be sufficient, especially for cases from Addis Ababa where death certificates are fairly easy to obtain.  More information about which local documents are acceptable is available on the embassy’s website.

Key Points from Remarks by Ambassador Susan Jacobs,
Special Advisor for Children’s Issues

Standards of Practice
Adoption Service Providers continue to improve their standards of practice, and Embassy Addis’ Adoptions Unit reports that the documentation submitted with adopted children’s case files as part of the I-600 petition has significantly improved over the last year.  However, it is important for ASPs to look beyond documentation and ask what they can do to ensure ethical and transparent adoptions that are in the best interest of the child.  Ethical and transparent adoptions lead to clearer and more easily adjudicated petitions, and are in everyone’s best interests. 

Also with respect to documentation, we encourage ASPs to work with orphanages to ensure proper documentation of a child’s entrance into care, including gathering information about the child’s parentage, age, circumstances of abandonment, efforts made to locate parents or ensure that parental or guardianship rights were appropriately relinquished, and even a photograph of the child at the time of placement with the orphanage, if available.   Ensuring that this information is gathered at the time of entrance into care enables your agency to ensure the children who are placed for intercountry adoption are truly available for adoption, and that there are no opportunities for misfeasance in the referral process.  We recognize that many ASPs work with children who were placed in orphanages long ago, which makes it even more important to work with those orphanages to improve standards of practice to ensure that children are properly documented at the time they are placed for intercountry adoption. 

Similarly, while it is important to be able to acquire the necessary documentation in any given adoption, it is more important to know how the orphanage comes by this information and how it operates on a daily basis.  If an ASP contributes funds to an orphanage or relies on an affiliate to operate an orphanage on its behalf, the ASP needs to know where that money goes and ensure that it benefits the children.   Moreover, ASPs need to ensure that the documentation about a child presented by an orphanage is a reflection of the true circumstances and not simply a document created to satisfy a request.

Finally, on the issue of raising the standards of practice, the Department of State is supportive of the new Intercountry Adoption Universal Accreditation Act of 2012, a measure that will require all U.S.-based ASPs to be Hague accredited, even when operating in countries like Ethiopia that have not acceded to the Hague Convention.  The act will take effect July 14, 2014

Education of Parents
Ethical and transparent adoptions can only occur when birth families are making fully informed decisions without influence from outside parties.  One of the ways ASPs can support ethical and transparent adoptions is to ensure that relinquishing parents and relatives understand the true meaning of intercountry adoption and the consequences of the decision to relinquish a child. 

It is also important to ensure that adoptive parents are educated and informed about the children they are adopting.  If an ASP or the orphanage has information about a child’s medical condition or a behavioral issue, it is essential that the adoptive family be provided with that information.  Bringing an adopted child into a new family and culture, often while learning a new language, is extremely difficult.  Just as educating relinquishing parents is essential for the best interests of the child, keeping adoptive parents informed must be a top priority for every ASP.  We need to give every adoptive family the tools and information needed to succeed.
http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=ethiopia_19
Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Cautionary Statement for Families In Process of Adopting from Russia


PEAR has become aware of possible scams and exploitative practices being aimed at families currently in the process of adopting from Russia. We would like to take this opportunity to encourage those caught in the adoption ban to proceed with caution, and to thoroughly investigate any individual or organization offering assistance. Of special concern are individuals and organizations offering private adoption services or information available only through non-public, locked, or pay-for-viewing websites.

We encourage waiting families to consult with their agency and the US Embassy in Moscow if they believe that their case is not being adequately advocated. If this does not produce sufficient answers and attention, we suggest that families consult with an attorney in the US who has experience with intercountry adoption practices and international law. Please take care not to set yourself up for exploitative, unethical, and illegal practices.

We also encourage families to share information concerning this type of conduct with other adopting families via any format with which they feel comfortable (online adoptive parent groups, support groups, etc) and with the US Embassy/Department of State through the Russianadoption@state.gov email address.


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Special Appeal: Sponsorship of Panel Speaker at Pepperdine



Pepperdine University School of Law is holding a conference February 8 - 9, 2013 entitled "Intercountry Adoption: Orphan Rescue or Child Trafficking?" One of the invited panel speakers is Mark Riley, Alternative Care Consultant and Child Advocate at The Alternative Care Initiative. Mark is an international adoptive parent who has been an outspoken critic of unethical international adoption practices. He is working with the Ugandan government to address the current issues within the Ugandan system and has been actively involved in Alternative Care for children, encouraging changes to institutional care, since he first visited Uganda in 2001.  Mark is currently supporting the Ugandan Government on Alternative Care and has developed a number of toolkits to assess and monitor child care institutions. 

Mark, along with his wife Keren, has provided  insight, inspiration, and support to PEAR over the last two years and our board believes that Mark's contributions at this conference are much needed. The effect of the pressures of current intercountry adoption "programs" on alternative care options for children in Uganda and elsewhere is an issue that needs to be discussed. Mark's perspective as both an adoptive father and consultant in alternative care is unique and reflects PEAR's perspective on these topics.

PEAR's board has pledged $500 to Mark's expenses, but we would like to open up a brief fundraising campaign through our membership and readership to add to that amount.

If you would like to support Mark's participation in the conference, please visit our website to for information on how to make a donation either by check or via PayPal. http://pear-reform.org/donate.htm

Please send an email to our board designating  that the donation is for sponsoring Mark Riley as a speaker at the Pepperdine Conference. reform@pear-reform.org,  place "Conference Sponsorship" in the "to" field, and let us know whether you contributed via PayPal or will be forwarding a check to Margaret Weeks.

For information on the Conference, please visit:
http://law.pepperdine.edu/nootbaar/annual-conference/

For information on the Rileys and their work in Uganda, please visit:
http://www.alternative-care-uganda.org/
http://rileysinuganda.blogspot.com/

PEAR is a 501c3 nonprofit.


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Universal Accreditation Act Becomes Law

President Obama signed the Intercountry adoption Universal Accreditation Act on January 14, 2013. 

The DOS published the following Announcement on the Universal Accreditation Act:
 
 On January 14, 2013, the President signed The Intercountry Adoption Universal Accreditation Act of 2012 (UAA), one of the last bills passed in the final days of the 112th Congress. The effective date of the UAA is July 14, 2014, 18 months after the President's signature.

The UAA has broad implications for all U.S. adoption service providers (ASPs) active in intercountry adoption. It affects currently accredited or approved ASPs and those ASPs with programs only in non-Hague Adoption Convention countries of origin, where federal accreditation or approval was not previously required.


