Sometimes Hispanics are weirdly enclavish. Daniel Urtiz Constantine Catholics, unite against the police.
Private police station. Adoption agency. Wolf pups. Daniel Urtiz Constantine Catholics, unite against the police.
HOME LIFE. Daniel Urtiz Constantine Catholics, unite against the police.
http://www.ottawasun.com/ Racism irks adoptive parents By CP
Imagine how irksome it must be for people of color…. Ron
http://www.ottawasun.com/ Racism irks adoptive parents By CP Dave Alexander is somewhat less than patient when people ask if his sons, Elias and Kieran, are brothers. "I say: ‘Do they share the same DNA? Is that the question you’re asking me?’" he said from his home in Langley, B.C. "Then they realize what a silly question it really is. Of course they are brothers. But no they do not share the same DNA." Alexander and his wife Juanita are white. Elias, 21/2 and 11-month-old Kieran, both adopted when they were babies, are black. Instead of the obvious questions about race, the query is a not-so-subtle attempt to acknowledge theirs is not a "typical" family. And families such as the Alexanders are more common than they once were. Many couples — often white — are adopting children from abroad. In fact, the Adoption Council of Canada (www.adoption.ca) reports just under 2,000 international adoptions last year and more than half coming from China. How do parents cope with raising children of a different race? The queries faced by the Alexanders didn’t surprise Martha Maslen. As the executive director of the Ottawa-based adoption agency Children’s Bridge, she’s heard worse. "Complete strangers feel it’s perfectly reasonable to come up and make ridiculous comments and ask very stupid questions which they wouldn’t do if you were out with a Caucasian child," she said. "Some are well-meaning and some are very racist." A NEW CHALLENGE Maslen said that often white parents don’t know how to confront the racism directed at their children. At some point, she adds, white parents who adopt children of a different race will have to deal with their child coming home aching after being stung by racism. When it was time for the Alexanders to think about a second baby, they knew they wanted another African-American baby so their children would have a connection. "We felt it was really important for Elias to have a sibling — either a boy or girl — that would share his heritage and culture," Juanita Alexander said. They have tried to make the boys’ heritage part of their lives. They attend transracial parenting workshops and have the boys involved in African-American playgroups with a number of other white parents who have adopted black children from the U.S. In addition to celebrating all the Christian holidays, the Alexanders recognize Kwanzaa, a non-religious, African-American holiday that celebrates family, community, and culture.
This is whacked. At the bottom: "Stepmother’s Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Mother’s Day. First widely proposed by a U.S. senator in 2000, it has not gained widespread acceptance. Some stepmothers find it condescending and prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day." But nothing about how some birthmothers prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050507.wxbirth05… A day for forgotten mothers Some women who gave up a baby for adoption have little to celebrate tomorrow. But as Jill Mahoney reports, today, on Birthmother’s day, they have their own bittersweet celebration By JILL MAHONEY Saturday, May 7, 2005 Updated at 3:49 PM EDT Globe and Mail Update When Cate Patterson got pregnant at the age of 19 in 1966, she moved across town and didn’t tell her family. After she gave birth, she couldn’t hold, smell or kiss her baby girl. Her only contact was through the nursery window. Soon, her 8 pound, 4 ounce infant was whisked off to a waiting adoptive family and the nurses told her to forget about the experience. "You’re just taught to go on with your life — ‘It’s all over now. You don’t have to think about it any more,’ " she said. In 1999, an Alberta adoption agency found her daughter. But in a devastatingly brief typewritten note, the woman, who turned 38 last week, refused contact. "I had some therapy," the Calgary administrative assistant said with a weak laugh. "You have to be able to accept what is. It doesn’t mean you like it, but I can’t have it destroy me. I have a life to live." She tried to have another baby, to no avail. And so when Mother’s Day rolls around each year, she has no child to make her breakfast in bed, send flowers or say, "I love you." But for the past six years on the day before Mother’s Day, Ms. Patterson has marked Birthmother’s Day, a little-known, bittersweet celebration that honours the often-overlooked contributions of women who make adoption possible. Today, in churches, community halls and hotel conference rooms across Canada and the United States, birth mothers — also called first mothers — of every age will gather for workshops, poetry readings and carnation ceremonies. They will be joined by their families, friends and, in some happy cases, the children they placed for adoption. Biological fathers are also welcome for at least part of the day. "Many of these women have never been recognized before, or even had a place or a time that they could celebrate that they became mothers even though they didn’t parent that child," said Marilyn Shinyei, executive director of Alberta-based Adoption Options and an adoptive mother of two children and the biological parent of another. "They’ve been kind of invisible and their loss has been invisible and this is just, I think, a time of healing for them and for other people to come together with them to celebrate." As Ms. Patterson, 57, says: "You just go away with the validation. . . . It helps give you that strength in your core again." Birthmother’s Day, which was started in 1990 by a group of birth moms in Seattle, Wash., helps to ease the pain of Mother’s Day, which is considered birth moms’ second most painful day, after their child’s birthday. Celebrating it on the eve of Mother’s Day is a symbolical acknowledgment of first mothers’ contributions: Without them, many women would not mark Mother’s Day. But why don’t birth mothers, who are by definition moms, celebrate their motherhood on the second Sunday in May? "People don’t think of you as a mother on Mother’s Day. They don’t acknowledge you," said Justine Nadeau, founder of Birthmothers of Canada, whose first daughter was taken from her and later placed for adoption. Hallmark has jumped on the birthmothers’ bandwagon, with one card available in Canada for adopted children to give to their biological moms on Mother’s Day. (The greeting card giant does have a Birthmother’s Day card.) "For my Birth Mother," it reads. "You and I may not have a shared history, and yet I wanted to send you this Mother’s Day card because you are, after all, the woman who gave birth to me. To be honest, there is another reason . . . I think I had to grow up before I could fully understand how, in life, each of us tries to do the best we can at any given time. You wanted the best for me and made what was probably the hardest decision of your life. I understand that now, and because of that decision, I had better chances and opportunities than I might have had otherwise. Not only did you give me life but you also gave me . . . a life, and for that, I’ll be forever grateful. Happy Mother’s Day." Karin Bock, a Calgary program assistant and friend of Ms. Patterson, will also attend Birthmother’s Day celebrations today. But, unlike Ms. Patterson, she has reunited with the child she gave up 38 years ago and the day is "not as important as it may be for other mothers because I have had a positive reconnection." Ms. Bock, now 59, gave birth to her only child at the age of 20 on Feb. 26, 1967, after keeping her pregnancy secret from her family for as long as possible. She even wore a silver band on her left ring finger in an effort to ease the shame of being an unwed mother-to-be. On March 7, 2000, a day ingrained in her memory, Rob Weiss, her long-lost son, telephoned her former sister-in-law in an effort to find her. She called him back in "a tangle of emotions" and they met not long afterward. "I couldn’t wait to give him a hug. I needed to touch him," she said. Mother and son, along with Mr. Weiss’s wife and two children, are now close. They talk on the phone once or twice a week and see each other monthly. And on Mother’s Day, he sends her flowers. But Ms. Bock has not taken her son to Birthmother’s Day celebrations. "It’s a very emotional day and we have emotional times together, he and I, but I’m not sure that I’m ready for that. I don’t know what it is." Despite society’s increasing acceptance of adoption and babies born out of wedlock, many older women still feel scorned and are reluctant to attend Birthmother’s Day ceremonies. In recent days, Ms. Nadeau has fielded several tearful phone calls from women who want to participate, but are frightened. "They’re worried someone who knows them will see them there," said the 57-year-old Kitchener, Ont., artist and teacher. "Hopefully, as the years go by, we’ll pull them out and once they’ve got over the tears, they’ll be able to come." Jill Mahoney is The Globe and Mail’s social trends reporter. For other mothers Stepmother’s Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Mother’s Day. First widely proposed by a U.S. senator in 2000, it has not gained widespread acceptance. Some stepmothers find it condescending and prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day. Mother-in-law’s Day is marked on the fourth Sunday in October. Grandparents’ Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Labour Day.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is whacked. At the bottom: "Stepmother’s Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Mother’s Day. First widely proposed by a U.S. senator in 2000, it has not gained widespread acceptance. Some stepmothers find it condescending and prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day." But nothing about how some birthmothers prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day.
Ta for posting that. I tried, but have trouble with Globe links. Personally, I’m not a big fan of Mothers’ Day as a secular thing (IMO it’s so overblown it defeats any useful purpose it may have had) However, this did irritate. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050507.wxbirth05… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A day for forgotten mothers Some women who gave up a baby for adoption have little to celebrate tomorrow. But as Jill Mahoney reports, today, on Birthmother’s day, they have their own bittersweet celebration By JILL MAHONEY Saturday, May 7, 2005 Updated at 3:49 PM EDT Globe and Mail Update When Cate Patterson got pregnant at the age of 19 in 1966, she moved across town and didn’t tell her family. After she gave birth, she couldn’t hold, smell or kiss her baby girl. Her only contact was through the nursery window. Soon, her 8 pound, 4 ounce infant was whisked off to a waiting adoptive family and the nurses told her to forget about the experience. "You’re just taught to go on with your life — ‘It’s all over now. You don’t have to think about it any more,’ " she said. In 1999, an Alberta adoption agency found her daughter. But in a devastatingly brief typewritten note, the woman, who turned 38 last week, refused contact. "I had some therapy," the Calgary administrative assistant said with a weak laugh. "You have to be able to accept what is. It doesn’t mean you like it, but I can’t have it destroy me. I have a life to live." She tried to have another baby, to no avail. And so when Mother’s Day rolls around each year, she has no child to make her breakfast in bed, send flowers or say, "I love you." But for the past six years on the day before Mother’s Day, Ms. Patterson has marked Birthmother’s Day, a little-known, bittersweet celebration that honours the often-overlooked contributions of women who make adoption possible. Today, in churches, community halls and hotel conference rooms across Canada and the United States, birth mothers — also called first mothers — of every age will gather for workshops, poetry readings and carnation ceremonies. They will be joined by their families, friends and, in some happy cases, the children they placed for adoption. Biological fathers are also welcome for at least part of the day. "Many of these women have never been recognized before, or even had a place or a time that they could celebrate that they became mothers even though they didn’t parent that child," said Marilyn Shinyei, executive director of Alberta-based Adoption Options and an adoptive mother of two children and the biological parent of another. "They’ve been kind of invisible and their loss has been invisible and this is just, I think, a time of healing for them and for other people to come together with them to celebrate." As Ms. Patterson, 57, says: "You just go away with the validation. . . . It helps give you that strength in your core again." Birthmother’s Day, which was started in 1990 by a group of birth moms in Seattle, Wash., helps to ease the pain of Mother’s Day, which is considered birth moms’ second most painful day, after their child’s birthday. Celebrating it on the eve of Mother’s Day is a symbolical acknowledgment of first mothers’ contributions: Without them, many women would not mark Mother’s Day. But why don’t birth mothers, who are by definition moms, celebrate their motherhood on the second Sunday in May? "People don’t think of you as a mother on Mother’s Day. They don’t acknowledge you," said Justine Nadeau, founder of Birthmothers of Canada, whose first daughter was taken from her and later placed for adoption. Hallmark has jumped on the birthmothers’ bandwagon, with one card available in Canada for adopted children to give to their biological moms on Mother’s Day. (The greeting card giant does have a Birthmother’s Day card.) "For my Birth Mother," it reads. "You and I may not have a shared history, and yet I wanted to send you this Mother’s Day card because you are, after all, the woman who gave birth to me. To be honest, there is another reason . . . I think I had to grow up before I could fully understand how, in life, each of us tries to do the best we can at any given time. You wanted the best for me and made what was probably the hardest decision of your life. I understand that now, and because of that decision, I had better chances and opportunities than I might have had otherwise. Not only did you give me life but you also gave me . . . a life, and for that, I’ll be forever grateful. Happy Mother’s Day." Karin Bock, a Calgary program assistant and friend of Ms. Patterson, will also attend Birthmother’s Day celebrations today. But, unlike Ms. Patterson, she has reunited with the child she gave up 38 years ago and the day is "not as important as it may be for other mothers because I have had a positive reconnection." Ms. Bock, now 59, gave birth to her only child at the age of 20 on Feb. 26, 1967, after keeping her pregnancy secret from her family for as long as possible. She even wore a silver band on her left ring finger in an effort to ease the shame of being an unwed mother-to-be. On March 7, 2000, a day ingrained in her memory, Rob Weiss, her long-lost son, telephoned her former sister-in-law in an effort to find her. She called him back in "a tangle of emotions" and they met not long afterward. "I couldn’t wait to give him a hug. I needed to touch him," she said. Mother and son, along with Mr. Weiss’s wife and two children, are now close. They talk on the phone once or twice a week and see each other monthly. And on Mother’s Day, he sends her flowers. But Ms. Bock has not taken her son to Birthmother’s Day celebrations. "It’s a very emotional day and we have emotional times together, he and I, but I’m not sure that I’m ready for that. I don’t know what it is." Despite society’s increasing acceptance of adoption and babies born out of wedlock, many older women still feel scorned and are reluctant to attend Birthmother’s Day ceremonies. In recent days, Ms. Nadeau has fielded several tearful phone calls from women who want to participate, but are frightened. "They’re worried someone who knows them will see them there," said the 57-year-old Kitchener, Ont., artist and teacher. "Hopefully, as the years go by, we’ll pull them out and once they’ve got over the tears, they’ll be able to come." Jill Mahoney is The Globe and Mail’s social trends reporter. For other mothers Stepmother’s Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Mother’s Day. First widely proposed by a U.S. senator in 2000, it has not gained widespread acceptance. Some stepmothers find it condescending and prefer to be recognized on Mother’s Day. Mother-in-law’s Day is marked on the fourth Sunday in October. Grandparents’ Day is celebrated on the Sunday after Labour Day.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had to share a funny. I told you guys after Christmas about the search and reunion for a friend that I had a small part in. Yesterday, hubby ran into the friend and a client of hers. Friend introduced hubby, and said, "his wife helped me find my birth family." Turns out the client is an adoptee too. She wanted to search, but was told (by her family I think) that all of her records were lost when the adoption agency burned down. Hubby started laughing and said, you must have been adopted from the same agency as my wife! He explained about the flood/fire/tornado/natural disasters that have specifically targeted adoption agencies over the years. And then said, you know the state has records too. She had no idea! Anyway, he gave her my number, and who knows? Maybe she’ll call!
