Australian Central Authority Closes Ethiopian Program

Today, June 28, 2012, the Australian government  announced that its Ethiopian Adoption Program has been closed. Below is the notice published on the Attorney General's website:

Closure of Ethiopia Program - June 2012

Current as at – 28 June 2012
Key points:

• Australia has closed its intercountry adoption program with Ethiopia, following several years of issues with the Program, a suspension of all adoptions between 2009 and early 2010, as well as long waits and uncertainty for Australian prospective adoptive parents.
• The Australian Government has taken this difficult decision, in consultation with State and Territory Central Authorities.
• The best interests and rights of children are the most important consideration for intercountry adoption programs.
• The adoption environment in Ethiopia has become increasingly unpredictable, complex and uncertain, leaving many prospective Australian parents in limbo for years.
• The Government has concluded that this uncertainty, combined with obstacles to operating the Program in a sustainable and ethical way into the future, means the Program needs to be closed.
• The Australian Government has decided to close the Program at this time because it will not impact on any individual Ethiopian children as there are none currently referred to the Program.
• The Australian Government will continue to support Ethiopia in ensuring that the rights of Ethiopian children are protected.
• The Australian Government will also continue to support children adopted from Ethiopia and their families in maintaining their cultural links with Ethiopia.
• Prospective adoptive parents who have paid fees to the Program will have their fees refunded in full. State and Territory Central Authorities will provide advice in relation to whether fees paid to them can be refunded.

Program update
The Ethiopia Program has consistently been Australia’s most complex and challenging program. Information gathered during the April/May 2012 delegation visit confirmed the significant challenges facing the Program. 

Growing use of alternative forms of care for children in Ethiopia
Ethiopian children in need increasingly have alternative long-term care options made available to them in Ethiopia.
The Australian Government supports the Ethiopian Government’s efforts to pursue the best interests of their children by facilitating domestic adoptions, long-term foster care arrangements and assisting families in crisis.
Unfortunately for prospective adoptive parents outside Ethiopia, this means that it is likely that there will be fewer children referred for intercountry adoption. This makes the adoption environment challenging and unpredictable, resulting in lengthening waiting times and uncertainty in the adoption process.

Changes regarding children in need of adoption and increasing costs
Growing numbers of non-government adoption agencies operating in Ethiopia, and the closure of orphanages due to greater government scrutiny, has led to increased competition for referrals of Ethiopian children to intercountry adoption programs.
This environment makes it difficult for Australia’s Program to continue to operate in a sustainable and ethical manner.
Despite the best endeavours of the Program to manage its community development projects so that they meet both Ethiopian Government requirements and Australian Government standards, the changing environment will make this increasingly problematic in the future, placing additional strain on Program and Government resources.
The Australian Government is confident that, to date, the Program has operated in an ethical manner and it has no concerns in relation to children referred to the Program and adopted by Australian adoptive parents.
Rising costs for adoption program essentials (such as food and accommodation) mean that, if the program was to continue, prospective parents would also face increasing costs. 

Arrangements with Service Provider
The Program and its service provider, Wide Horizons for Children, have come to the view that the changing conditions in Ethiopia mean that the volume of intercountry adoptions initially anticipated at the commencement of the arrangement is unlikely to be achieved.
Wide Horizons for Children has also advised that, in light of these changing circumstances, it has decided to partially reallocate its resources and shift more focus from adoptions to its humanitarian activities in Ethiopia.
As a result, the Program and Wide Horizons for Children have agreed to end their arrangement. Given the other issues confronting the Program, Australia will not replace the role of Wide Horizons for Children within the Program.

Further information
For further information, please contact your State and Territory Central Authority.

http://www.ag.gov.au/Intercountryadoption/Whatsnew/Pages/default.aspx#CloseEthiopia

---

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

DOS Adoption Notice Romania: Agency Authorization Required by Romanian Law

Romania

June 28, 2012

Notice: Agency Authorization Required by Romanian Law

The Romanian Office for Adoptions (the Office) reported to the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest that it will allow private non-profit organizations accredited in the foreign receiving country to transmit documents in intercountry adoption procedures provided that they are also authorized by the Office. U.S. accredited agencies that would like to work on behalf of U.S. prospective adoptive parents adopting children from Romania should submit a request for authorization to the Office with the following documents:

1. A copy of all state statutes governing adoption service providers in the state where they are licensed;
2. Domestic licenses and Hague accreditation documentation;
3. Documents pertaining to the organizational and personnel structure;
4. A history of the activities already performed, and recommendations from other collaborators, as well as from foreign authorities that supervise the agency’s work overseas;
5. A description of planned activities and work methodology in Romania;
6. A commitment to present to the Office only the applications of those families or individuals with whom the respective private organization has signed an agreement (contract, understanding) regarding the follow-up of the child after the adoption is granted by qualified personnel, for a period of at least two (2) years from the time the child enters the territory of the foreign state;
7. A commitment to present to the Office annual activity reports, in view of the renewal of the authorization, as well as periodic reports, at its request;
8. A commitment to forward to the Office quarterly reports for post-adoption follow-up required by the Office.

http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=romania_2

---

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

AdopSource Letter to President Obama

PEAR supports AdopSource's efforts to stop adoptees from being deported to their countries of origin. See their recent letter to President Obama here:

http://adopsource.org/Shepherd_Community_Letter_%20final.pdf

---

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

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/

DOS Adoption Notice - Guatemala Update

May 14, 2012

Notice: Guatemala Update

This Adoption Notice is a follow up to the Notice of December 12, 2011.
 