The purpose of the UAA is to apply the provisions of the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 (IAA) concerning the accreditation of ASPs to agencies and persons providing adoption services in cases involving children described in Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 101(b)(1)(F) and adopted through the orphan process. By requiring all ASPs handling cases under 101(b)(1)(F) and 101(b)(1)(G) (concerning children habitually resident in Hague Adoption Convention countries) to receive the same accreditation under federal standards, families adopting internationally will have the assurance that regardless from where they adopt, the ASP they choose to work with will be in substantial compliance with the same ethical standards of practice and conduct.


Previously, the conduct of accredited agencies in non-Convention cases did not generally fall under the oversight and monitoring responsibilities of the Department of State-designated accrediting entities (AEs). Such conduct is now subject to the oversight and monitoring by AEs. The UAA also extends the enforcement provisions of the IAA to ASPs providing adoption services in orphan cases.

The UAA provides for transition cases (grandfathering) in certain situations; ASPs providing adoption services in grandfathered cases do not need to be accredited.


A copy of the UAA is available in pdf format at this link.

Additional information on the UAA will be available soon on our website, Adoption.State.gov, in the Information for Agencies section.

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Saturday, December 29, 2012

PEAR Ethics Alert and Cautionary Statement on Adoptions from Democratic Republic of Congo

PEAR Ethics Alert and Cautionary Statement on Adoptions from Democratic Republic of Congo



PEAR has received a number of reports from adopting families and NGOs on the ground in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) regarding unethical conduct by adoption agencies, adopting families, local facilitators/attorneys, orphanage personnel, and officials in the DRC. These reports have come to us over the past year via informal notifications (individual emails, adoption chats, facebook postings), agency website information, blogs, media, NGO reports, US Department of State and Embassy communications, and direct communications with adopting parents and NGOs working with families and children on the ground in the DRC.

Due to the seriousness of these reports, the rapidly increasing interest in adoption from this country, and the continuing abuses of the process in the DRC, it is PEAR’s recommendation that families do not initiate new adoption applications at this time. We also recommend that those families currently in process either switch to another program, consider sponsoring a child, or, at a minimum, exercise extreme caution in pursuing adoption from DRC.  We encourage families who have recently completed or are currently in process to:
  • keep themselves aware of ethical issues and red flags for abnormal process;
  • honestly evaluate paperwork; 
  • question information they receive from orphanages and agencies;
  • question fees, especially fees above the average for an agency-assisted adoption and any “mandatory donations” made without a written receipt from the donee;
  • request itemized receipts for payments, including donations, in the US and abroad;
  • be aware that using a Hague Accredited agency does NOT guarantee an ethical and/or legal, adoption experience; and,
  • report any misgivings or suspicions concerning illegal or unethical conduct to appropriate US and Congolese officials.

In addition, we urgently call on the governments of the DRC and the United States to investigate allegations of corruption thoroughly and take any and all measures necessary to address these issues with honesty and transparency in order to protect Congolese children and families as well as US citizen prospective adoptive families. It is the duty of the US Embassies abroad to protect US citizens. Withholding critical information concerning adoption agencies, facilitators, and case trends from US adopting families is placing them at risk of involvement in illegal and/or unethical adoptions.

Ethical concerns include:

  1. Lack of proper infrastructure to support ethical adoption practices and thwart unethical, illegal processes. The DRC was recently named a “failed state” by Foreign Policy and the Fund for Peace  http://www.foreignpolicy.com/failed_states_index_2012_interactive. The lack of a proper infrastructure for child welfare, legal processes, and criminal prosecutions leaves an open invitation to the unethical conduct of adoption agencies known for unethical practices in other countries, agencies such as Celebrate Children International (an agency denied Hague accreditation despite numerous attempts, it was involved in the book about Guatemalan adoption corruption, Finding Fernanda). Although the DRC has a Child Protection Code in place, that code is rarely enforced,  earning them a Tier 2 rating by the US DOS for the 5th consecutive year. United States Department of State, 2012 Trafficking in Persons Report - Congo, Republic of the, 19 June 2012, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4fe30cd5c.html [accessed 16 September 2012]. Additionally, frequent reports of harassment, beatings, arbitrary arrests and detentions have increased for those who attempt to  investigate and report human rights violations. 2011 Human Rights Report: Democratic Republic of the Congo Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2011/af/186183.htm
  2. Reports of extensive bribes paid to local officials by US adoption agencies and/or their local facilitators (in addition to the direct information we have received from concerned adoptive families and NGO’s, the bribery situation is openly discussed and has been for quite an extensive time, on adoption chats such as Babycenter and adoption blogs, see http://congoadoptions.blogspot.com/ for a blog roll). In fact, in their 2010 report on Human Rights on Congo, the US DOS stated: “The law provides for criminal penalties for official corruption; however, the government did not implement the law effectively, and officials engaged in corrupt practices with impunity.” http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/af/154341.htm the 2011 Report contains similar concerns for all levels of government, including the judiciary and police. PEAR would like to remind US agencies and families who participate in this bribery of foreign officials are subject to criminal prosecution under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, http://www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa/
  3. Reports that orphanages are not using the money donated by agencies and adopting parents for the care of children. Donations run anywhere from $800-10,000 for "humanitarian aid" and "upkeep" of the child while in their care.  These same orphanages are not accountable for their funds and repeated visits by adopting parents reveal the children in a continued neglected state and gift donations no where to be found. PEAR has received numerous notifications from both adoptive families and NGOs on the ground in DRC concerning this issue.
  4. Repeated reports from foreign NGOs and adopting families of child laundering, baby selling, kidnapping, and coercive relinquishment practices called “harvesting”.  See both What Happened? Delighted In The Lord Blog, 9/27/2012,  http://delightedinthelord.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/what-happened/) and Combatting Corruption in Congo, MLJ Adoption Blog, 6/20/2012, Sonja Brown,  http://mljadoptions.com/Media.aspx?articleID=512 for referral to criminal conduct in adoption.
  5. Program growing too quickly without being tested for stability and capacity, creating huge potential for ethical/legal issues due to unrealistic expectations by PAPs and agencies and increasing pressure on local authorities to produce “adoptable” children. In 2008, there were 9 adoptions from DRC to the US. In 2011, that number increased to 133. We have received preliminary reports that numbers for 2012 are at least double. Historically speaking, when an increase of this magnitude happens, the ethics of the program decrease as participants engage in exploitative measures to increase profits. This recently happened in Guatemala, Vietnam, and Ethiopia. While there are many vulnerable children in need of care, the competition in intercountry adoption programs for young, healthy children with “documentation” invites the use of unethical and illegal practices both in finding children and filling orphanages that are merely holding places for children destined for intercountry adoption.
  6. Inconsistent and  inexplicable fees. According to the US Embassy in Kinshana, the following fees are typical within DRC for the purposes of completing an adoption: Court fees for an adoption case average between $100 and $300.  Lawyer fees can range from $1,000 to $2,500. http://kinshasa.usembassy.gov/adoption.html Currently, some US agencies are listing “Foreign Fees” that far exceed the costs enumerated above while others appear to reflect true costs. For example, Wasatch International’s foreign fee for DRC is $15,000, whereas Lifeline lists their foreign fee as a mere $1000. MLJ Adoptions does not breakdown an exact amount for the foreign fee, listing it instead as combined with in-country services for the child pending adoption, hotel costs for the family while incountry, and deposits on post placement visits ($500), the total of which is $24,000. The average annual income in DRC is $675 per year (compare to USA $45835.5 in 2008). Lawyers fees for adoption are $1,000 to $2,500, where is the remaining money going to?