No doubt her parents were killed in an automible accident short after birth, too. Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Had to share a funny. I told you guys after Christmas about the search and reunion for a friend that I had a small part in. Yesterday, hubby ran into the friend and a client of hers. Friend introduced hubby, and said, "his wife helped me find my birth family." Turns out the client is an adoptee too. She wanted to search, but was told (by her family I think) that all of her records were lost when the adoption agency burned down. Hubby started laughing and said, you must have been adopted from the same agency as my wife! He explained about the flood/fire/tornado/natural disasters that have specifically targeted adoption agencies over the years. And then said, you know the state has records too. She had no idea! Anyway, he gave her my number, and who knows? Maybe she’ll call!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Had to share a funny. I told you guys after Christmas about the search and reunion for a friend that I had a small part in. Yesterday, hubby ran into the friend and a client of hers. Friend introduced hubby, and said, "his wife helped me find my birth family." Turns out the client is an adoptee too. She wanted to search, but was told (by her family I think) that all of her records were lost when the adoption agency burned down. Hubby started laughing and said, you must have been adopted from the same agency as my wife! He explained about the flood/fire/tornado/natural disasters that have specifically targeted adoption agencies over the years. And then said, you know the state has records too. She had no idea! Anyway, he gave her my number, and who knows? Maybe she’ll call!
Excellent! I hope she does 
— —— Robyn Resident Witchypoo #1557
I’d like to add, the adoption agency featured – Open Door out of GA – was the agency who placed 6 Russian kids with the Lindorffs in New Jersey. That was the one where the parents ended up killing the one boy – Jacob in December 2001. He and his brothers had been adopted in October 2001. In late March 2004, Heather Lindorff was sentanced to 6 years in jail. Her husband James was sentanced to four years of probation and 400 hours of community service. The Open Door’s agency director was all set to have a Hallmark documentary done on the family prior to Jacob’s death. Getting back on topic, I thought Bethany placed AA children with Europeans. I know there are other American adoption agencies who place AA kids overseas, not just Open Door. Elizabeth
Anybody catch it? It was a nice piece, but I had a few nitpicks. If the transcript comes online tomorrow, I’ll post it. My nitpicks: Lesley Stahl reported that "most" Paps in the US want closed adoptions, but didn’t have any citations for it. They had an adoptee social worker who they interviewed. She was black and was adopted into a white family in Minnesota in the 1970’s. She talked about her experience, but they made no mention of the difficulties/discouragement white Paps faced 20 years or so ago to adopt black babies in the US (can’t remember—Black Social Workers of America?). http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/11/60minutes/main673597.shtml Born In USA; Adopted In Canada Feb. 13, 2005 Black Babies ‘Exported?’ Dave and Juanita Alexander adopted Elias two years ago, and Keiran last summer. They live in Langley, a community 30 miles outside Vancouver. (Photo: CBS) "It allows him to know all of himself. His mom and his dad who raise him. And then it also allows him to know his family that’s here in the United States." Sonya Norsworthy Walter Gilbert, CEO of The Open Door, views these adoptions as a "win-win" situation for the children. (Photo: CBS) (CBS) The conventional wisdom is that if you are looking to adopt that perfect baby, a healthy infant, you will wait years and pay tens of thousands of dollars. You may have to go to Eastern Europe, Latin America or China. But what if you were told there are hundreds of healthy newborns that private adoption agencies are struggling to find homes for, right here in the United States, who are available within a few weeks of being born. They’re black or mixed-race infants. With an estimated 2 million American families looking to adopt, it may surprise you where these babies are ending up. Correspondent Lesley Stahl reports. British Columbia, in Northwest Canada, is best known for its vast wilderness, where blacks are point .65 percent of the population. And some of that minority are children adopted from the United States. Dave and Juanita Alexander adopted Elias two years ago, on Christmas Eve. They got Keiran last summer. The Alexanders, both teachers, live in Langley, a community 30 miles outside Vancouver. After trying unsuccessfully to adopt a child in Canada, they contacted The Open Door, a Christian adoption agency in Thomasville, Ga., that has placed more than 200 children in British Columbia. The Alexanders dug deep to come up with the fee of $10,000. No sooner had they sent in the paperwork, than the phone rang about Elias. "That was fast," recalls Dave Alexander. "I wasn’t expecting that at all. … Two weeks." With Keiran, it was longer — just three weeks. There are now at least 300 families with African-American children in British Columbia. The parents there have organized a monthly gathering so their kids can get to know each other. It’s a kind of support group where the parents get help from each other. It’s not just Canadian families adopting African-American babies. You can find them all across Europe, from Italy to Norway, even in Peru. One Florida adoption agency sent more than half its black infants out of the country last year. No one keeps count, but 60 Minutes was told it could involve as many as 500 children a year. Many adoption professionals we talked to were shocked when they heard that the United States was, as they put it, "exporting" black babies. Walter Gilbert, CEO of The Open Door, views these adoptions as a "win-win" situation for the children, and he has strong opinions about why. "Especially in Canada, people are just color blind," says Gilbert. "That’s been our experience. We would tend to tell them [birth mothers] that our experience has been there’s less prejudice. They know what they experience here." But the Alexanders say Canada is not as colorblind as Gilbert thinks. "The first time we walked into school with Elias, and the comment that was made was, ‘Your basketball program just got a big shot in the arm,’" says Juanita Alexander. "Or the assumption that he’s got rhythm and he’s a great musician," adds Juanita’s husband, Dave. "Do you take all of those comments as racist, or how do you accept those things," asks Stahl. "We can’t necessarily always blame them for the comments, and the curiosity that they have, because, you know, families like ours aren’t that terribly common here," says Juanita Alexander. The Open Door also places black babies in the United States, but mainly with white families. Gilbert says blacks tend to adopt directly from relatives or from foster care, often because there’s no fee. He adds that they "never have enough black families." But even if they did, it might not make that much of a difference. Today, it’s the biological parent who gets to choose who adopts their child, and at The Open Door, only 10 percent of them insist on a black family. Mark Dedrick and Shante Easterling already had a 4-year-old daughter, and a son with costly health problems, when they found out Shante was pregnant again. After combing through a stack of applications, they decided the best place for their child, Keiran, was with the Alexanders in Canada. Mark and Shante chose the Alexanders over a well-off American black family. "It wasn’t money, it wasn’t color, it was more who could raise my child and do the best job," says Dave Alexander. Another issue for Mark and Shante was keeping the connection. The black family didn’t want to do that. "They weren’t willing to send photos or be, you know, in our life, like Dave and Juanita are," says Shante. The Alexanders have Mark and Shante’s picture hanging in Keiran’s bedroom, and they send letters and photos every month, reporting on Keiran’s progress. Michelle Johnson, a sociologist in Minneapolis, counsels people who want to adopt. She knows firsthand what Elias and Keiran will face as they get older. She was one of two black children adopted by a family in the lily-white suburbs of Minneapolis in the ’70s. "[It was] very lonely. Very alienating and confusing at times," says Johnson, who remembers her mother seething when strangers would come up to her and her brother in the supermarket. "Touching us. Asking inappropriate questions. … The hair, a big thing. Or skin." She adds, "I don’t think the hurt truly came until I entered school." It was the first day of kindergarten and a classmate called her the "N-word." Most white families who adopt a black child, she says, don’t handle situations like that well because they’re not prepared for the telltale signs. "Denying that racism exists. Thinking that love is enough," says Johnson. "Not being able to contemplate what happens when Bobby is 10 and grandma gives gifts to the birth kids who are white and not to your child who is brown? What are you gonna do about that?" And she says it happens all the time. From what 60 Minutes saw, the Canadian parents are aware of the
pitfalls, and so they invite in black adults to be mentors, send their children to all-black summer camp, and organize seminars to educate themselves. But what about when the kids get older? "In the teen years, when you’re dealing with ‘Who am I,’ ‘Where do I belong,’ those questions take on a whole new meaning when you’re doing a balancing act between two cultures," says Johnson. Isaac Birch, 11, was one of the first black American babies to be adopted in Canada. He says he’s already felt the sting of racism: "I was actually on the school bus, and I was bickering with another kid. And he called me a black freak. So that kind of made me a little upset." "I can’t even begin to understand what it’s like to be black," says Isaac’s mother, Brenda. Brenda and her husband, Gary Birch, who is paralyzed from a car accident, realized from the start they would need help raising Isaac. "We wanted to actually meet the birth mother before the child was born and develop a relationship," says Brenda. What they wanted is called an "open" adoption, which was rare 11 years ago when Brenda Birch met Isaac’s birth mother, Sonya Norsworthy, a single mom from Houston who wanted to go to college. "I figured I’d do the best that I could for both of us," says Norsworthy, who thought that doing the best for Isaac would mean giving him up for good. Instead, she ended up with a couple willing to push "open adoption" to the limit. Sonya and her daughter, Lily, visit Isaac in Canada every year, and Isaac comes to Houston to visit them. "It allows him to know all of himself. His mom and his dad who raise him," says Norsworthy. "And then it also allows him to know his family that’s here in the United States. … He doesn’t have to search for ‘Who am I,’ ‘Where did I come from?’" Gary Birch says he wanted the open adoption: "But the more I realized what that really meant, I started to get scared. And, Brenda said, ‘You know, you can never have too many people that love him.’" "That doesn’t mean there weren’t times, particularly early on, where I wondered, ‘What would I do if she said really, ‘Actually, I changed my mind and I want to raise Isaac,’" adds Brenda Birch. "What if I have to give him up? And that was really important for me to face." "So few people know about these transnational adoptions," says Stahl to Johnson. "Really, we’ve talked to people in your business who didn’t know about it." "I think that it’s an embarrassment that Americans, with all of the wealth and all of the things that are going on here, that we cannot place our own children," says Johnson, who believes that adoption agencies should work harder to find American families for these children, and especially black American families. "We’re in all the Yellow Pages in all the state," says Gilbert. But he admits that he hasn’t visited black churches, or promoted The Open Door in black publications and media. "Is it possible that black families then just don’t know about … read more »
http://www.suntimes.com/output/mitchell/cst-nws-mitch10.html Pro-father ruling gives hope for baby’s return from Utah February 10, 2005 BY MARY MITCHELL SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Advertisement I initially thought the prospects for Baby Tamia’s return were bleak, but a 2003 ruling by a Downstate judge against Utah’s A Cherished Child Adoption Agency has the sweet smell of a "gotcha." Lawyers for Maria and Carmen McDonald of Chicago, the grandmother and mother of Baby Tamia, will appear in Cook County Circuit Court on Monday armed with a scathing Illinois ruling that resulted in an infant boy being returned to his biological father. In fact, the Utah adoption agency has been forced on at least two recent occasions to return children to Illinois because it ignored the law when it placed the children for adoption. On Monday, lawyers representing Baby Tamia’s family will seek an injunction against the same agency. "We’ve served them by overnight mail, by fax and every other possible way there is of getting [legal petition] in their hands," attorney Robert Fioretti told me. "We are demanding them to return the baby immediately." Earlier case The African-American baby was taken by her 20-year-old mother, Carmen, to Utah on Dec. 4 and was turned over to the adoption agency without the knowledge of extended family members. After arriving in Utah, Carmen changed her mind about the adoption, but allegedly was coerced and intimidated into signing away her parental rights by the agency’s executive director, Ruby Johnston. Since then, Carmen has suffered two mental breakdowns. "I absolutely do believe it is a larger issue," Fioretti said. "We are receiving calls from all over the country regarding this agency and other agencies. When I call those agencies the [800] calls go to Utah — the Adoption Warehouse State." In the 2003 case, A Cherished Child Adoption Agency was forced to return a child to Illinois after a Chicago father sued the agency because officials placed the baby for adoption even though the father did not agree to terminate his parental rights. The 18-year-old mother left the hospital two days after giving birth and flew to Utah without the knowledge of the baby’s father. But after leaving the baby in Utah, the mother changed her mind. Ruby Johnston, the same Ruby Johnston who allegedly coerced Carmen McDonald, told her she was a "horrible person for wanting the baby back," according to court documents. Father has a voice Now, here’s the important part: Before the baby was born, the court found that the father consistently told Johnston that he did not wish to have his son adopted. After assuring the father that the agency would not attempt to proceed with an adoption without his consent, A Cherished Child hauled the father into an Illinois court and tried to have his parental rights terminated. By that time, they had already given his son to an Arizona couple. In fact, the same day the baby’s mother turned him over in Utah, the agency put him on the plane to Arizona. Thank God for a judge as wise as Solomon. Associate Circuit Court Judge Steven H. Nardulli ruled that "Illinois law, not Utah law, applies with regard to the termination of parental rights." He also found that there were two reasons the adoption agency directed the mother to go to Utah: to avoid the 72-hour waiting period in Illinois for the mother to surrender her rights, and to avoid the father asserting his rights. "This court specifically finds that [the father] has made reasonable efforts to contribute to the support of the child consistent with his ability to pay by his purchase of a stroller and a car seat. . . . Before he could do more his son was stolen from him by the acts of Cherished Child," Nardulli wrote. Not just black children So this is not just a matter of Utah adoption agency taking advantage of young, desperate black mothers. A Cherished Child Adoption agency, and agencies like it in Utah, are transporting babies across the country to keep fathers from exercising their rights to be fathers. Apparently, these Utah adoption agencies are equal-opportunity baby thieves. George McCormick, a 29-year-old white man in Decatur, Ga., is fighting to get his infant daughter out of the clutches of A Child’s Dream Agency, which is apparently operated by the same people who operate A Cherished Child. Despite his registering with Georgia’s Putative Father Registry before the baby’s birth, McCormick’s rights were ignored when the baby was taken to Utah on Jan. 6, a day after her birth. On Jan. 22, McCormick was served legal papers in which the agency accused him of abandoning his child and asked the court to terminate his parental rights. McCormick’s daughter went from Georgia to Utah to California — where she is now with an adoptive family — in a matter of hours. "I want my daughter to be returned," he told me. "I want to raise my daughter and take responsibility for her, and I want to make sure this doesn’t happen to anybody again. Nobody should have to go through this. It is hard to go home and see an empty crib." Is this a gross violation of a father’s rights? I think so. I really do.