Universal List
In March 2012, after months of meetings to gather information, U.S. officials presented a list of known pending cases to Guatemalan officials.  This list is a compellation of USCIS records of all properly grandfathered Form I-600A applications and pending Form I-600s filed by U.S. citizens on behalf of Guatemalan children, and lists provided by each of the adoption processing entities in Guatemala.  This “Universal List” reflects all known Guatemalan records of pending cases involving U.S. citizen prospective adoptive parents.  The goal is a consistent and universally agreed upon list of cases for both U.S. and Guatemalan officials to work from, allowing officials to focus on the necessary steps to bring each of the transition cases to resolution.  The initial response has been positive, with all Guatemalan agencies agreeing to work from this Universal List.

Senator Mary Landrieu and Representative Karen Bass Led Delegation to Guatemala April 10-14, 2012
Senator Mary Landrieu and Representative Karen Bass led a congressional delegation to Guatemala April 10 -14, 2012.  USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas traveled with the delegation along with the Office of Children’s Issues Guatemala Adoption Officer.  The delegation attended meetings with President Otto Perez Molina, Vice President Roxana Baldetti, Foreign Minister Harold Caballeros, the Attorney General, the Ministerio Publico (MP), the Comisión Internacional Contra la Impunidad en Guatemala (CICIG), the Procuraduría General de la Nación (PGN), the National Adoption Council (CNA), UNICEF, and Ministry of Social Development.
Senator Landrieu provided all of the above officials with a copy of the Universal List of cases.  Senator Landrieu urged Guatemalan officials to resolve all of the pending cases by the end of 2012, and to move forward with adoptions involving U.S. prospective adoptive parents where there is no evidence that the child was taken fraudulently from his or her birth family.  USCIS Director Mayorkas offered to return to Guatemala to learn more about the Guatemalan adoption investigation process and to encourage Guatemalan authorities to continue to complete cases.  President Perez-Molina expressed his hope that the pending cases will be resolved within the next 6 to 12 months, and all other Guatemalan authorities -- as well as CICIG -- generally agreed that the pending transition adoption cases should be resolved as soon as possible in the best interests of the children, but also stated that a lack of resources is a potential obstacle to resolution.  Guatemalan authorities noted the possibility that some of the notario cases may not be able to proceed as notario cases when the investigation reveals that the case does not fall within the parameters of the relevant law.  However, they also advised that in these cases, if a judge makes a finding of adoptability for the child, such a case may be considered eligible under the CNA Acuerdo process.  

Update on possible legislative solution
In February 2012, Guatemala’s Foreign Minister Harold Caballeros travelled to Washington, D.C. and met with U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Special Advisor for Children’s Issues Susan Jacobs, as well as congressional leaders and adoption stakeholders.  The new Perez-Molina Administration announced that they would have a plan to resolve the pending transition cases by June, and suggested that the Guatemalan Administration was looking at a legislative solution.  
In April, Foreign Minister Caballeros informed the congressional delegation and Embassy officials that the Guatemalan administration did not believe it was necessary to pursue a legislative solution, and that the pending transition cases could be resolved within the existing framework. 

CNA Acuerdo Update
In December 2011, the CNA confirmed the details of a processing plan for a limited group of pending adoption cases already under CNA processing authority.  Please refer to our adoption notices from December 13, 2011 and September 27, 2011 for more background. 
To date, the CNA has initiated only five cases under the Acuerdo process, out of 22 that it has identified as currently eligible.  This is less than the number of cases that the CNA represented would be in progress by this time.  Embassy officials continue to meet frequently with the CNA to identify and address causes for delay and to urge the CNA to initiate all of those cases that are eligible to proceed.  
The U.S. Embassy in Guatemala City submitted a formal request to the Guatemalan government in early May 2012 for extension of the Acuerdo beyond the current August 2012 expiration date to ensure continued processing of adoptions.  The Guatemalan government has not responded.  Embassy officials continue to press for the extension.

Adoptions in Acuerdo Process
Progress has been slow on those cases that have been initiated and submitted to the CNA by the U.S. Embassy under the Acuerdo process.  After its review of the first case, the CNA requested supplemental documents in addition to those required documents confirmed in writing by the CNA in December 2011.  Embassy officials responded urging the CNA to abide by their original documentary requirements.  We will provide updates when they are available. 
Note:  Only the CNA can determine whether cases are eligible under the CNA process.  The Office of Children’s Issues, USCIS, and the U.S. Embassy can only advise on whether or not the CNA has initiated the case, and if so, what documents the CNA requires.  The Office of Children’s Issues can also provide general information on the CNA process.

Working Group Update
Although the working group (known as the “mesa tecnica” in Spanish) is reportedly continuing to meet on a weekly basis to investigate and move cases closer to resolution, this has not translated into significant numbers of cases moving to final adoption.  The U.S. Embassy continues to communicate on a regular basis with each institution that participates in the working group on a regular basis, but the working group itself refuses to provide a comprehensive status update for those cases already reviewed.

Other News
Between June 2011 and April 2012, the PGN informed the U.S. Embassy of approximately 40 children no longer available for adoption because the child was either reunited with the biological family or placed in domestic adoption.  Upon receiving written confirmation of this from the Guatemalan government, USCIS informed the U.S. families associated with those cases.

Visas statistics
From July 1, 2011 until December 31, 2011 the U.S. Embassy issued eight (8) IR3 adoption visas.  From January 1, 2012 to May 1, 2012, the U.S. Embassy has issued only one (1) IR3 adoption visa.  These visa statistics represent only the cases which have completed ALL processing steps with Guatemalan authorities, USCIS Guatemala, and the Consular Section of the U.S. Embassy.  

http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=guatemala_9

---

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