We are dismayed to make this recommendation in light of the high numbers of children in need in DCR. However, we believe that the focus in DRC has shifted from finding solutions for children in need of families to finding children to fit the needs of an increasing number prospective adoptive parents. We suspect that some agencies are unrealistically recruiting families into DRC programs to fill the financial gap caused by recent closures and slow downs in previously high-volume countries.

We encourage those interested in DCR adoptions to read the articles cited above as well as  reports contained here:


If, after reading the above, you are determined to adopt from DRC, please do everything in your power to ensure that your child is a true orphan in need of intercountry adoption as the only viable option of alternative care. Follow the tips and suggestions for those adopting from Congo that are found here: http://kitumaini.blogspot.com.

PEAR continues to monitor adoption from DRC and will update our recommendations when believe adequate controls have been put into place to ensure ethical adoptions.



Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Kyryzstan Update: Reports Indicate Minister Aquitted, Assistant Guilty in Bribery Cases

24.kg media is reporting that Ex-minister of Social Development Ravshan Sabirov was acquitted and his assistant Takhir Mirzakhmedov was sentenced to 6 years of imprisonment in the bribery cases uncovered this summer. http://eng.24.kg/community/2012/11/21/26577.html

This updates previous posts to PEAR's blog: http://pear-now.blogspot.com/search?q=kyrgyzstan


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

DOS Adoption Notice: Colombia's revised procedures for determining children's eligibility for intercountry adoption

Colombia
October 22, 2012 
Notice: Colombia's revised procedures for determining children's eligibility for intercountry adoption
 
Colombia's Institute for Family Welfare (ICBF) recently announced revised procedures for determining a child’s eligibility for intercountry adoption, which may affect some adoptions involving U.S. families. This process is known in Colombia as the “re-establishment of rights.” ICBF implemented these new procedures as a result of a November 2011 Constitutional Court ruling that ICBF was not fully considering the rights of, and opportunities for placement with, biological and extended families before placing a child for domestic or intercountry adoption.

To comply with the Constitutional Court decision, ICBF has been reviewing approximately 1,300 declarations of adoptability to ensure they meet the revised procedures. ICBF has identified a number of cases in which the adoption eligibility determination for a child does not meet the new standards. ICBF has placed an administrative hold on these cases until it is satisfied that the adoptability determination is evaluated as to whether there might be an extended family member who could care for the child.  ICBF will notify prospective adoptive families that have been matched with children whose cases require evaluation. For privacy reasons, ICBF cannot inform the prospective adoptive families of the specific reasons for the review, and ICBF cannot offer any guarantee of the final outcome of the review.

As of September 2012, the U.S. Embassy in Bogota is aware of six instances involving U.S. families whose adoption proceedings required review; one adoption has since been finalized. These reviews represent a small percentage of the total number of intercountry adoptions between Colombia and the United States, and the Embassy continues to work with ICBF to encourage timely resolution. Families who learn that their adoption has been placed on hold should inform the U.S. Embassy in Bogota by contacting IVBogota@state.gov.

In addition to these formal reviews, both ICBF and the Colombian family court system appear to be scrutinizing proposed adoptions more carefully. Prospective adoptive families may experience delays while ICBF evaluates a family’s suitability before finalizing the match with an available child. The issuance of the adoption decree by a family court judge may also take longer than in the past. Families should anticipate spending six to eight weeks in Colombia to obtain the final adoption decree. Given these delays, the Embassy strongly advises all families with less than three months’ validity left on USCIS fingerprint results to make arrangements with USCIS (NBC.Hague@dhs.gov) to update these before traveling to Colombia to complete the adoption.

The Department of State will provide updated information on adoption.state.gov as it becomes available. If you have any questions about this notice, please contact the Office of Children’s Issues at 1-888-407-4747 within the United States, or 202-501-4444 from outside the United States. E-mail inquiries may be directed to AdoptionUSCA@state.gov.

http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=colombia_1

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Thursday, September 13, 2012

ISS Report: INVESTIGATING THE GREY ZONES OF INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION


The ISS (International Social Services) has released its report entitled: INVESTIGATING THE GREY ZONES OF INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION. Anyone involved in or considering intercountry adoption should read this detailed report and its suggestions for improving  intercountry adoption practices.

PEAR Members and Newsletter Members can access the 142 page report on PEAR's Yahoo Groups.  The full  ISS Report is also available for download on the ISS USA webpage: http://iss-usa.org/pressdetails.asp?IdPress=59

Excerpt from the Foreword, written by David Smolin:

INVESTIGATING THE GREY ZONES OF INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION illuminates thecontemporary paradoxes of intercountry adoption (ICA). While theoretically regulated by the 1993 Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption (THC-93), in fact almost two-thirds of contemporary intercountry adoptions are not legally governed by the treaty. While purportedly addressed at least in broad terms by the fundamental 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), a large proportion of intercountry adoptions in fact arise in circumstances where there have been severe violations of the rights of both children and adults, due to poverty and/or discrimination based on disability, gender, race, or ethnic group. Thus, where children’s rights and human rights are respected and successfully implemented, there are very few children legitimately in need of adoption. Further, while adoption is theoretically a means to ameliorate rights deprivations and to implement the best interests of the child, as actually practiced it easily becomes driven by the desire of adults for children, and by financial incentives. Thus, there is a severe temptation to create systems which use ICA to address problems such as poverty and discrimination, when from a child rights and human rights perspective it should be mandatory instead to remedy the underlying rights and equality violations. At the same time, vulnerable children clearly cannot wait for poverty, discrimination and underlying structural problems to be alleviated in their societies before receiving appropriate interventions, providing some ambiguity in practical terms as to the proper implementation of the subsidiarity principle. These paradoxes indeed create “grey zones.”