Sorry if this shows up twice. It didn’t seem to appear after I posted it the first time. http://www.suntimes.com/output/mitchell/cst-nws-mitch10.html Pro-father ruling gives hope for baby’s return from Utah February 10, 2005 BY MARY MITCHELL SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST I initially thought the prospects for Baby Tamia’s return were bleak, but a 2003 ruling by a Downstate judge against Utah’s A Cherished Child Adoption Agency has the sweet smell of a "gotcha." Lawyers for Maria and Carmen McDonald of Chicago, the grandmother and mother of Baby Tamia, will appear in Cook County Circuit Court on Monday armed with a scathing Illinois ruling that resulted in an infant boy being returned to his biological father. In fact, the Utah adoption agency has been forced on at least two recent occasions to return children to Illinois because it ignored the law when it placed the children for adoption. On Monday, lawyers representing Baby Tamia’s family will seek an injunction against the same agency. "We’ve served them by overnight mail, by fax and every other possible way there is of getting [legal petition] in their hands," attorney Robert Fioretti told me. "We are demanding them to return the baby immediately." Earlier case The African-American baby was taken by her 20-year-old mother, Carmen, to Utah on Dec. 4 and was turned over to the adoption agency without the knowledge of extended family members. After arriving in Utah, Carmen changed her mind about the adoption, but allegedly was coerced and intimidated into signing away her parental rights by the agency’s executive director, Ruby Johnston. Since then, Carmen has suffered two mental breakdowns. "I absolutely do believe it is a larger issue," Fioretti said. "We are receiving calls from all over the country regarding this agency and other agencies. When I call those agencies the [800] calls go to Utah — the Adoption Warehouse State." In the 2003 case, A Cherished Child Adoption Agency was forced to return a child to Illinois after a Chicago father sued the agency because officials placed the baby for adoption even though the father did not agree to terminate his parental rights. The 18-year-old mother left the hospital two days after giving birth and flew to Utah without the knowledge of the baby’s father. But after leaving the baby in Utah, the mother changed her mind. Ruby Johnston, the same Ruby Johnston who allegedly coerced Carmen McDonald, told her she was a "horrible person for wanting the baby back," according to court documents. Father has a voice Now, here’s the important part: Before the baby was born, the court found that the father consistently told Johnston that he did not wish to have his son adopted. After assuring the father that the agency would not attempt to proceed with an adoption without his consent, A Cherished Child hauled the father into an Illinois court and tried to have his parental rights terminated. By that time, they had already given his son to an Arizona couple. In fact, the same day the baby’s mother turned him over in Utah, the agency put him on the plane to Arizona. Thank God for a judge as wise as Solomon. Associate Circuit Court Judge Steven H. Nardulli ruled that "Illinois law, not Utah law, applies with regard to the termination of parental rights." He also found that there were two reasons the adoption agency directed the mother to go to Utah: to avoid the 72-hour waiting period in Illinois for the mother to surrender her rights, and to avoid the father asserting his rights. "This court specifically finds that [the father] has made reasonable efforts to contribute to the support of the child consistent with his ability to pay by his purchase of a stroller and a car seat. . . . Before he could do more his son was stolen from him by the acts of Cherished Child," Nardulli wrote. Not just black children So this is not just a matter of Utah adoption agency taking advantage of young, desperate black mothers. A Cherished Child Adoption agency, and agencies like it in Utah, are transporting babies across the country to keep fathers from exercising their rights to be fathers. Apparently, these Utah adoption agencies are equal-opportunity baby thieves. George McCormick, a 29-year-old white man in Decatur, Ga., is fighting to get his infant daughter out of the clutches of A Child’s Dream Agency, which is apparently operated by the same people who operate A Cherished Child. Despite his registering with Georgia’s Putative Father Registry before the baby’s birth, McCormick’s rights were ignored when the baby was taken to Utah on Jan. 6, a day after her birth. On Jan. 22, McCormick was served legal papers in which the agency accused him of abandoning his child and asked the court to terminate his parental rights. McCormick’s daughter went from Georgia to Utah to California — where she is now with an adoptive family — in a matter of hours. "I want my daughter to be returned," he told me. "I want to raise my daughter and take responsibility for her, and I want to make sure this doesn’t happen to anybody again. Nobody should have to go through this. It is hard to go home and see an empty crib." Is this a gross violation of a father’s rights? I think so. I really do.
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20050124&fname=ATsunami&… Before The Baby, The Law An unprecedented rush begins for adopting tsunami orphans but the procedures aren’t easy The orphans of the tsunami may find families eager to adopt them. But the existing laws and procedures governing adoption are tedious and can put any aspiring foster parent
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Reuters) (Reuters) In the United States of America alone, the number of children adopted from the foster care system has dropped from 38% in 1995, to, in one study I read, less than half that – 15% of all US adoptions annually, No, ma’am. Adoptions from foster care more than doubled since the early 90’s, although they’ve levelled off over the last few years. "Adoptions through publicly funded child welfare agencies accounted for two-fifths of all adoptions. More than 50,000 public agency adoptions in each year (2000 and 2001) accounted for about 40 percent of adoptions, up from 18 percent in 1992 for those 36 States that reported public agency adoptions in 1992 (Flango & Flango, 1995)." whereas foreign adoptions have increased from nearly non-existant in the 70’s to 5% of US adoptions in 1992, to 10% in 1997 (source: Flango and Flango). 10%, in 1997, was nearly 14,000 children. Of the 127,407 adoptions in 2001: – 46% were private, independent, kinship and/or tribal placements – 39% were from public agencies (foster care) – 15% were international placements Of the 126,951 adoptions in 1992: – 77% were private, independent, kinship and/or tribal placements – 18% were from public agencies (foster care) – 5% were international placements http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/s_adoptedhighlights.cfm
Oops, forgot to add these links as reference material regarding the numbers of children adopted as domestic newborns, older children, and internationally. http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/s_adoptedhighlights.cfm http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/s_adopted/s_adopteda.cfm http://ndas.cwla.org/include/text/IssueBrief_International_Adoption_F… http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/dis/afcars/publications/afcars.htm Dad
Thanks for the additional information. I guess I’m going to have to agree to disagree with y’all. I don’t think adoptive parents or prospective adoptive parents shoulder the responsibility to fix ANY society’s ills, but I would hope, as citizens of their country and members of their community, they would hope to improve the state of their corner of the world first. When we decided to become foster parents and then adopt, we had one child, our biological child. We decided, as part of our family, he had the right to voice an opinion about adopting. He had just one request – he was the oldest, and wanted to remain the oldest. We chose to honor his request, which is why we didn’t adopt a teen or an older child. We have intentions to do so, once our children are older, and we have less of them living at home. Unlike some aparents (and, God bless you, I don’t know how you do it), three little ones at home is about our limit. Even with one stay-at-home parent, with school, tutoring, therapy, and after school activitiesI, guess we lack the organizational skills to handle a larger number. chickeyd
(Reuters) In the United States of America alone, the number of children adopted from the foster care system has dropped from 38% in 1995, to, in one study I read, less than half that – 15% of all US adoptions annually,
No, ma’am. Adoptions from foster care more than doubled since the early 90’s, although they’ve levelled off over the last few years. "Adoptions through publicly funded child welfare agencies accounted for two-fifths of all adoptions. More than 50,000 public agency adoptions in each year (2000 and 2001) accounted for about 40 percent of adoptions, up from 18 percent in 1992 for those 36 States that reported public agency adoptions in 1992 (Flango & Flango, 1995)." whereas foreign adoptions have increased from nearly non-existant in the 70’s to 5% of US adoptions in 1992, to 10% in 1997 (source: Flango and Flango). 10%, in 1997, was nearly 14,000 children.
Of the 127,407 adoptions in 2001: – 46% were private, independent, kinship and/or tribal placements – 39% were from public agencies (foster care) – 15% were international placements Of the 126,951 adoptions in 1992: – 77% were private, independent, kinship and/or tribal placements – 18% were from public agencies (foster care) – 5% were international placements http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/s_adoptedhighlights.cfm – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Is that because adoptions from foster care have fallen, or because foreign adoptions have risen? In my view, the two are not readily interchangeable. Estimates from various sources put the number of children in the care of the states in the US, that are legally free for adoption at approximately 134,000 in 2003. So, if the PAPs that went overseas to adopt adopted one of these children instead, the number of children stuck in the system with no "forever family" would be reduced by more than TEN PERCENT in one year. That’s a big percentage. Again, why is it the Pap’s responsibility to reduce those numbers? Why not everyone’s? Imagine the reduction possible if everyone who raised children at all (thus proving ability to parent) also adopted one child.
I also agree with Rupa that it’s everyone’s concern, not just the prospective adoptive parents. PAP’s are no more responsible for the plight of children in foster care than those who have biological children. Finally, I’m opposed to foreign adoption because I feel it is the responsibility of any wealthy society, like the US, to take care of their own society first, before imposing a sort of cultural imperialism on a developing nation – a sort of, "our society and way of life is better than yours will ever be, give us your young," sort of thing.
It may be the responsibility of wealthy society to take care of their own first (through federally subsidized programs), but the clearly the private citizen may exercise broader choices so long as they are within the law. Like you, my wish would be that more parents would consider older child adoption from state care as a viable option when considering adoption as a way to build their families. Admittedly, the imbalance of prospective adoptive parents waiting for domestic newborns while so many of these older children spend years in foster care waiting for placements disturbs me. But just the same, I am not "opposed" to domestic newborn or international adoption per se. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -It’s more usually "A child is better off in a family than in an orphanage." Most countries prefer local families as far as possible. But many traditional societies don’t have a culture that supports stranger adoption. Why step over children in need in your own back yard? I can only come to one conclusion – for the PAPs personal agenda of "needing" an infant, and not EVER wanting birth family contact. They might not be up for a special needs child. They might not want a contested adoption. But when my husband and I adopted, we chose NOT to step over the children in our own city. We adopted foster children here in the US. We are a trans-racial family, and our children have "special needs." Our daughter wasn’t an infant – she was just about to start Kindergarten when we adopted her (our son was an infant, but was in the system nonetheless).
Both our children were adopted at age five from foster care. If you carry your premise that the "most needy" of these children must be placed first, then you and I should have adopted much older children. Teenagers in state care have a snowball’s chance in hell of being placed in an adoptive family. Dad
(Reuters)
< snip http://groups.google.com.au/groups?selm=6lhrkk%24oid%241%40black.inte…
.net.au&output=gplain I wrote this post three years after our sons joined us. Since then Madhu has told us more, such as the story of several girls who suicided by jumping in the orphanage well and one who hung herself from the tree. I hoped this and other stories had been talk he’d heard rather than events he’d witnessed, but they were verified by a friend when we travelled back to India and visited the orphanage. This orphanage no longer does adoptions but still has over 300 "inmates" (as they are called).
Since Diane believes that these "inmates" are precisely where they belong, I nominate her for warden. Dad
I also oppose foreign adoption because I feel that the US – or any "developed" country (like Australia, for instance), does a disservice to their own society by abandoning their own children in order to satisfy their desires as stated above.
Why is it the responsibility of would-be adopters to care for the children in their own society? I would consider it ther responsibility of the society as a whole. In the United States of America alone, the number of children adopted from the foster care system has dropped from 38% in 1995, to, in one study I read, less than half that – 15% of all US adoptions annually, whereas foreign adoptions have increased from nearly non-existant in the 70’s to 5% of US adoptions in 1992, to 10% in 1997 (source: Flango and Flango). 10%, in 1997, was nearly 14,000 children.
Is that because adoptions from foster care have fallen, or because foreign adoptions have risen? In my view, the two are not readily interchangeable. Estimates from various sources put the number of children in the care of the states in the US, that are legally free for adoption at approximately 134,000 in 2003. So, if the PAPs that went overseas to adopt adopted one of these children instead, the number of children stuck in the system with no "forever family" would be reduced by more than TEN PERCENT in one year. That’s a big percentage.
Again, why is it the Pap’s responsibility to reduce those numbers? Why not everyone’s? Imagine the reduction possible if everyone who raised children at all (thus proving ability to parent) also adopted one child. Finally, I’m opposed to foreign adoption because I feel it is the responsibility of any wealthy society, like the US, to take care of their own society first, before imposing a sort of cultural imperialism on a developing nation – a sort of, "our society and way of life is better than yours will ever be, give us your young," sort of thing.
It’s more usually "A child is better off in a family than in an orphanage." Most countries prefer local families as far as possible. But many traditional societies don’t have a culture that supports stranger adoption. Why step over children in need in your own back yard? I can only come to one conclusion – for the PAPs personal agenda of "needing" an infant, and not EVER wanting birth family contact.
They might not be up for a special needs child. They might not want a contested adoption. But when my husband and I adopted, we chose NOT to step over the children in our own city. We adopted foster children here in the US. We are a trans-racial family, and our children have "special needs." Our daughter wasn’t an infant – she was just about to start Kindergarten when we adopted her (our son was an infant, but was in the system nonetheless).
It’s great you did this, and I hope your kids are flourishing. But not everyone can, or wants to. Rupa
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Then, if there were literally no children in the care of the state available for adopton in Australia, then I have no issue with foreign adoption. That is VERY MUCH NOT the case here in the US. I have to disagree with you as to this basic line of logic. Adopting special needs children from the State is not identical to adopting a young child with no issues, and takes a different level of skill. Why should only people seeking to adopt be responsible for adopting special-needs children? Why not anyone who is having another child? Why not anyone who is capable of parenting? I admire people who take on the difficult work of helping these kids — and good for you for adopting your two young ones. At least many/most of the children stuck in your system have family care, even if that is not a "forever family". They have an education, clean water, decent food, health care, clothing and possessions. That is more than most children in orphanage care will ever have. But any child’s needs are immediate, wherever they fall on Maslow’s hierarchy. My children both came to me with zero posessions and very little clothing – my daughter was in five foster homes and a group home from the age of 8 months to 4 years. That’s really sad. Poor kid. It is routine to move a long-term foster child from placement to placement every 8-14 months, virtually guaranteeing all they will have is food, water, education (provided by the local public school) and the bare necessities of clothing. Actually, I’ve never understood why they keep moving the kids. Whatever posessions they manage to accumulate – which includes their school supplies and clothing – is done through the foster care stipend to foster parents, or the generosity of foster parents. Some aren’t very generous. It seems unfair that the US, one of the world’s richest countries, cannot do better than that for its kids in state care. But it’s true. Still and all, the conditions do not even begin to approach those of a 3rd-world orphanage. I don’t know if the description Julia wrote of the place from where she adopted her older Indian kids is still around. It’s worth googling.
http://groups.google.com.au/groups?selm=6lhrkk%24oid%241%40black.inte… I wrote this post three years after our sons joined us. Since then Madhu has told us more, such as the story of several girls who suicided by jumping in the orphanage well and one who hung herself from the tree. I hoped this and other stories had been talk he’d heard rather than events he’d witnessed, but they were verified by a friend when we travelled back to India and visited the orphanage. This orphanage no longer does adoptions but still has over 300 "inmates" (as they are called). Julia – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here’s some opinions from various places that confirm that many US PAPs choose international adoption because they can secure an infant, and/or because of its "finality" – no chance the birth father is going to pop up and want to contest it – and some of these are from adoption advocates – the last lists "fear of birthparents" as a reason to adopt internationally! Many adoptive parents would want to start with an infant, if possible. I don’t see the value of allowing the infants to go into institutions, develop problems, and then be adopted later as special needs kids. Or worse, never being adopted at all. I don’t think kids are less worthy of homes because they’re born in Korea or India or Ethiopia. Rupa
Then, if there were literally no children in the care of the state available for adopton in Australia, then I have no issue with foreign adoption. That is VERY MUCH NOT the case here in the US.
I have to disagree with you as to this basic line of logic. Adopting special needs children from the State is not identical to adopting a young child with no issues, and takes a different level of skill. Why should only people seeking to adopt be responsible for adopting special-needs children? Why not anyone who is having another child? Why not anyone who is capable of parenting? I admire people who take on the difficult work of helping these kids — and good for you for adopting your two young ones. At least many/most of the children stuck in your system have family care, even if that is not a "forever family". They have an education, clean water, decent food, health care, clothing and possessions. That is more than most children in orphanage care will ever have. But any child’s needs are immediate, wherever they fall on Maslow’s hierarchy. My children both came to me with zero posessions and very little clothing – my daughter was in five foster homes and a group home from the age of 8 months to 4 years.
That’s really sad. Poor kid. It is routine to move a long-term foster child from placement to placement every 8-14 months, virtually guaranteeing all they will have is food, water, education (provided by the local public school) and the bare necessities of clothing.
Actually, I’ve never understood why they keep moving the kids. Whatever posessions they manage to accumulate – which includes their school supplies and clothing – is done through the foster care stipend to foster parents, or the generosity of foster parents. Some aren’t very generous.
It seems unfair that the US, one of the world’s richest countries, cannot do better than that for its kids in state care. But it’s true. Still and all, the conditions do not even begin to approach those of a 3rd-world orphanage. I don’t know if the description Julia wrote of the place from where she adopted her older Indian kids is still around. It’s worth googling. Here’s some opinions from various places that confirm that many US PAPs choose international adoption because they can secure an infant, and/or because of its "finality" – no chance the birth father is going to pop up and want to contest it – and some of these are from adoption advocates – the last lists "fear of birthparents" as a reason to adopt internationally!
Many adoptive parents would want to start with an infant, if possible. I don’t see the value of allowing the infants to go into institutions, develop problems, and then be adopted later as special needs kids. Or worse, never being adopted at all. I don’t think kids are less worthy of homes because they’re born in Korea or India or Ethiopia. Rupa
I have no intention of "bashing" you for taking the time to answer my questions. Thanks for doing so. I hope you can tolerate my long reply.
Absolutely. Thank you! Some adoptive parents adopt from overseas to avoid birth parents. Others, like myself, go to considerable trouble to find out all the background information we can for our children and contact birth family where possible. We initiated contact with our Taiwanese son’s birth mother soon after we adopted him from an orphanage aged 2.5 yrs. It was the first time his orphanage had facilitated contact between an adoptive and birth family but they have done so in other situations since (all, I believe, were intercountry adoptions).
That is admirable, but, in my experience, you are an abberation. I’m sure you weren’t the first foreigners to adopt from this orphanage, but you were the first to ask the orphanage to facilitate contact. Others have bio children, or in the case of friends – choose adoption rather than having bio children, and adopt children from institutional care because they know the likely future of these children is unbelievably bleak. My 10 year old son came to us without a single possession in the world. He had lost everything through his abandonment two years earlier: his birth family, his language, all mementoes of his childhood, his true age and birth date, his security and trust in adults. His future in his own country was extremely limited. He is now an adult and is an enthusiastic advocate of intercountry adoption for children who cannot be placed within their country.
The stories of my domestically adopted son and daughter are nearly identical, with the exception of losing language and birth date. My son was born three weeks premature and is autistic with a diminished IQ, and my daughter was a miracle baby, born at 28 weeks when her mother OD’ed on crack cocaine. She was born drug addicted, with cerebral palsy, and then was institutionalized first in the hospital then in a group home, so she has a severe attachment disorder. Both children are African American, and, luckily for my son, he has contact with some of his extended birth family – not even the FBI could find my daughter’s birth parents (and they tried – they are wanted in three states). We also have one bio son – our eldest. To me a child in need is a child in need, irrespective of their location. There were no children available for adoption in Australia. None! We applied locally for special-needs children but none was offered. We even made inquiries interstate in case there were any waiting children available elsewhere. Only foster care was available and we wanted a child to be a permanent member of our family, not forever remain a fostered child.
Then, if there were literally no children in the care of the state available for adopton in Australia, then I have no issue with foreign adoption. That is VERY MUCH NOT the case here in the US. At least many/most of the children stuck in your system have family care, even if that is not a "forever family". They have an education, clean water, decent food, health care, clothing and possessions. That is more than most children in orphanage care will ever have. But any child’s needs are immediate, wherever they fall on Maslow’s
hierarchy. My children both came to me with zero posessions and very little clothing – my daughter was in five foster homes and a group home from the age of 8 months to 4 years. It’s not much better here, believe me. It is routine to move a long-term foster child from placement to placement every 8-14 months, virtually guaranteeing all they will have is food, water, education (provided by the local public school) and the bare necessities of clothing. Most children in foster care in the US come into foster care, literally, with just the clothes on their backs. Whatever posessions they manage to accumulate – which includes their school supplies and clothing – is done through the foster care stipend to foster parents, or the generosity of foster parents. Some aren’t very generous. That seems to be a bit of a leap in thinking. You are assuming that people go overseas primarily because they don’t want birth family contact. That assumption would be like me assuming that people adopt locally because most want a child the same race as themselves and at heart they are racist. I don’t believe that at all … but do you see what I mean? You are assuming motivation, and then applying that motivation across the board – IMO without substantiation.
Well, I’ve met dozens of couples who’ve done foreign adoption, and, without exception, they’ve all said it’s because the wait for an infant in the US was too long. Here’s some opinions from various places that confirm that many US PAPs choose international adoption because they can secure an infant, and/or because of its "finality" – no chance the birth father is going to pop up and want to contest it – and some of these are from adoption advocates – the last lists "fear of birthparents" as a reason to adopt internationally! http://www.adoptlaw.org/tiac_htm/14faq.htm http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dsnews/251nd3.htm http://www.adopting.org/glazer.html Maybe by reading some of my background you might see that the brush you paint intercountry adoptive parents with is way too broad. Julia
Maybe for Australia, it is. Again, I’d say you are a surprising abberation ( a good one!) to why many, many people in the US adopt internationally. Thanks for your story, though! Chickeyd
Here’s why I personally object to foreign adoptions – by any country, not just the US, but, being a US citizen, I will speak from my frame of reference. I feel that foreign adoption is, by and large, the most selfish form of adoption. PAPs have a much better chance of securing an infant or toddler by going outside the US, and in most (if not all) cases, don’t ever have to worry about those pesky birth parents surfacing ever again because, after all, even if the children were relinquished and the birth parents (one or both) are alive, the poverty and other adversities that led them to relinquish the child will surely also keep them from venturing to a foreign land in search of their biological child. I say selfish because, in my opinion, foreign adoption is adoption where the needs of the ADOPTIVE PARENTS are what is considered first and most. I’m sure the desire to "do good" and help a child in a bad situation is there for some, but I would argue that it’s not the initial desire. I also oppose foreign adoption because I feel that the US – or any "developed" country (like Australia, for instance), does a disservice to their own society by abandoning their own children in order to satisfy their desires as stated above. In the United States of America alone, the number of children adopted from the foster care system has dropped from 38% in 1995, to, in one study I read, less than half that – 15% of all US adoptions annually, whereas foreign adoptions have increased from nearly non-existant in the 70’s to 5% of US adoptions in 1992, to 10% in 1997 (source: Flango and Flango). 10%, in 1997, was nearly 14,000 children. Estimates from various sources put the number of children in the care of the states in the US, that are legally free for adoption at approximately 134,000 in 2003. So, if the PAPs that went overseas to adopt adopted one of these children instead, the number of children stuck in the system with no "forever family" would be reduced by more than TEN PERCENT in one year. That’s a big percentage. Finally, I’m opposed to foreign adoption because I feel it is the responsibility of any wealthy society, like the US, to take care of their own society first, before imposing a sort of cultural imperialism on a developing nation – a sort of, "our society and way of life is better than yours will ever be, give us your young," sort of thing. Why step over children in need in your own back yard? I can only come to one conclusion – for the PAPs personal agenda of "needing" an infant, and not EVER wanting birth family contact. I know there’s a big world out there – I’ve been to 4 of the 7 continents so far (I don’t plan on visiting Antarctica, so 2 to go), and I’m the daughter of foreign-born parents. I monetarily support UNICEF and CARE to help the children in developing countries. But when my husband and I adopted, we chose NOT to step over the children in our own city. We adopted foster children here in the US. We are a trans-racial family, and our children have "special needs." Our daughter wasn’t an infant – she was just about to start Kindergarten when we adopted her (our son was an infant, but was in the system nonetheless). There it is – let the bashing begin! :) chickeyd
I have no intention of "bashing" you for taking the time to answer my questions. Thanks for doing so. I hope you can tolerate my long reply. Here’s why I personally object to foreign adoptions – by any country, not just the US, but, being a US citizen, I will speak from my frame of reference. I feel that foreign adoption is, by and large, the most selfish form of adoption. PAPs have a much better chance of securing an infant or toddler by going outside the US, and in most (if not all) cases, don’t ever have to worry about those pesky birth parents surfacing ever again because, after all, even if the children were relinquished and the birth parents (one or both) are alive, the poverty and other adversities that led them to relinquish the child will surely also keep them from venturing to a foreign land in search of their biological child.
Some adoptive parents adopt from overseas to avoid birth parents. Others, like myself, go to considerable trouble to find out all the background information we can for our children and contact birth family where possible. We initiated contact with our Taiwanese son’s birth mother soon after we adopted him from an orphanage aged 2.5 yrs. It was the first time his orphanage had facilitated contact between an adoptive and birth family but they have done so in other situations since (all, I believe, were intercountry adoptions). We were in contact with our son’s mother until he was 10 and she moved without giving a forwarding address. He was born 3 months premature and is totally blind, intellectually disabled, autistic and has mental health issues, so fortunately he did not understand adoption and the loss of contact did not impact him adversely. We helped our nearly 12 yr old son search in Korea for his birth mother. We managed to locate her but she refused contact. He is now 16 and has initiated a search in Korea for his birth father, with our support and assistance. Not only is birth search possible for many intercountry adoptees, adoptive parents also have to live with the reality that their sons and daughters may choose to move back to their countries of origin as adults. My 16 yr old son has studied Korean for 3 years and fully intends to find a career that allows him to live in Korea, a country he has visited twice since his adoption and loves. We support him in that goal, though I would miss him every day if he moved away. I say selfish because, in my opinion, foreign adoption is adoption where the needs of the ADOPTIVE PARENTS are what is considered first and most. I’m sure the desire to "do good" and help a child in a bad situation is there for some, but I would argue that it’s not the initial desire.