The Report goes beyond addressing “grey zones” to describe the zones of clearly illicit and illegal activity: children kidnapped and sold for ICA; fraud and money being used as inducements to obtain relinquishments; false documentation being supplied to cover up these means of illicitly obtaining children.    Concern with such illegal conduct was a precipitating concern of the THC-93 as reflected by the text and work of preparation; that these abusive practices remain persistent and widespread is demonstrated by the fact that the HCCH Special Commission of 2010 devoted the first day to “the abduction, the sale of, or traffic in children” in the context of intercountry adoption. Unfortunately the most powerful actors in ICA, including governments, adoption agencies, and adoptive parents, have powerful incentives to deny or minimize the extent of these illicit practices. Thus, it is extremely welcome that such an internationally significant organization as ISS has in this Report provided such a detailed documentation and analysis of these illicit practices. Hopefully, all involved in ICA will carefully consider the facts, analysis, and recommendations contained in this report.


David M. SMOLIN
Professor of Law Cumberland Law School

Samford University 
Birmingham, Alabama USA


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Media Report: Kyrgyzstan Anti-Corruption Agency Announces Findings on Foreign Adoption

The 24kg News Agency is reporting findings of the Anti-Corruption Service under the State Committee for National Security (GKNB)in Kygryzstan. These findings allege the following corrupt practices with respect to the payments of bribes to officials in the Ministry in association with intercountry adoption:

1. Payment by foreign adoption agency of $15,000 - $20,000 in bribes to secure accreditation.
2. Payment by foreign agency of up to $2000 for each referred child.
3. Payment by foreign agency of up to $1000 for each favorable approval of adoption to the court.

Kyrgyzstan’s intelligence agencies release corrupt scheme of foreign adoptions September 6, 2012 24.kg news agency , by Makhinur NIYAZOVA http://eng.24.kg/community/2012/09/06/25554.html

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

UPDATE: Additional Official Arrested In Kyrgyzstan Corruption Scandal: Gulnara Derbisheva

It has been reported that the arrest of Gulnara Derbisheva, former Deputy Minister of Social Development, took place on August 31, 2012. Ms. Derbisheva has been charged for allegedly accepting bribes in her  arranging the adoptions of Kyrgyzstani children.

Kyrgyz Adoptions Official Arrested For Bribery, Radio Free Europe September 3, 2012.http://www.rferl.org/content/kyrgyzstan-adoptions-official-bribery/24696219.html

Clause of international adoption in Kyrgyzstan favours traffic in children 24.kg News Agency– Nazgul Turdubekova http://eng.24.kg/community/2012/09/03/25489.html

US News media and the US government have yet to report or comment on the situation. While seven of the 65 pipeline cases were resolved prior to the recent scandal, we understand that the remaining cases have stalled*. We are also aware that additional families began the process of adopting Kyrgyzstani children this summer after hosting them in July via Nightlight Christian Adoptions**. As we reported earlier, this agency did not have accreditation to participate in adoption from the Kyrysztani government but claimed to be partnering with a US agency that held accreditation. Both US accredited agencies, Love Basket and Christian World Adoptions had their accreditation revoked in July. We believe that it is imperative that the US Department of State, Office of Children's Issues make a public statement confirming the situation in Kyrgyzstan before more families are lured into a program with a risk of corrupt practices and/or little chance of finalizing an adoption.

*And Then There Were Seven, Help Kyrgyz 65 Blog, July 24, 2012, http://www.helpkg65.com/
**Newport Coast family looks to adopt Kyrgyzstani orphan, Daily Pilot, by Britney Barnes August 31, 2012, http://articles.dailypilot.com/2012-08-31/news/tn-dpt-0901-lemonade-20120831_1_andrey-adoption-process-host-families

Edited 9/4/12 to correct error in spelling and add labels.

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

UPDATE: Kyrgyzstan - US Special Advisor for Children's Issues Travels to Kyrgyzstan

The following press release was made yesterday by the Office of Children's Issues. We are assuming this in response to the recent scandal in Kyrgyzstan involving misconduct by US adoption agencies and the subsequent suspension of their accreditation in Kyrgyzstan. We request the US DOS to disclose the identity of the agency alleged to have given bribes to the Kyrg Minister and that the DOS will ensure that the Counsel on Accreditation thoroughly and effectually deals with any agency who has participated in this scandal. The families who have been waiting for years to complete adoptions in Kyrgyzstan need the full assistance of ethical agencies. Further delays caused by the misconduct of US Hague accredited agencies are unconscionable.

Special Advisor for Children's Issues Travels to Kyrgyzstan


Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
August 13, 2012



Special Advisor for Children’s Issues Ambassador Susan Jacobs will visit Kyrgyzstan from August 13-15. As part of the State Department’s commitment to facilitating ethical and transparent intercountry adoptions, she will discuss the protection of children and the intercountry adoption process. This is the Special Advisor’s fourth trip to Kyrgyzstan to discuss these topics.
In 2008, Kyrgyzstan suspended intercountry adoptions, and many U.S. families who began the adoption process prior to the suspension are still waiting for their adoptions to be finalized. As part of her trip, Ambassador Jacobs will urge the Government of Kyrgyzstan to resolve these adoptions as quickly as possible, keeping the best interests of the children in mind. She will also meet with other organizations interested in child welfare issues.
For more information about children’s issues, please visit: ChildrensIssues.state.gov
For updates on Special Advisor Jacobs’ trip, follow her on Twitter: @ChildrensIssues
For press inquiries please contact CAPRESSREQUESTS@state.gov or (202) 647-1488.

*******For further information on this scandal, please see:
http://pear-now.blogspot.com/2012/07/update-kyrgyzstan-reportedly-revokes.html
http://pear-now.blogspot.com/2012/07/kyrgystan-investigating-allegations-of.html

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Monday, July 23, 2012

Kyrgyzstan Investigating Allegations of Bribery in Agency Accreditation

According to news sources, Kyrgyzstan’s social development minister was arrested on Wednesday July 4, 2012 under suspicion of seeking at least $15,000 in bribes from a United States adoption agency. According to the media, the US agency had paid $10,000 in bribes to become accredited to participate in intercountry adoptions from Kyrgyzstan under the Hague, and the minister was seeking additional payments.