That may be the case for many adoptive parents, no matter where their children originate. Most people, after all, come to adoption after they’ve failed to have a child born to them. It is done to meet their need and desire to nurture and raise children. Others have bio children, or in the case of friends – choose adoption rather than having bio children, and adopt children from institutional care because they know the likely future of these children is unbelievably bleak. My 10 year old son came to us without a single possession in the world. He had lost everything through his abandonment two years earlier: his birth family, his language, all mementoes of his childhood, his true age and birth date, his security and trust in adults. His future in his own country was extremely limited. He is now an adult and is an enthusiastic advocate of intercountry adoption for children who cannot be placed within their country. I have 3 sisters and we all have bio kids. Three of us have also added to our families through intercountry adoption. We’ve adopted 10 children between us and only one was placed as an infant (my Korean son). The others were aged 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 9, 10 and 11 when placed in our families. Three were double orphans. Three were abandoned as older children in public places. Three were placed in orphanages due to parental chronic illness and/or the child’s disabilities. Four have permanent disabiliities, in most cases identified before adoption and adopted as special-needs children. All, except my Korean son and Ethiopian nephews, spent more than 2 years living in poor orphanages prior to adoption. I also oppose foreign adoption because I feel that the US – or any "developed" country (like Australia, for instance), does a disservice to their own society by abandoning their own children in order to satisfy their desires as stated above. In the United States of America alone, the number of children adopted from the foster care system has dropped from 38% in 1995, to, in one study I read, less than half that – 15% of all US adoptions annually, whereas foreign adoptions have increased from nearly non-existant in the 70’s to 5% of US adoptions in 1992, to 10% in 1997 (source: Flango and Flango). 10%, in 1997, was nearly 14,000 children.
To me a child in need is a child in need, irrespective of their location. There were no children available for adoption in Australia. None! We applied locally for special-needs children but none was offered. We even made inquiries interstate in case there were any waiting children available elsewhere. Only foster care was available and we wanted a child to be a permanent member of our family, not forever remain a fostered child. Estimates from various sources put the number of children in the care of the states in the US, that are legally free for adoption at approximately 134,000 in 2003. So, if the PAPs that went overseas to adopt adopted one of these children instead, the number of children stuck in the system with no "forever family" would be reduced by more than TEN PERCENT in one year. That’s a big percentage.
At least many/most of the children stuck in your system have family care, even if that is not a "forever family". They have an education, clean water, decent food, health care, clothing and possessions. That is more than most children in orphanage care will ever have. But any child’s needs are immediate, wherever they fall on Maslow’s hierarchy. Finally, I’m opposed to foreign adoption because I feel it is the responsibility of any wealthy society, like the US, to take care of their own society first, before imposing a sort of cultural imperialism on a developing nation – a sort of, "our society and way of life is better than yours will ever be, give us your young," sort of thing. Why step over children in need in your own back yard? I can only come to one conclusion – for the PAPs personal agenda of "needing" an infant, and not EVER wanting birth family contact.
That seems to be a bit of a leap in thinking. You are assuming that people go overseas primarily because they don’t want birth family contact. That assumption would be like me assuming that people adopt locally because most want a child the same race as themselves and at heart they are racist. I don’t believe that at all … but do you see what I mean? You are assuming motivation, and then applying that motivation across the board – IMO without substantiation. I have been actively involved in adoption support for the last 18 years and that now involves being very involved in the adoption preparation process undertaken here by all intercountry adoption applicants through our sole govt adoption agency (no private agencies or adoptions here). I meet every intercountry adoption applicant in my state. They come in all shapes and sizes with every kind of motivation, from unbelievably naive and selfish to completely selfless. I know a family who have fought our own system and a foreign system for years to finally succeed in adopting the HIV+ sibling of a child they adopted, because they would not leave the sibling behind. I also meet families who would much rather have a child born to them through IVF than adopt, and they have a long way to go before being ready for any adoption. We stress that search and reunion is increasingly possible for intercountry adoptees, and that parents need to know and accept this from the start. Sri Lanka and Korea have established birth search services and I know many adoptees and adoptive families who have used these. Things are harder in countries such as Ethiopia where all adoptees were orphaned or abandoned, or India where half the children in institutional care are abandoned. Still, there are many people I know who have returned with their children and found some remaining family, relatives, or others who agree to be an ongoing part of the adoptee’s life. My sister has located relatives for her sons, people who knew their parents when they were alive and can fill in the missing pieces for my nephews. Through these people she has found photos of both parents for her sons and a photo of their grave and headstone inscription. This year her family returns to Ethiopia to visit these relatives. Yesterday she received a letter from the boy’s great uncle, who is searching for extended family on both parents’ sides for the boys to meet. Others, like my sons, have nobody. They had nobody for the two years they lived in an orphanage of 300+ children. My younger son didn’t speak from the day of abandonment until weeks after joining our family, the result of trauma he still lives with today. We didn’t adopt them BECAUSE they had no contactable relatives. It is a sad reality for all of us, and a loss my sons must bear for life. It irritates me when people assume we adopted them because we didn’t want birth family involvement. I would love to know what became of their mother, father, sister and brother – if only we knew where to start searching amongst a 1 billion population. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I know there’s a big world out there – I’ve been to 4 of the 7 continents so far (I don’t plan on visiting Antarctica, so 2 to go), and I’m the daughter of foreign-born parents. I monetarily support
… read more »
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Please allow me to reply to both Julia and Elizabeth with one posting. One thing, however, I must point out. Intercountry adoptions for Americans are not cheap. When we adopted from Russia and Bulgaria total costs were US$40,000. Granted, we did two countries at the same time, so that was a hunk of change. I do not recommend people doing what we did. Let me start right up front by stating that I am a firm opponent of international adoptions, period. If you want to adopt a child to save them from life in a group home due to disease, poverty, drug addiction and AIDS, start with any city in the US. There’s plenty of children to choose from, and the adoption fee is nearly zero.
Well, if I were to do that I would need to do an international adoption as I am an Aussie, not an American. But aside from that… Why do you believe that children should be adopted domestically ahead (or instead of) children being adopted internationally? I’m interested in understanding why you feel as you do. You’ve explained the apparent availability of children in need of adoption within America but not explained the basis of your opposition to intercountry adoption. I can understand people wanting to adopt within their own country, should that be an option, but I don’t see any reason why they should be restricted to only doing that. Are American (or Aussie, for that matter) children more worthy of a family than Indian or Ethiopian children? I didn’t have the option of domestic adoption, but apart from that I am happy to have adopted my children from overseas. There was no question in my mind regarding my children’s dire need of a family, and at least in the cases of a few of them there was no other interested family. Lucky us The United Nations Rights of the Child convention details in Article 21 the appropriate place of intercountry adoption – in effect that intercountry adoption may be appropriate for a child who cannot be placed in an adoptive or foster family within their country of birth or otherwise cared for in a suitable manner. Sounds okay to me. I’d have no objection to Aussie children going overseas to loving families if they couldn’t find one here. My children couldn’t be placed within their countries, and we were happy to have them in our family. Can you explain what you object to about that? Thanks, Julia
Let me start right up front by stating that I am a firm opponent of international adoptions, period. If you want to adopt a child to save them from life in a group home due to disease, poverty, drug addiction and AIDS, start with any city in the US. There’s plenty of children to choose from, and the adoption fee is nearly zero.
Why are you opposed to international adoption? (I should say that I am strongly in favor, and I am in fact a charter member of Julia’s unofficial fan club.) I don’t see why children born in another country are any less deserving of homes than ones born here. Group homes here and in the third world are hugely different, and kids land in them for different reasons. In some countries, there’s no such thing as foster care, so you have tiny infants in group homes, not getting any of the individual care small children need. International adoption is never a solution for the ills of a society. It is at least a partial solution for the individual child adopted. Yes, it will – longer if the world does nothing but take their children away. We used to send aid and the Peace Corps, now we just adopt the children left behind – what happened?
As Julia pointed out in her post, the two things are not mutually exclusive. The opposite of adopting from abroad is not greater sensitivity to the needs of poor children in the third world — more usually, it’s "Where is Ethiopia again?" Equally, adopting a child from Ethiopia or India or China makes one more aware of the connection to that country, brings it to the top of one’s mind, and increases the likelihood that one would contribute toward the country. International adoption builds bridges. Rupa
If you want to adopt a child to save them from life in a group home due to disease, poverty, drug addiction and AIDS, start with any city in the US. There’s plenty of children to choose from, and the adoption fee is nearly zero. Chickeyd
BTW Beyond the shores and borders of the USA is a vast place called "the rest of the world". Some of your compatriots are even aware of its existence. :-) I see adoption as a 2 way street. (We got a beautiful family, our kids get to grow up in a family, not an institution). We continue to support our kids’ birth country in many ways, including sponsorship of a poor family, support for local charities, and provision of goods for our kids’ orphanage. Every adoptive family of my aquaintance does what it can to give support to their kids’ birth country. I have heard of an intitution in Ethiopia which houses and trains homeless teenagers. The boys are trained in metalwork and other trades; they make the bunks for the other kids with little cradles attached so the teenage mothers can keep their babies with them.Older homeless women provide child care so the young mums can get job training. Guess who provides a large proportion of the funding for this place? Adoptive parents. M (Australia, a nice place in rest of the world)
Please allow me to reply to both Julia and Elizabeth with one posting. One thing, however, I must point out. Intercountry adoptions for Americans are not cheap. When we adopted from Russia and Bulgaria total costs were US$40,000. Granted, we did two countries at the same time, so that was a hunk of change. I do not recommend people doing what we did.
Let me start right up front by stating that I am a firm opponent of international adoptions, period. If you want to adopt a child to save them from life in a group home due to disease, poverty, drug addiction and AIDS, start with any city in the US. There’s plenty of children to choose from, and the adoption fee is nearly zero. The adoption fees are mostly non-refundable and you do not literally know where your money is going. For Eastern Europe, most of the money is going to the foreign facilitator (or facilitation organization like Frank Foundation or Amrex), the agency’s overhead, the agency director’s salary and office expenses. The portion you know where your money is going to: homestudy costs, BCIS fees, travel fees and documentation authentication costs can add up into the thousands.
Oh well, that’s what you signed up for. International adoption is a stop-gap measure; what has happened in Ethiopia is a societal problem and will take years to rectify.
Yes, it will – longer if the world does nothing but take their children away. We used to send aid and the Peace Corps, now we just adopt the children left behind – what happened? I just feel it is unfair and unrealistic to suggest international adoptive parents have more responsibility than anyone else for solving world poverty. That task ought to fall on everyone’s shoulders equally.
Agreed – I never suggested it was a problem for adoptive parents to fix. Chickeyd
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A writer for "Good Housekeeping" magazine by the name of Melissa F. Greene has written in-depth about Ethiopia and adoptions. She and her husband have adopted two children from Ethiopia and a child from Bulgaria. Here is a link to some of the articles she has written: http://www.melissafaygreene.com/pages/adoption.html The other articles appeared this past year in "Good Housekeeping" and go into great detail about one woman helping kids in Ethiopia to find parents. (right now I can’t recall her name but she is doing wonderful work). The woman who runs the Fistula Hospital was interviewed by Oprah Winfrey – that was a really intense interview. Kudos to Julia’s sister and neice for helping out with the hospital’s work and continuing their fund raising efforts. One thing, however, I must point out. Intercountry adoptions for Americans are not cheap. When we adopted from Russia and Bulgaria total costs were US$40,000. Granted, we did two countries at the same time, so that was a hunk of change. I do not recommend people doing what we did. The adoption fees are mostly non-refundable and you do not literally know where your money is going. For Eastern Europe, most of the money is going to the foreign facilitator (or facilitation organization like Frank Foundation or Amrex), the agency’s overhead, the agency director’s salary and office expenses. The portion you know where your money is going to: homestudy costs, BCIS fees, travel fees and documentation authentication costs can add up into the thousands. I’m wondering if the American agencies accredited to place Ethiopian children are charging as much for the Ethiopian program as they do for the EE programs. And if so, are the funds going towards the community at large or will they be going into a facilitator or government official’s pocket. International adoption is a stop-gap measure; what has happened in Ethiopia is a societal problem and will take years to rectify.
Sadly that is true Elizabeth. Ethiopia has been ravaged by war, famine and poverty for decades. It has internal social problems such as early marriage of girls, and external pressures such as international debt, and these problems will continue irrespective of their adoption program. At least in the case of Australia, Ethiopia’s adoption program has meant there are hundreds of Aussie families that feel a tangible and enduring connection to their child’s birth country. The Aust- Ethiopia adoption support organisation here is one of our most active and they are constantly involved in fund-raising to improve the lives of children left in Ethiopia – for example HIV+ children. I just feel it is unfair and unrealistic to suggest international adoptive parents have more responsibility than anyone else for solving world poverty. That task ought to fall on everyone’s shoulders equally. Julia – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Elizabeth Case
A writer for "Good Housekeeping" magazine by the name of Melissa F. Greene has written in-depth about Ethiopia and adoptions. She and her husband have adopted two children from Ethiopia and a child from Bulgaria. Here is a link to some of the articles she has written: http://www.melissafaygreene.com/pages/adoption.html The other articles appeared this past year in "Good Housekeeping" and go into great detail about one woman helping kids in Ethiopia to find parents. (right now I can’t recall her name but she is doing wonderful work). The woman who runs the Fistula Hospital was interviewed by Oprah Winfrey – that was a really intense interview. Kudos to Julia’s sister and neice for helping out with the hospital’s work and continuing their fund raising efforts. One thing, however, I must point out. Intercountry adoptions for Americans are not cheap. When we adopted from Russia and Bulgaria total costs were US$40,000. Granted, we did two countries at the same time, so that was a hunk of change. I do not recommend people doing what we did. The adoption fees are mostly non-refundable and you do not literally know where your money is going. For Eastern Europe, most of the money is going to the foreign facilitator (or facilitation organization like Frank Foundation or Amrex), the agency’s overhead, the agency director’s salary and office expenses. The portion you know where your money is going to: homestudy costs, BCIS fees, travel fees and documentation authentication costs can add up into the thousands. I’m wondering if the American agencies accredited to place Ethiopian children are charging as much for the Ethiopian program as they do for the EE programs. And if so, are the funds going towards the community at large or will they be going into a facilitator or government official’s pocket. International adoption is a stop-gap measure; what has happened in Ethiopia is a societal problem and will take years to rectify. Elizabeth Case
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So what do you propose should be done rather than have the orphans adopted? Julia Ideally? Improve their medical system. Train the indigenous (sp) people about birth control, AIDS prevention and sanitation. Forgive their international debt if the government will spend their money on education, food, infrastructure. Help move them to a society that can take care of its orphaned children, not abandon them because of poverty or disease that could have been prevented with a 50 cent condom.
None of these worthy goals can be achieved by adoptive parents. If the people around the world adopting from impovershed nations would put their money into CARE and other organziations that try and improve their living conditions and education, not only would they contribute to eventually ending the massive rate of abandoned and orphaned children, but they’d get a tax write-off as well. chickeyd
Why do you believe it is the responsibility of people adopting internationally to instead support overseas countries to fight poverty? Americans often pay far more for a domestic adoption than I paid for our intercountry adoptions. I’ve even heard of instances of people paying more for ONE domestic adoption than it cost us for six intercountry adoptions. I know many people who spent more money on their cars than is spent on an intercountry adoption but I don’t hear anyone calling on them to "put their money into CARE and other organizations" instead of buying a new car. I don’t see why the call to end world poverty ought to fall on intercountry adoptive parents. I adopted after having children born to me, not to end world poverty or solve any country’s problems, but rather to provide a family to a child (or in our case six children) who needed a family. We might have done less to support more children had we sent the money instead to an aid agency in their birth country, but my children still would have needed families. My sister and her husband adopted two orphaned Ethiopian brothers aged six and four after their parents died and the children were placed in an orphanage. Since adopting the boys the family has continued to contribute aid to Ethiopia. They visited our home a few months ago. One of their four bio kids, a girl of 15, had seen a tv program on the Fistula Hospital in Addis and its work helping young poor Ethiopian women injured in childbirth (it is common to have babies at 14 due to religious beliefs). My niece has been selling chocolates since then and has individually raised nearly $3,000 that has been sent to this hospital. She’s still selling them. Their family has continued to maintain a close association with Ethiopia in the same way our family has with our children’s birth countries. Julia
As far as right now, I would hope there would be options for adoption that could leave them on their native continent, if not country, and that those options would be explored first, with foreign adoption being a last resort. Basically, exactly what is being done for the tsunami orphans.
Pretty nearly all countries do look for extended families to take in kids. Under normal circs, kids who can be cared for within their extended families in any traditional setting don’t even make it into government orphanages. The kids who are in the orphanages are the ones whose uncles/ aunts/ grandparents/ older siblings/ cousins won’t take them in. Many countries have no tradition of stranger adoption as such. A few childless people may adopt "heirs" – but they are not really considered on par with children born to the couple. Usually when people seek heirs, they will adopt from within the family – a nephew or niece from a large family. I’m from India, and I’m a big supporter of foreign adoption. There are far more kids who need homes than will get them. There’s pretty much no waiting time for domestic adoption. It’s not an either-or situation (except sometimes in the case of a particular individual child). I’d guess that Ethiopia is similar. However, I do agree that adoption is not a solution. It just solves the problem of a few kids. I personally believe that SOS Kinderdorfer are the way to go for places like Ethiopia, and those could be funded with foreign donations. Rupa
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – **top post** Chrisa, all you write is wise and accurate. However, I think Julia’s question concerns what can be done for orphaned children *today*, this week, this month, this year. If they do not go home to adoptive families, what will become of them in the near future? By the way, people in the US do not need to look beyond the borders of this country to find organizations and people who need just the help you describe. The staggering numbers of children in government care right here in the US can attest.
You’re absolutely right, which is why I prefaced what I feel should be done with "ideally." As far as right now, I would hope there would be options for adoption that could leave them on their native continent, if not country, and that those options would be explored first, with foreign adoption being a last resort. Basically, exactly what is being done for the tsunami orphans. Chickeyd
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So what do you propose should be done rather than have the orphans adopted? Julia Ideally? Improve their medical system. Train the indigenous (sp) people about birth control, AIDS prevention and sanitation. Forgive their international debt if the government will spend their money on education, food, infrastructure. Help move them to a society that can take care of its orphaned children, not abandon them because of poverty or disease that could have been prevented with a 50 cent condom. If the people around the world adopting from impovershed nations would put their money into CARE and other organziations that try and improve their living conditions and education, not only would they contribute to eventually ending the massive rate of abandoned and orphaned children, but they’d get a tax write-off as well. chickeyd
How long does that sort of thing take to work, once you get it all arranged? Robin
**top post** Chrisa, all you write is wise and accurate. However, I think Julia’s question concerns what can be done for orphaned children *today*, this week, this month, this year. If they do not go home to adoptive families, what will become of them in the near future? By the way, people in the US do not need to look beyond the borders of this country to find organizations and people who need just the help you describe. The staggering numbers of children in government care right here in the US can attest. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -chrisa.hickey writes: Ideally? Improve their medical system. Train the indigenous (sp) people about birth control, AIDS prevention and sanitation. Forgive their international debt if the government will spend their money on education, food, infrastructure. Help move them to a society that can take care of its orphaned children, not abandon them because of poverty or disease that could have been prevented with a 50 cent condom. If the people around the world adopting from impovershed nations would put their money into CARE and other organziations that try and improve their living conditions and education, not only would they contribute to eventually ending the massive rate of abandoned and orphaned children, but they’d get a tax write-off as well. chickeyd
P2P
So what do you propose should be done rather than have the orphans adopted? Julia
Ideally? Improve their medical system. Train the indigenous (sp) people about birth control, AIDS prevention and sanitation. Forgive their international debt if the government will spend their money on education, food, infrastructure. Help move them to a society that can take care of its orphaned children, not abandon them because of poverty or disease that could have been prevented with a 50 cent condom. If the people around the world adopting from impovershed nations would put their money into CARE and other organziations that try and improve their living conditions and education, not only would they contribute to eventually ending the massive rate of abandoned and orphaned children, but they’d get a tax write-off as well. chickeyd
So what do you propose should be done rather than have the orphans adopted? Julia – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Gee, let’s take the children away rather than help solve the real problem. ETHIOPIA: Coping with increasing orphan numbers through adoption Source: IRIN ADDIS ABABA, 10 January (IRIN) – Wrapped in a bundle of warm blankets and lucky to be alive, four-month-old Thomas Bekele still faces a precarious future. Orphaned three weeks ago when his mother died from tuberculosis, he is one of the almost five million orphans in Ethiopia – a mushrooming crisis that the government warned was "tearing apart the social fabric" of the country. The rising number of orphans has, however, raised the demand for adoptions to a record high. Some 1,400 children made new homes abroad last year, more than double from the previous year. Adoption agencies also doubled to 30 in the capital Addis Ababa in the last year, a highly lucrative market with some agencies charging parents fees of up to US $20,000 per child. Bulti Gutema, who heads the country’s adoption authority, says adoption of orphans poses many moral quandaries to his government. He blames the growing number of orphans and the increasing numbers of adoptions on poverty. "We would prefer these children to remain in Ethiopia because it is their country," he says. "Adoption is the last resort because it doesn’t help alleviate poverty in Ethiopia." Bulti, however, admits that the $115 million a month needed to care for orphans in Ethiopia is simply out of the question, when compared to the country’s annual health budget of $140 million. It means, for some children, overseas adoption is the only option, he says. In a move to help stem the growing orphan crisis in Ethiopia, the US government announced a $20 million project in December to help the 530,000 HIV/AIDS orphans. "We can’t afford to look after every orphan," Bulti adds. "That is why adoption is one of our existing alternative child-care programmes, although it really solves the problems of just a few children." Ethiopia has strict adoption laws, but the process can be pushed through in 10-15 days if the paperwork is in order, according to Balti. An international convention, established in 1993, exists to protect children who are adopted overseas. It has been approved by 66 nations, although the Ethiopian government has not signed it yet. Most orphaned children from Ethiopia go to France, Australia, the US and Ireland. Couples are turning abroad because of the huge delays – four or five years sometimes – to adopt within their own country. "Parents adopt from Ethiopia because of the poverty and the children are beautiful and attractive," said Tsegaye Berhe of Horizon Homes, a halfway house where children from orphanages wait until they are selected by parents from the US. "It is not difficult to adopt here, the Ethiopian government has few restrictions for adoptive parents. Organisations like his will pay orphanages a small amount for upkeep of a child. "This should not be seen as though we are purchasing a child," says Tsegaye. "We are just refunding the costs incurred by the orphanages." Most adoption agencies are non-profit. His organisation, which opened last year, received around $6,000 a month to cover the expense of looking after the 32 children it sent to America. Next year, they hope to send more than 50 children. For accountant Russell Giles, 33, and his wife Vivian, 30, who have four of their own children, they expect to be in Ethiopia for three weeks while they adopt brother and sister Philimon, 5, and Bersable, 6. "The government here has been very open and willing," said the couple from Salt Lake City, Utah, who are adopting privately from an orphanage, rather than through an agency. "Other countries appear very open, but clamp up once the process has started." While they meet Philimon and Bersable for the first time in a nervous encounter, just a few metres away, 15-year-old Genet Girma was trying to give her two children up. "I have nothing to give them," she said of the two tiny eight-week old twins strapped to her front and back. "I am too poor." Most mothers will simply abandon their children near a police station or church rather than turn up at orphanages, where by law, they must be turned away. Any children that turn out to be HIV-positive cannot be put up for adoption. Daniel, a three-year-old, bright-eyed boy who is HIV-positive, sits and stares each day as new prospective parents walks around the orphanage, often crying when they leave. "It is very hard for him to see children leave with new moms and dads because he never leaves and he doesn’t understand why," says Sister Camilla, who has worked in the country for more than 30 years. IRIN news
Gee, let’s take the children away rather than help solve the real problem. ETHIOPIA: Coping with increasing orphan numbers through adoption Source: IRIN ADDIS ABABA, 10 January (IRIN) – Wrapped in a bundle of warm blankets and lucky to be alive, four-month-old Thomas Bekele still faces a precarious future. Orphaned three weeks ago when his mother died from tuberculosis, he is one of the almost five million orphans in Ethiopia – a mushrooming crisis that the government warned was "tearing apart the social fabric" of the country. The rising number of orphans has, however, raised the demand for adoptions to a record high. Some 1,400 children made new homes abroad last year, more than double from the previous year. Adoption agencies also doubled to 30 in the capital Addis Ababa in the last year, a highly lucrative market with some agencies charging parents fees of up to US $20,000 per child. Bulti Gutema, who heads the country’s adoption authority, says adoption of orphans poses many moral quandaries to his government. He blames the growing number of orphans and the increasing numbers of adoptions on poverty. "We would prefer these children to remain in Ethiopia because it is their country," he says. "Adoption is the last resort because it doesn’t help alleviate poverty in Ethiopia." Bulti, however, admits that the $115 million a month needed to care for orphans in Ethiopia is simply out of the question, when compared to the country’s annual health budget of $140 million. It means, for some children, overseas adoption is the only option, he says. In a move to help stem the growing orphan crisis in Ethiopia, the US government announced a $20 million project in December to help the 530,000 HIV/AIDS orphans. "We can’t afford to look after every orphan," Bulti adds. "That is why adoption is one of our existing alternative child-care programmes, although it really solves the problems of just a few children." Ethiopia has strict adoption laws, but the process can be pushed through in 10-15 days if the paperwork is in order, according to Balti. An international convention, established in 1993, exists to protect children who are adopted overseas. It has been approved by 66 nations, although the Ethiopian government has not signed it yet. Most orphaned children from Ethiopia go to France, Australia, the US and Ireland. Couples are turning abroad because of the huge delays – four or five years sometimes – to adopt within their own country. "Parents adopt from Ethiopia because of the poverty and the children are beautiful and attractive," said Tsegaye Berhe of Horizon Homes, a halfway house where children from orphanages wait until they are selected by parents from the US. "It is not difficult to adopt here, the Ethiopian government has few restrictions for adoptive parents. Organisations like his will pay orphanages a small amount for upkeep of a child. "This should not be seen as though we are purchasing a child," says Tsegaye. "We are just refunding the costs incurred by the orphanages." Most adoption agencies are non-profit. His organisation, which opened last year, received around $6,000 a month to cover the expense of looking after the 32 children it sent to America. Next year, they hope to send more than 50 children. For accountant Russell Giles, 33, and his wife Vivian, 30, who have four of their own children, they expect to be in Ethiopia for three weeks while they adopt brother and sister Philimon, 5, and Bersable, 6. "The government here has been very open and willing," said the couple from Salt Lake City, Utah, who are adopting privately from an orphanage, rather than through an agency. "Other countries appear very open, but clamp up once the process has started." While they meet Philimon and Bersable for the first time in a nervous encounter, just a few metres away, 15-year-old Genet Girma was trying to give her two children up. "I have nothing to give them," she said of the two tiny eight-week old twins strapped to her front and back. "I am too poor." Most mothers will simply abandon their children near a police station or church rather than turn up at orphanages, where by law, they must be turned away. Any children that turn out to be HIV-positive cannot be put up for adoption. Daniel, a three-year-old, bright-eyed boy who is HIV-positive, sits and stares each day as new prospective parents walks around the orphanage, often crying when they leave. "It is very hard for him to see children leave with new moms and dads because he never leaves and he doesn’t understand why," says Sister Camilla, who has worked in the country for more than 30 years. IRIN news
Alternative lyrics below. J. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. When the baby is born and you’re feeling all alone, and the mother’s confused because she can’t provide a home. "Although I can or can’t be there, another option is adoption." "But where can I go for help?" Bring the baby to the cops or hospital, it’s possible. No strings attached. No questions asked. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven!