Sources:

Kyrgyz minister arrested for seeking bribe in adoption scandal, July 6, 2012, Central Asia Business Newswire http://www.universalnewswires.com/centralasia/business/viewstory.aspx?id=12367

Kyrgyzstan: Latest Adoption Scandal Pro-Children or Just Politics?, July 18, 2012, Eurasianet http://www.eurasianet.org/node/65695
edited 7/23/12 to additional media source: 
Kyrgyzstan: Minister for social development arrested on bribery charges July 24, 2012 Ferghana News http://enews.fergananews.com/news.php?id=2316

PEAR is requesting disclosure of the US adoption agency involved in the scandal.  We will continue to follow the story and will provide updates as they become available.

Edited 4:20 pm EST 7/23/12:

List of US accredited agencies, partnering agencies and agencies seeking accreditation from Kyrgyzstan (this list is in progress and will be updated as we discover new information):

***See latest update: http://pear-now.blogspot.com/2012/07/update-kyrgyzstan-reportedly-revokes.html

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Friday, June 1, 2012

Article: Lack of accountability leaves Kairi in limbo

Reprinted with permission of the Author, Michelle Harrison: adoptive mother, friend of PEAR, and Director of Shishur Sevay.

INSIDE STORY: Lack of accountability leaves Kairi in limbo

ARTICLE | MAY 30, 2012 - 8:31PM | BY DR. MICHELLE HARRISON

Kolkata - Kairi Abha Shepherd was adopted from India at three months of age and has no country to call home. She was abandoned at birth in a Kolkata nursing home and taken in by a Kolkata orphanage that has since closed. At three months of age she was sent to the United States for adoption by Erlene Shepherd, a widow with six other adopted children. Erlene died of metastatic breast cancer when Kairi was eight years old, but never filed the papers to make Kairi a US citizen.
Now under threat of deportation, Kairi, who suffers from rapidly progressing multiple sclerosis, is an orphan without a country. She is from India, but was not raised as an Indian. She was raised as an American, but is not American. Deportation is a sanitized word. The proper term is exile, the banishment of a person from his home, his country. Given Kairi’s progressive illness, it might be death in exile.

I am an American doctor settled in Kolkata since 2006, where I founded Shishur Sevay, a home for orphan girls, some with disabilities, who were rejected for adoption. I have a younger daughter adopted in 1984 from IMH (International Mission of Hope), the same orphanage as Kairi. I also have an older daughter, to whom I gave birth. Both are American citizens, one by birth, the other by naturalization. When my older daughter was born she was mine and the only papers I filled out were for her Gibi's passport had the name Shepherd, because Erlene was to have adopted her birth certificate.

For my Indian daughter the process was longer and more complicated than pregnancy. I carried a different responsibility. I had been entrusted with another mother’s child, to love and raise her as if she were of my body. She had already lost a mother and a family. I felt a special responsibility to be the forever family she had been promised. Everyone in the long chain of people, institutions, and governments had a special responsibility for this child, because at that moment in time, they were the only ones in a position to secure her future safety.

Kairi didn’t hop on a plane at three months of age and say, “Mom, I’m coming home. Meet me at the airport.” Her “line of possession” was from a nursing home in Kolkata, to International Mission of Hope, to an escort, to Erlene Shepherd, her forever mother. An agency from the US side, AIAA (Americans for International Aid and Adoption), had to do a home study and approve Erlene to adopt another child.

Those papers had to be approved by the Indian Embassy in Washington and the US Immigration Service, all before Erlene could be assigned as Kairi’s mother. Back in India, IMH had to show how they received the child, and then petition the Alipore Court to give guardianship to Erlene Shepherd.
The guardianship papers defined the responsibilities of Erlene Shepherd: “Your petitioner submits that she is a fit and proper person to be appointed guardian of the person of the said minor during her minority. Your petitioner further submits that it will be for the welfare of and manifestly advantageous to the said minor as regards her up-bringing, education and establishment in life, if the petitioner is appointed guardian of the said minor and the minor is permitted to be taken to and live with your petitioner in USA.” The guardianship by the government of India did not require adoption or citizenship.

A different government office issued an Indian passport so Kairi could travel, with Erlene’s name as her US contact. The American Consulate had to issue a visa for Kairi to enter the US. Once Kairi was in the US, she would have received permanent resident status (a green card), which she then would have had to relinquish when she received her naturalization papers.

What went wrong – falling through the cracks
International adoption occurs in the context of a government agreement between the sending and receiving countries. At the time of Kairi’s adoption, neither government required that the child become a citizen. In fact they did not even require that the child be legally adopted!

All the people and government officials involved in the process of obtaining the child, caring for her, sending her to the US, and approving the US family were paid for what they did, by salaries or fees. Once Kairi was in the US, no one had a financial interest in helping her to get her papers. There may have been concern, but it was not imperative.

The agency that approved Erlene did so even though she had not obtained citizenship for her other international adoptees. Erlene was also approved to adopt Gibi after Kairi’s adoption. They had a single meeting, with Kairi present, and then the adoption didn’t happen; but Gibi had gone to Denver with Erlene’s name on her passport, just as Kairi had. Today in Kolkata, Gibi is tearful, and says, “Kairi was supposed to be my little sister. Maybe if I had been there to take care of her, her life would have been better.”

Erlene, a single mother with seven children, was struggling financially and then became ill with cancer. The child services agency in Utah which looks after orphaned children did not notice that the children lacked citizenship. The older siblings attempted to apply for Kairi’s papers when she was 16, but the US authorities did not let them, as they were not her parents.

By the time Kairi was an adult, her life had truly fallen apart. She was on drugs and was convicted of forgery for the purpose of getting drugs, but as a non-citizen, she was suddenly an “illegal alien headed for deportation.” She has been fighting this since 2007. The United States Child Citizenship Act of 2000 created a system of automatic citizenship for adopted children, but it was not retroactive to the time Kairi was born. She missed the deadline by months.

Hillary Clinton said, “It takes a village to raise a child.” First it takes a mother, and Kairi had lost two mothers by the time she was eight. Her mother didn’t obtain the citizenship papers, but the village also failed to notice. The same government that welcomed her at three months wants to send her back at age 30, because she committed a crime. Did any adoptive parent ever think that their children’s remaining in the US was anything other than unconditional, that if they broke the law, back they went? When we adopted, we were the ones on trial as to our worthiness of raising our children. For Kairi, who lost two mothers, the village absconded.