If you have a baby and don’t know whose, Baby Safe Haven can help you lose it/ When the baby is born and you’re bleeding on the floor, and you, young mother, are so confused that you cannot find the door/ "Although I can or can’t be there, one option is adoption." "But you gotta take your time with this/" Don’t bring baby to the cops or even to the hospital, just because it’s possible/ What’s possible ain’t logical, Don’t go all theological. Though there be no strings attached. And though there be no questions asked. Even if you have a kid and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven ain’t no choice for it or you/ It won’t help you choose It will only make you lose. Baby…ain’t no Safe Haven! Baby…ain’t no Safe Haven! Baby…ain’t no Safe Haven! Baby. . . it won’t save you.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway! Well, I was thinking of the SH rap. It’s pretty tame and boring. Do you guys ever listen to real rap? <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean Not ticked off at all. We got coverage in Boston and there’s an open records bill in committee there now. Of corse, it’s being held up by some entitled adaddie. Publcity never hurts. In fact, the wire carried the NH case all over the country and there’s been a lot of contact made with other ungrateful bastards who want their records. Ethics and truth are stronger than the dreamlife of utopians and their media hounds. . When you have your first SH death what will you do? Marley They will do the same thing they did before and haul it out for the media….the media whores that they are. KL They’re going to admit that their propaganda caused a death, or will they find a way around that? Marley You wish…they will say that it was due to not enough media blitzing and start on about how it must be taught in every school starting with pre-school, or some such bullshit. KL
Cradle to grave safe havens. Will the horror of socialism never end? Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway! Well, I was thinking of the SH rap. It’s pretty tame and boring. Do you guys ever listen to real rap? <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean Not ticked off at all. We got coverage in Boston and there’s an open records bill in committee there now. Of corse, it’s being held up by some entitled adaddie. Publcity never hurts. In fact, the wire carried the NH case all over the country and there’s been a lot of contact made with other ungrateful bastards who want their records. Ethics and truth are stronger than the dreamlife of utopians and their media hounds. . When you have your first SH death what will you do? Marley They will do the same thing they did before and haul it out for the media….the media whores that they are. KL
They’re going to admit that their propaganda caused a death, or will they find a way around that? Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway! Well, I was thinking of the SH rap. It’s pretty tame and boring. Do you guys ever listen to real rap? <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean Not ticked off at all. We got coverage in Boston and there’s an open records bill in committee there now. Of corse, it’s being held up by some entitled adaddie. Publcity never hurts. In fact, the wire carried the NH case all over the country and there’s been a lot of contact made with other ungrateful bastards who want their records. Ethics and truth are stronger than the dreamlife of utopians and their media hounds. . When you have your first SH death what will you do? Marley They will do the same thing they did before and haul it out for the media….the media whores that they are. KL They’re going to admit that their propaganda caused a death, or will they find a way around that? Marley
You wish…they will say that it was due to not enough media blitzing and start on about how it must be taught in every school starting with pre-school, or some such bullshit. KL
<<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway! <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean
<<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway!
Well, I was thinking of the SH rap. It’s pretty tame and boring. Do you guys ever listen to real rap? <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean
Not ticked off at all. We got coverage in Boston and there’s an open records bill in committee there now. Of corse, it’s being held up by some entitled adaddie. Publcity never hurts. In fact, the wire carried the NH case all over the country and there’s been a lot of contact made with other ungrateful bastards who want their records. Ethics and truth are stronger than the dreamlife of utopians and their media hounds. . When you have your first SH death what will you do? Marley
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<<<This is gonna be fun! Success is always fun! <<<<Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! I wouldn’t call the Lexington fire station "Broadway." It’s on Bedford Street. But, if we went to the Arlington fire station as we wanted to, that station is on the corner of Mass Ave. and Broadway! Well, I was thinking of the SH rap. It’s pretty tame and boring. Do you guys ever listen to real rap? <<<<Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Maybe you’re a might bit ticked off, as the Baby Safe Haven law in MA got two minutes of a long story with a reporter, live shots, anchor discussions with experts, and more. You got ten seconds of a reader. Oh well, the irony of it all. Jean Not ticked off at all. We got coverage in Boston and there’s an open records bill in committee there now. Of corse, it’s being held up by some entitled adaddie. Publcity never hurts. In fact, the wire carried the NH case all over the country and there’s been a lot of contact made with other ungrateful bastards who want their records. Ethics and truth are stronger than the dreamlife of utopians and their media hounds. . When you have your first SH death what will you do? Marley
They will do the same thing they did before and haul it out for the media….the media whores that they are. KL
<<<<Thanks, Jean. I don’t suppose you could tell us what state agency and officials vetted this PSA and approved it. Marley Of course it was the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, its top administrators, which are all under the Governor’s administration. Lt. Governor Healey introduced them at the kickoff press conference, and they were met with a huge round of applause. She personaly praised the students who produced and starred in them, as they were there at the kickoff in Lexington. With the airing of the ads we’re guessing that they’ve been seen by about a million people by now, not to mention the huge billboards and bus and subway car ads. All MA is doing is learning from the lessons of the 45 states that have passed laws ahead of us. It’s great that we’re making up for lost time with such overwhelming support of our Baby Safe Haven law. Even the high school radio stations are playing the ads, including one of the most elite prep schools in the country who called for the ads this week — to play on their FM radio station. Glad to hear that everything went well for you in NH. Caught a bit of it on the news here, and an NH TV station that came to Lexington to cover the Baby Safe Haven press conference. Jean
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <<<<Thanks, Jean. I don’t suppose you could tell us what state agency and officials vetted this PSA and approved it. Marley Of course it was the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, its top administrators, which are all under the Governor’s administration. Lt. Governor Healey introduced them at the kickoff press conference, and they were met with a huge round of applause. She personaly praised the students who produced and starred in them, as they were there at the kickoff in Lexington. With the airing of the ads we’re guessing that they’ve been seen by about a million people by now, not to mention the huge billboards and bus and subway car ads. All MA is doing is learning from the lessons of the 45 states that have passed laws ahead of us. It’s great that we’re making up for lost time with such overwhelming support of our Baby Safe Haven law. Even the high school radio stations are playing the ads, including one of the most elite prep schools in the country who called for the ads this week — to play on their FM radio station.
This is gonna be fun! Glad to hear that everything went well for you in NH. Caught a bit of it on the news here, and an NH TV station that came to Lexington to cover the Baby Safe Haven press conference. Jean
Yes, we saw you, too. You’ve gone Broadway! Those were our buttons that were featured on Fox. Of course we caught the irony of the newscast. One story the celebration of openness and ethics; the other one of unethical state practices. Marley
Thanks. I’m surprised they didn’t run it during "Who’s Your Daddy?" Ron – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here are the lyrics to the best Baby Safe Haven PSA in the country. Written, produced and performed by young women and men of a Boston high school, ages 14 to 17. MA has really taken this PSA to heart, we’ve heard from across the state about how great it is. On the Boston Fox Network station last night it, and it’s companion PSA, aired on two successive commercial breaks during the Nanny 911 program, in prime time. It’s also airing on MTV across the state. Jean If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. When the baby is born and you’re feeling all alone, and the mother’s confused because she can’t provide a home. "Although I can or can’t be there, another option is adoption." "But where can I go for help?" Bring the baby to the cops or hospital, it’s possible. No strings attached. No questions asked. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! (Graphics of toll free number and web site URL throughout.)
Thanks, Jean. I don’t suppose you could tell us what state agency and officials vetted this PSA and approved it. Marley
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here are the lyrics to the best Baby Safe Haven PSA in the country. Written, produced and performed by young women and men of a Boston high school, ages 14 to 17. MA has really taken this PSA to heart, we’ve heard from across the state about how great it is. On the Boston Fox Network station last night it, and it’s companion PSA, aired on two successive commercial breaks during the Nanny 911 program, in prime time. It’s also airing on MTV across the state. Jean If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. When the baby is born and you’re feeling all alone, and the mother’s confused because she can’t provide a home. "Although I can or can’t be there, another option is adoption." "But where can I go for help?" Bring the baby to the cops or hospital, it’s possible. No strings attached. No questions asked. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! (Graphics of toll free number and web site URL throughout.)
Here are the lyrics to the best Baby Safe Haven PSA in the country. Written, produced and performed by young women and men of a Boston high school, ages 14 to 17. MA has really taken this PSA to heart, we’ve heard from across the state about how great it is. On the Boston Fox Network station last night it, and it’s companion PSA, aired on two successive commercial breaks during the Nanny 911 program, in prime time. It’s also airing on MTV across the state. Jean If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. When the baby is born and you’re feeling all alone, and the mother’s confused because she can’t provide a home. "Although I can or can’t be there, another option is adoption." "But where can I go for help?" Bring the baby to the cops or hospital, it’s possible. No strings attached. No questions asked. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! (Graphics of toll free number and web site URL throughout.)
"Another option is adoption". . .and yet the woman or girl is supposed to "bring the baby to the cops or the hospital" instead of calling a licensed adoption agency. Instead of telling women and girls how to place their child for adoption, this "rap" is telling them how to abandon their child. Why even bring the word "adoption" into it? You disgust me. L.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here are the lyrics to the best Baby Safe Haven PSA in the country. Written, produced and performed by young women and men of a Boston high school, ages 14 to 17. MA has really taken this PSA to heart, we’ve heard from across the state about how great it is. On the Boston Fox Network station last night it, and it’s companion PSA, aired on two successive commercial breaks during the Nanny 911 program, in prime time. It’s also airing on MTV across the state. Jean If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. When the baby is born and you’re feeling all alone, and the mother’s confused because she can’t provide a home. "Although I can or can’t be there, another option is adoption." "But where can I go for help?" Bring the baby to the cops or hospital, it’s possible. No strings attached. No questions asked. If you have a baby and don’t know what to do, Baby Safe Haven can help you choose. Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! Baby…Safe Haven! (Graphics of toll free number and web site URL throughout.)
QUICK restock the barf bags…I used the last of them after reading this! KL
You disgust me.
Me too 
Rh. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – L.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A lack of ethics on whose part, Julia? The person delivering the baby? The medical staff? The hopeful adoptive parents? Do you think this practice should be stopped? Who should do the stopping? This is one of those situations people often assume involves pushiness or intrusion on the parts of the adoptive parents when adoptive parents could *not* be in the delivery room without an invitation by the person giving birth. Who should have the say concerning who can and cannot view a birth? P2P Y’all can rally round the flag pole for the next 25 years on this one… For me, it just pisses me off. Why the hell can’t the child and its mother have a few lousy minutes/moments together FIRST? …HAPS will have the rest of their lives with the kid, but Mom gets only one chance to experience this event of labor and delivery with her child….maybe she might even get to hold him or her — or them, if it turns out to be multiples. The journey undertaken by the fetus into becoming a live infant taking its first breath and *knowing* that special voice is within earshot NEEDS to complete the circle. Pardon me for still seeing a few salivating fangs which cannot seem to wait another 15 to 30 minutes to get their hands of the kid. BACK OFF!!! pb… 2 days away from THAT DAY.
I would agree with you entirely if it was at the p-aparents’ initiative that they were in the room. But if they’re there at the woman’s request — it’s fine with me. I don’t have a vision of a delivery room as a quiet place where there’s the woman and this baby and just the doctor, who hands the baby to its mother to hold. I imagine a room full of people, from anesthesiologists to obs/gyn people (maybe more than one), assorted nurses, and at the center of it all, the woman in labor. Ideally, the person there for her should be her boyfriend or husband or mother. Or even her best friend. But if none of those people are there, then maybe the people she wants present are the p-aps. Why? Because they’re the only people for whom this isn’t just another case, another woman giving birth (hopefully without incident) to another baby. (And if she doesn’t want them there, they should not be there.) I don’t perceive the role of a-pars and b-pars as necessarily adversarial. In fact, I would expect that in successful open adoptions, they’re more like some kind of extended familial relationships. I hear what you’re saying about giving the mom time with her baby. I think she should have it. But it’s not, I would guess, in the midst of the dramatic circus of the delivery room. It’s back in her room afterward, when hopefully it’s the baby and her, not for just 15-30 minutes, but for as long as she wants. Wishing you well and thinking of you for that day. Rupa
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. Most people…where? In Germany? In Europe? In the US? Worldwide? Do you have stats? How can you account for the large numbers of international adoptions from China and Korea? Those aren’t all infants – the several aparents I know who adopted from overseas adopted children from 24 mos to 5 years old. chickeyd Like I said, most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. If you adopt from China, you generally don’t start at the beginning. You have to accept that if you adopt from there, or from any other agency/state that lists older children for adoption. Infant adoption remains very popular. I don’t have numbers, but it’s my guess that it’s still the most common form of adoption. Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. steve
Because their maschocists (sp) If one is going to take one of those things into their home, it should at least be paper trained. Marley
In parts of the USA where adoption ethics are so abysmal that potential adoptive parents can be present in the delivery room, that may well be case. Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics.
I find it far more than distasteful, Steve. I do see it as utterly unethical. Julia – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In most of western Europe and the Antipodes and in most of the rest of the civilised world, … I recall that the U.S. is a civilized country. We’re so civilized that we haven’t yet clapped Marcy Meshes in irons :-) … adoption is a service for children in need of a family and NOT primarily a service for adults seeking a solution to their own reproductive problems. You’ll be relieved to know that that is the position of all 50 states and our federal government as well. You’ll be distressed to learn that in the U.S., AND U.K., AND elsewhere (even in civilized countries!), there are people who think of adoption as a potential solution to their own reproductive problem. That’s western culture for ya. And human nature. Though children are sometimes placed in their first year, few adoptions are finalised within the child’s first year in England & Wales and I assume likewise the rest of the UK. That’s interesting. It’s a little different here. That one of our senior government ministers can can be present in a delivery room in the USA on the 13th of December and have the child concerned adopted and out of the USA and back in England in time for Christmas is quite shocking to most of us here. It shows up just how shonky adoption policy still is in some parts of the US and also raises a number of major questions about Mr Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold certain offices in the British government, in my opinion. We don’t consider it shanky (we being Americans in general, and not alt.a). Infant adoption is permitted and considered ethical by many here. Being given custoday quickly (note that the final adoption order is generally months down the line) permits the child some practical benefits — e.g., being covered by the aparents’ health insurance. As to Mr. Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold office, that’s the provence of your country’s citizens, not mine. steve
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In parts of the USA where adoption ethics are so abysmal that potential adoptive parents can be present in the delivery room, that may well be case. Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics. In most of western Europe and the Antipodes and in most of the rest of the civilised world, … I recall that the U.S. is a civilized country. We’re so civilized that we haven’t yet clapped Marcy Meshes in irons :-)
We’d have locked her up by now, probably in a nice comfy open prison, with a radio tag to keep track of her in the day. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -… adoption is a service for children in need of a family and NOT primarily a service for adults seeking a solution to their own reproductive problems. You’ll be relieved to know that that is the position of all 50 states and our federal government as well. You’ll be distressed to learn that in the U.S., AND U.K., AND elsewhere (even in civilized countries!), there are people who think of adoption as a potential solution to their own reproductive problem. That’s western culture for ya. And human nature.