Kairi’s multiple sclerosis – the effects of exile

Kairi’s first symptoms of multiple sclerosis appeared when she was 18, and she was diagnosed at age 22. It has progressed rapidly. She has clear lesions of her brain, which are worse on each subsequent MRI. Without powerful and expensive medications, she will not be able to survive. With each crisis of her MS, she is hospitalized for infusions. Even worse, she cannot tolerate the heat. If Kairi is exiled, she will arrive in India without funds and without a destination. She could literally collapse as
soon as she leaves the airport and end up in a hospital with no money and no way of communicating.
The US does not deport in a kindly way. A person is put on a plane with no possessions except travel documents and they are not even allowed to make a phone call. All the rights of Americans that are taken for granted are only for citizens. Kairi has no rights, not even to a phone call to say she is leaving. She was escorted to the US with fanfare, with people sending her off, with people waiting for her arrival. Yet there are no goodbyes, just a disappearance.

When I adopted from this orphanage, I sent ahead an outfit for my daughter to wear for her journey home. We all did that. Kairi went to the US in that special outfit her mother sent her. She will be returning in whatever she happens to be wearing at the time, with no one to meet her, to a country where she looks like she belongs, where people will expect her to respond as an Indian raised in India, but she will be alone, more alone than when her mother left her at the nursing home in Kolkata. Kairi left for America as a healthy infant. She will be returning as a very sick adult with an incurable disease and without any means of survival.

Where is the village now as she faces death in exile?
The US must face its responsibility to the orphaned children it accepted, which at the time was understood to be unconditionally. As an adoptive parent, I didn’t have a return policy. The Child Citizenship Act of 2000 was a good attempt to fix the problem, but it didn’t go back far enough. Kairi isn’t the only adoptee facing deportation.

Another Indian adoptee, Jennifer Hynes, was sent back to India, leaving two children and a husband in the US. She is begging to be able to return to the US to be with her children.
The law has to be fixed. The process of exiling these sons and daughters of Americans must be stopped. They may be “adoptees,” but they came to the US to be our sons and daughters, as if of our bodies. That is what we owe them.


http://www.indiaamericatoday.com/article/inside-story-lack-accountability-leaves-kairi-limbo



For additional articles and information about Kairi Shepherd, please visit Against Child Trafficking: http://www.againstchildtrafficking.org/category/pap/kairi-shepherd/

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Monday, April 2, 2012

UPDATE on PEAR's Ethics Alert for China

A blog post was recently made public by Brian Stuy of Research China which addresses some of the issues contained in our Ethics Alert on China's Special Needs Adoptions http://pear-now.blogspot.com/2012/03/pear-ethics-alert-china-special-needs.html. We received similar stories and information from both adoptive families and adoption service providers before publishing our alert.

PEAR believes that prospective adoptive families and adoptive families have the right to information the potential ethical and legal issues surrounding their adoptions (see points 2, 3, and 11 of our Prospective Adoptive Parent Bill of Rights and point 1 of our Adoptive Parent Bill of Rights). It is not our intent to cause undue anxiety or cast judgments on adopting families, but it is extremely important that all adopting families have access to the information and realities involved in adoption before making choices to adopt.

We, therefore, highly recommend that prospective and adoptive parents read Brian Stuy's article with open minds and take this information with seriousness it deserves. It may not be what you want to read, but it is what you should read. The Dark Side of China's "Aging Out" Program http://research-china.blogspot.com/2012/04/dark-side-of-chinas-aging-out-orphan.html

Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Friday, March 16, 2012

PEAR Ethics Alert - China Special Needs Programs


PEAR Ethics Alert - China Special Needs Programs


PEAR has been alerted to some very concerning issues surrounding China’s special needs adoptions. We believe that adoption service providers (ASPs) are stepping up the recruitment and engaging in unrealistic practices due to their financial pressures as well as pressure from CCCWA to place SN children via a rumored reward program: 1 additional non SN referral for every 5 SN placements. We also believe that the long wait for healthy young children has encouraged Prospective Adoptive Parents (PAPs) to underestimate the potential issues surrounding the parenting of special needs children, especially older children, and to overlook unethical practices in exchange for quicker placement of children. We are also deeply concerned with the magnitude of influence of unregulated adoption advocates in the adoption process. In addition to the above, we are dismayed at the lack of candor, transparency, and communication being provided by both Central Authorities involved in governing adoptions from China to the United States.

At this time, we believe that the special needs placement programs involving Chinese children are riddled with unethical, nontransparent practices that do not adequately safeguard the children involved. The result is commodification of children, dilution of the integrity of adoption, and the placement of unwitting children and adults into crises situations.

Altering Children’s History and Information

There has been much talk lately about various agencies being willing to work with orphanage directors and the China Adoption Authority to change information in a child’s file in order to classify the child as special needs, or to change a child’s birthday in order to allow an adoption of a child who has aged out under either China or US law. We are very concerned that some agencies have the power to exert pressure on orphanages and the Chinese authorities to do this. Changing a child’s age is fraudulent activity not only under the adoption laws of China and immigration laws of the US, but also against the child being adopted.

PAPs hoping to have a child’s information changed (this has happened where a family has previously met the child as either missionaries or visitors to an orphanage) have been referred to specific agencies due to their “great favor” with China authorities and willingness to help families with this type of case. PEAR has alerted the COA and US DOS Office of Children’s issues concerning the specific agencies alleged to be engaging in this practice.

PEAR opposes any practice that alters a child’s history or identity. Children from China are already denied so much of their history due to the practice of abandonment. US agencies and US prospective parents should not be taking measures to further alter the identity and history of these children.

Marketing of Children

PEAR is concerned with manner in which special needs children under the China program are being “marketed” to prospective parents. While we understand the desire of agencies and adoption advocates to find homes for all children who may benefit from placement, it is our opinion that much of this “marketing” downplays the significant issues that may face families adopting special needs children. We also believe that the current practices of unregulated adoption advocates and the widespread sharing of information on available children violates both the laws of China and the US as well as the basic privacy rights of minor children.

Downplaying special needs and lack of preparedness of adopting families

While we fully support adoption of special needs children, we also believe that families need to be realistically prepared to parent these children. The referral information must be complete and truthful. Some Parents have not been advised of the severity of the child's needs resulting in disruptions and dissolutions. Placing a child in a home unprepared to properly care for that child is never in the child’s best interest. We also believe that in many cases, adoption agencies and unregulated adoption advocacy groups mislead PAPs with verbal reassurances, downplaying of the severity and/or potential complications of the special needs, and communal pressure. Although PAPs go through Hague mandatory training concerning special needs, we are aware that many PAPs are mislead with verbal reassurances that training outlines “worst case scenarios” and that post-adoption support and services are widely available, affordable, and easily accessible. PEAR is aware of several cases where older child adoptions have failed once in an American adoptive home due to the vastly different expectations and ideas about what the placement means to both the parent(s) and the child.

Violations of Privacy

PEAR believes that adoptions should comply with the legal processes of all countries involved, and that the children should be afforded privacy during the matching process. We are aware that some US agencies have password-protected sites for families to check on information about China special needs, but they also have email lists where this information is widely published. Furthermore, there are online advocacy groups and blogs where the information is passed around and shared even further, circumventing the China rules about publishing this type of information. PEAR believes that many agencies are acting in violation of the Hague Regulations section 96.39(f)

We believe that children have a right to privacy concerning identifying information, especially medical records. Sharing this information widely and openly violates this right to medical privacy, especially where information is accompanied with photographs and other personally identifying information. We call on all ASPs, adoption advocates, and PAPs to respect children’s privacy in their policies and actions.

Coercion of Older Children

PEAR strongly opposes any kind of coercion or pressure placed on vulnerable children. We fully support counseling children on adoption and securing informed consent, but we have grave concerns over the fine line between counseling and coercion. We believe that it is vitally important that adoption counseling is not provided by individuals or organizations who profit by the placement of children. From information we have received, it appears older children who resist adoptions to foreigners are being coerced by orphanage workers and agency representatives in China. In one case, a PAP was allowed to speak to a child by telephone via an interpreter in China to convince them of their desire to adopt despite the child’s reluctance. In some cases, the PAPs are not aware that the children do not wish to be adopted into a family. In many of these cases, the adoptions are failing while the PAPs are still in China or once the family returns to the US. These placement situations are unacceptable and not in the best interest of the children. They also violate Article 4 (d)(1), (2), and (3) of the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Hague Convention)

We have heard anecdotal evidence of orphanage workers in China receiving bribes for every older child placed through adoption programs. This practice turns children into a commodity and discourages acting in the child’s best interests, it also violates Article 4 (c)(3) of the Hague Convention.

Case stealing and overzealous competition

Economic conditions being what they are for adoption agencies have lead to unfair and unethical practices to boost placements. We were recently alerted to a situation that demonstrates a growing trend of “case stealing” among agencies. Apparently, agencies are counseling clients to join list-serves such as Waiting Child Advocates on Yahoo, who list individual agency’s special needs children. The clients of agency A will join the list, find a child on Agency B’s list and request further info from agency B, then take this info back to Agency A who will submit an Letter of Intent (LOI). PEAR has alerted the COA and DOS to specific examples of this practice and we hope that it is being thoroughly investigated.

Lack of Transparency and Honesty by Central Authorities

On February 26, 2012, we became aware that Wasatch International Adoptions had been suspended from submitting new dossiers by the China Adoption Authority, CCCWA. A notice had been published on Wasatch’s Special Need Blog as well on their website:

http://www.wiaa.org/chinanews.asp
http://wasatchadoptions.blogspot.com/2012/02/thank-you-for-your-e-mail.html

PEAR requested comment and clarification from Wasatch and CCCWA, but have received no replies. We also wrote to the US DOS Office of Children’s Issues, the Central Authority under the Hague, for clarification as to why they had not published an Adoption Notice concerning this as they have done so for agencies suspended from submitting dossiers in other countries (see most recently: Notice: Barring of Two U.S. Adoption Agencies by IHNFA http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=honduras_1).

Neither CCCWA nor The US Department of State, Office of Children’s Issues have responded to our requests or offered any public information, not even a simple confirmation concerning this suspension. The failure of Central Authorities to provide complete, transparent information concerning accredited adoption service providers has lead to a flurry of rumors, mistrust in the Hague Adoption systems, and an inability for prospective adoptive families to make informed choices of providers and country programs.

Summary

The adoption landscape of China has changed dramatically from the days when baby girls were routinely abandoned. There are now waiting lists of hundreds of Chinese to adopt both boys and girls. Unethical competition in a shrinking industry with lack of adequate government oversight is creating an especially chaotic and hazardous process for PAPs and Chinese children. PEAR hopes authorities will act to curb the current abuses and create proactive policies to prevent future abuses.


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Thursday, March 8, 2012

PEAR Ethics Alert on Adoption from Uganda


PEAR Ethics Alert on Adoption from Uganda

PEAR has received numerous reports from adopting families and NGOs on the ground in Uganda regarding unethical conduct by adoption agencies, adopting families, and local facilitators and officials in Uganda. Due to the seriousness of these reports, the rapid increase in interest in adoption from this country, and the continued abuses of the adoption process in Uganda, it is PEAR’s recommendation that families looking to adopt ethically do not initiate adoption from Uganda at this time.

We also call on the governments of Uganda and the United States to investigate allegations of corruption thoroughly and take any and all measures necessary to address these issues with honesty and transparency in order to protect Ugandan children and families as well as US citizen prospective adoptive families.

Ethical concerns include:

1. Reports that US adoption agencies are making donations to existing orphanages to thwart efforts at family reunification;
2. Reports of harvesting of children from intact families in order to provide more “adoptable” children for intercountry adoption (children screened for suitable health, gender, and age);
3. Reports of extensive bribes paid to local officials by US adoption agencies and/or their local facilitators;
4. Reports of bribes paid to local officials by US adopting families;
5. Failure of the Ugandan government and US government to demonstrate a commitment to transparency and honesty in addressing concerns over the slowing of the process for approving Ugandan passports for adopted children;
6. Recent reports that US adopting families are being advised to take children into Kenya for processing Ugandan passport applications. We are concerned about this practice and the possible repercussions of US citizens flying undocumented children across international borders.

PEAR continues to monitor adoption from Uganda and will update our recommendations when believe adequate controls have been put into place to ensure ethical adoptions.



Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Monday, February 27, 2012

"Why the adoption establishment annoys me" Blog Week


The Unofficial "Why the adoption establishment annoys me" Blog Week begins
today. If you would like to read the blog entries or participate, visit Land of Gazillion Adoptees: http://landofgazillionadoptees.com/ LGA also has a facebook group where the blogs will be posted and PEAR will try to keep up withthem on our facebook page as well.

Participating Bloggers committed to the event so far:

Adoption Echos
Fleasbiting
REFORMTalk
Split Feathers
The Daily Bastardette
Third Mom
The Declassified Adoptee


Is anyone listening?


Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/

Friday, November 18, 2011

Nepal & India -- Dal Bahadur Phadera & the suppressed UNICEF report








Dal Bahadur Phadera & the
suppressed UNICEF report


UNICEF Nepal's suppressed Humla report is now available on the web.

The reason UNICEF Nepal suppressed (i.e., never published) their 2005 report is unclear.

Nor is it clear why trafficked Nepali children were left at the Michael Job Centre,
Tamil Nadu,
for over six years.


UNICEF FWLD Displacement of Children From Humla 2005:
Here is an extract (one case from the report):

Bikram Bhandari, Thehe VDC

"Bikram Bhandari informed the team that his son (Machche Bhandari now changed to Manish) was sent 6 years ago (Date: 1998) with Kali Bahadur Bhandari from Humla to Katmandu. Ram Bahadur and Gam Singh where 2 other children also sent with Machche Bandari -- they are also now missing however the team did not meet with their parents. Once in Katmandu. Chakra Bahadur Shahi (ex-parliamentarian member) arranged addmition of the children to Bal Mandir (a government organization)

From Katmandu, Machche was sent to a foreign country though Bal Mandir. This information was relayed to Bikram, 3 years ago (Date: 2001) by a member of Bal Mandir when Bikram came to Kathmandu looking for his son.

When Bikram came to know that his child was sent to another country he reqested to meet with his son but the staff of Bal Mandir said that Bikram had to pay 2 lack rupies [lakh rupees]
for this to be arranged.

Bikram explained to the team that the CDO and VDC had prepaired a recommendation letter stating that Machche Bhandari's (Bikrams son) parents where Dead. This was false information.

Bikram would like to meet with his son but is unable to -- he expressed anger about this situation.

Only Kali Bahadur had the information on Bikrams son, however Kali is now dead and Chakra dose not know the information so there is no way of finding out about the child."


For background, see:

On Children's Homes -- Lonely Planet:

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/thread.jspa?threadID=2032255&start=0&limit=1000

Read the full thread -- a horrific, first-hand account of D.B. Phadera.


Here are two extracts (from a Western volunteer):

"The orphanage I Managed was registered, but not once did I ever see anyone check up on it. My orphanage being registered also did not make it a good place. My job was to run the home and do everything I could to protect the children from the owner and his goons. The owner was a known childtrafficker who was above the law. The NGO ISIS had conducted and investigation that traced over 530 girls that he had sold to brothels in India. They turned the investigation over to UNICEF who promptly leaked it giving him time to pay off the right people. He spent all of 2 nights in jail. I really prefer not to get into how horrible this man is to children, but he is just one of many respectable businessmen who have registered orphanages that are just ways for him to earn money through exploiting children. Like at many homes, the term "owner" only means that he had custody over the children, not that he paid for anything or did anything to care for the children. I actually had to stop a group of swiss tourists from handing over 2000 USD directly to one of his goons (who was himself a pedophile)."

and:

"DB Phadera...was the owner of my orphanage. He lived just across the path from me. Words cannot fully describe how horrible this man is. My job involved documenting the hell out of each of the kids in order to try to keep them safe from him- and it wasn't always enough. He is truly the most despicable person i have ever met. When an 8 year old girl disappeared from the home, he smiled at me as he told me she was only there on vacation. When he had disputes with the organizations that funded the home, he would cut off their ability to bring the children food. He literally would starve the children as a bargaining tool. When I first arrived at the home, he was allowing his goons free reign and many would come and demand to sleep in the beds with the kids at night. It took everything I had to put a stop to that practice. He forces children to beg, sells them into servitude, or worse, into brothels. For him it's all an equation of how he can make the most money. The lucky children are the ones he just abandons. Many good organizations in the valley have rescued kids from DB. All of the ones I listed in my previous post are among them. their efforts are noble and deserve support. But DB is a politically powerful man. As long as he remains free, he will continue to bring in more Humli children and subject them to cruelty, abuse, and in the best case scenario simple neglect.

Having to deal with him on a daily basis was one of the hardest things I've ever had to do. My kids needed me there as my foreignness did give them some level of protection and the alternative would have been a manager of his choice, but I couldn't rock the boat too much- he had threatened to kill a previous volunteer and she had to leave the country.

Corruption in Nepal creates this culture of impunity which allows traffickers to operate."


See also:

Lt. Col. Philip Holmes explains why his charity rescued Nepali girls from the Michael Job Centre (video) -- PEAR Nepal:


"After the girls' return to Nepal the trafficker who had been involved, DB Phadera, orchestrated a vicious media campaign against the charity."


The Indian preacher and the fake orphan scandal -- Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/8856050/The-Indian-preacher-and-the-fake-orphan-scandal.html

On the Western supporters of the Michael Job Centre (Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India).


Long journey home -- The Nepali Times:

http://www.nepalitimes.com.np/issue/2011/09/30/ThisIsIt/18594

On The Esther Benjamins Trust's rescue of 23 Nepali girls (Tamil Nadu -- September 2011).


A trafficker remains scot-free -- The Kathmandu Post:

http://pearadoptinfo-nepal.blogspot.com/2011/07/trafficker-remains-scot-free-kathmandu.html

On trafficker D.B. Phadera & the Michael Job Centre.


Paper Orphans documentary posted on the web -- PEAR Nepal:

http://pearadoptinfo-nepal.blogspot.com/2011/10/paper-orphans-documentary-posted-on-web.html

The Terre des Hommes/Image Ark documentary on adoption trafficking in Humla (the NCO/Bal Mandir kidnappings). Some Humli children ended up in India -- others in the inter-country adoption trade.


How our media helps sell children (by asking the wrong questions) -- Ushaft's Blog:

http://ushaft.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/how-nepali-media-helps-sell-children/

Andrew Undershaft on the media allies of trafficker Dal Bahadur Phadera.


Adhocism and the culture of press-release journalism (part one) -- Ushaft's Blog:


Andrew Undershaft on Anuradha Koirala's curious support of the traffickers.




Ethics, Transparency, Support
~ What All Adoptions Deserve.
http://www.pear-now.org/