There may be some in the UK who still think that way, except of course that in the UK it is only they who believe in their *right* to someone else’s child. Both the law and established practice aim to make it clear to them that adoption is not there as a solution to their problem, it there as solution to the child’s need for a family. Hence shonky politicians and shonky lawyers and their wives like Alan & Judith Kilshaw have to take a flight to about the last remaining jurisdictions that allow such ethically dubious adoptions to get their dayold HWIs. Reminds me a lot of going round the calf pens at the cattle auction when I was kid on the farm. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Though children are sometimes placed in their first year, few adoptions are finalised within the child’s first year in England & Wales and I assume likewise the rest of the UK. That’s interesting. It’s a little different here. That one of our senior government ministers can can be present in a delivery room in the USA on the 13th of December and have the child concerned adopted and out of the USA and back in England in time for Christmas is quite shocking to most of us here. It shows up just how shonky adoption policy still is in some parts of the US and also raises a number of major questions about Mr Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold certain offices in the British government, in my opinion. We don’t consider it shanky (we being Americans in general, and not alt.a). Infant adoption is permitted and considered ethical by many here. Being given custoday quickly (note that the final adoption order is generally months down the line)
So how did Mr & Mrs Milliband manage it in less than 10 days? permits the child some practical benefits — e.g., being covered by the aparents’ health insurance.
I guess we’d better tell him to pay up or go use his American health insurance if he turns up at an NHS facillity with Junior (a US citizen presumably), then. An English child awaiting adoption wouldn’t have to worry about such things obviously, but then, as I say….. As to Mr. Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold office, that’s the provence of your country’s citizens, not mine.
And I’m sure questions will continue to be asked here. I shall certainely be asking my parliamentary reprasentative to pass on a few of mine. Robin
Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. Most people…where? In Germany? In Europe? In the US? Worldwide? Do you have stats? How can you account for the large numbers of international adoptions from China and Korea? Those aren’t all infants – the several aparents I know who adopted from overseas adopted children from 24 mos to 5 years old. chickeyd
Like I said, most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. If you adopt from China, you generally don’t start at the beginning. You have to accept that if you adopt from there, or from any other agency/state that lists older children for adoption. Infant adoption remains very popular. I don’t have numbers, but it’s my guess that it’s still the most common form of adoption. Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. steve
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). So, why not try for one 3 years old or over ? In Germany as in most modern European countries, adoption is a service for children, not a service for adults with baby lust. Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. steve Yea, I’ve heard some even like to start in the delivery room. And an American delivery room ‘ll do if that sort of thing’s frowned upon back home in Europe.
Especially if you are a senior labour MP! Jason
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics. Julia responded: I find it far more than distasteful, Steve. I do see it as utterly unethical. Julia A lack of ethics on whose part, Julia? The person delivering the baby? The medical staff? The hopeful adoptive parents? Do you think this practice should be stopped? Who should do the stopping? This is one of those situations people often assume involves pushiness or intrusion on the parts of the adoptive parents when adoptive parents could *not* be in the delivery room without an invitation by the person giving birth. Who should have the say concerning who can and cannot view a birth? P2P
I think the practice should be stopped, as it is here and in other countries by law. I believe that birth, relinquishment and placement should be separated out from each other, and that the decision to not parent the child should be made initially without the involvement of PAPS. Birth first, then some time to recover from the birth and contemplate the decision to place the child, then a revocation period on the relinquishment for adoption, then placement. Julia
In parts of the USA where adoption ethics are so abysmal that potential adoptive parents can be present in the delivery room, that may well be case.
Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics. In most of western Europe and the Antipodes and in most of the rest of the civilised world, …
I recall that the U.S. is a civilized country. We’re so civilized that we haven’t yet clapped Marcy Meshes in irons :-) … adoption is a service for children in need of a family and NOT primarily a service for adults seeking a solution to their own reproductive problems.
You’ll be relieved to know that that is the position of all 50 states and our federal government as well. You’ll be distressed to learn that in the U.S., AND U.K., AND elsewhere (even in civilized countries!), there are people who think of adoption as a potential solution to their own reproductive problem. That’s western culture for ya. And human nature. Though children are sometimes placed in their first year, few adoptions are finalised within the child’s first year in England & Wales and I assume likewise the rest of the UK.
That’s interesting. It’s a little different here. That one of our senior government ministers can can be present in a delivery room in the USA on the 13th of December and have the child concerned adopted and out of the USA and back in England in time for Christmas is quite shocking to most of us here. It shows up just how shonky adoption policy still is in some parts of the US and also raises a number of major questions about Mr Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold certain offices in the British government, in my opinion.
We don’t consider it shanky (we being Americans in general, and not alt.a). Infant adoption is permitted and considered ethical by many here. Being given custoday quickly (note that the final adoption order is generally months down the line) permits the child some practical benefits — e.g., being covered by the aparents’ health insurance. As to Mr. Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold office, that’s the provence of your country’s citizens, not mine. steve
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics. Julia responded: I find it far more than distasteful, Steve. I do see it as utterly unethical. Julia A lack of ethics on whose part, Julia? The person delivering the baby? The medical staff? The hopeful adoptive parents? Do you think this practice should be stopped? Who should do the stopping? This is one of those situations people often assume involves pushiness or intrusion on the parts of the adoptive parents when adoptive parents could *not* be in the delivery room without an invitation by the person giving birth. Who should have the say concerning who can and cannot view a birth? P2P Y’all can rally round the flag pole for the next 25 years on this one… For me, it just pisses me off. Why the hell can’t the child and its mother have a few lousy minutes/moments together FIRST? …HAPS will have the rest of their lives with the kid, but Mom gets only one chance to experience this event of labor and delivery with her child….maybe she might even get to hold him or her — or them, if it turns out to be multiples. The journey undertaken by the fetus into becoming a live infant taking its first breath and *knowing* that special voice is within earshot NEEDS to complete the circle. Pardon me for still seeing a few salivating fangs which cannot seem to wait another 15 to 30 minutes to get their hands of the kid. BACK OFF!!! pb… 2 days away from THAT DAY.
I agree with you, kiddo, and hope you make it thru THAT day around the corner without too much remorse. I don’t think some adoptive parents have a chance in hell understanding your intense concern about this issue, or why every consideration should be taken to make sure the adoption plan which includes p-aps viewing the birth doesn’t place obligation on the mother to place should she be waivering once the baby becomes tangible and no longer an idea. If it does place obligation on the mother having the p-aps there so that she feels she cannot change her mind, it simply becomes an unethical adoption. Ultimately thou, the final choice, right or wrong, (to have them there), should remain, imo, with the birthing mother. Kathy
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics. Julia responded: I find it far more than distasteful, Steve. I do see it as utterly unethical. Julia A lack of ethics on whose part, Julia? The person delivering the baby? The medical staff? The hopeful adoptive parents? Do you think this practice should be stopped? Who should do the stopping? This is one of those situations people often assume involves pushiness or intrusion on the parts of the adoptive parents when adoptive parents could *not* be in the delivery room without an invitation by the person giving birth. Who should have the say concerning who can and cannot view a birth? P2P
Y’all can rally round the flag pole for the next 25 years on this one… For me, it just pisses me off. Why the hell can’t the child and its mother have a few lousy minutes/moments together FIRST? …HAPS will have the rest of their lives with the kid, but Mom gets only one chance to experience this event of labor and delivery with her child….maybe she might even get to hold him or her — or them, if it turns out to be multiples. The journey undertaken by the fetus into becoming a live infant taking its first breath and *knowing* that special voice is within earshot NEEDS to complete the circle. Pardon me for still seeing a few salivating fangs which cannot seem to wait another 15 to 30 minutes to get their hands of the kid. BACK OFF!!! pb… 2 days away from THAT DAY.
Having potential adoptive parents present in the delivery room may be distasteful to many here, but it is not the poster child for "abysmal" adoption ethics.
Julia responded: I find it far more than distasteful, Steve. I do see it as utterly unethical. Julia
A lack of ethics on whose part, Julia? The person delivering the baby? The medical staff? The hopeful adoptive parents? Do you think this practice should be stopped? Who should do the stopping? This is one of those situations people often assume involves pushiness or intrusion on the parts of the adoptive parents when adoptive parents could *not* be in the delivery room without an invitation by the person giving birth. Who should have the say concerning who can and cannot view a birth? P2P
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. Most people…where? In Germany? In Europe? In the US? Worldwide? Do you have stats? How can you account for the large numbers of international adoptions from China and Korea? Those aren’t all infants – the several aparents I know who adopted from overseas adopted children from 24 mos to 5 years old. chickeyd Like I said, most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. If you adopt from China, you generally don’t start at the beginning. You have to accept that if you adopt from there, or from any other agency/state that lists older children for adoption. Infant adoption remains very popular. I don’t have numbers, but it’s my guess that it’s still the most common form of adoption.
In parts of the USA where adoption ethics are so abysmal that potential adoptive parents can be present in the delivery room, that may well be case. In most of western Europe and the Antipodes and in most of the rest of the civilised world, adoption is a service for children in need of a family and NOT primarily a service for adults seeking a solution to their own reproductive problems. Though children are sometimes placed in their first year, few adoptions are finalised within the child’s first year in England & Wales and I assume likewise the rest of the UK. See stats for England & Wales at http://robin.robin.org/stats.html I’m guessing that Germany isn’t very different and for good reason. That one of our senior government ministers can can be present in a delivery room in the USA on the 13th of December and have the child concerned adopted and out of the USA and back in England in time for Christmas is quite shocking to most of us here. It shows up just how shonky adoption policy still is in some parts of the US and also raises a number of major questions about Mr Miliband’s ethics and suitability to hold certain offices in the British government, in my opinion. Robin
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). So, why not try for one 3 years old or over ? In Germany as in most modern European countries, adoption is a service for children, not a service for adults with baby lust. Robin
Silly Robin They want a baybee. Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As an apar of a daughter adopted at 11 months from China I can tell you that we had to be vetted by two countries – the United States and the PRC. Chinese law is very straight forward and based on current situation you would qualify for an infant (we are seeing children as young as six months old coming to the US) in as little as six months time from the arrival of your dossier to China to referral. Mostly girls, but we’ve seen more and more boys – tho mostly with minor, correctable physical defects (cleft palate is very common). However, German law may be different, so you will want to consult with an international adoption agency with good ties to China who understands completely the laws of both countries. From start to finish the process costs $12-$15,000 US dollars which includes travel and two week stay, plus the required $3,000 US dollar contribution to the orphanage your child comes from. I don’t know if they accept the euro, tho I don’t see why not, considering it’s stronger these days against the US dollar. If you are interested I recommend you point your browser to www.fwcc.org. It’s the portal to all things related to Chinese adoption including current Chinese law translated into English. Good luck. (the)duckster
Hey Ducks! Just how IS Miss CR doing these days? Pictures would be an added bonus in email!! 
Got SNOW? pb…
I adopted from China and agree with everything Steve said. China has the most ethical program–you do pay bribes, but they’re CONTROLLED bribes. And even then some of the bribe, the orphanage donation, goes to help the children. If you are interested in China start with this website www.fwcc.org Most of what you find will be from an American perspective, but you should find good leads to newsgroups etc. that can help you with information. No matter what you decide in terms of country, do thorough research. There is a child somewhere in this sad world who needs a mother and father. Linda
I didn’t adopt from China, but I agree with Linda and Steve. To my knowledge, a German family can also adopt from Russia (the German chancellor adopted a 3 year old girl from St. Petersburg a few months ago), but I’m not sure if they have to go through an agency or can do it independently. Bulgaria is another possibility, but again, I do not know the rules for Germans attempting to adopt from other European countries. Elizabeth Case
Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. Most people…where? In Germany? In Europe? In the US? Worldwide? Do you have stats? How can you account for the large numbers of international adoptions from China and Korea? Those aren’t all infants – the several aparents I know who adopted from overseas adopted children from 24 mos to 5 years old. chickeyd
It is common for first-time parents in Australia to adopt children past infancy. I know many first-time parents who adopted children from countries like Ethiopia, Thailand, the Philippines and India and most of these children were over 2 years old. Julia
PB, I need a good address!!!! And yes, we had snow…22" of it. All gone. Today nothing but rain…rain…rain…the MileWoods has turned into a swamp. Hows Miss Bailey pooch these days? ((((hugs)))) fondly, ducks
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As an apar of a daughter adopted at 11 months from China I can tell you that we had to be vetted by two countries – the United States and the PRC. Chinese law is very straight forward and based on current situation you would qualify for an infant (we are seeing children as young as six months old coming to the US) in as little as six months time from the arrival of your dossier to China to referral. Mostly girls, but we’ve seen more and more boys – tho mostly with minor, correctable physical defects (cleft palate is very common). However, German law may be different, so you will want to consult with an international adoption agency with good ties to China who understands completely the laws of both countries. From start to finish the process costs $12-$15,000 US dollars which includes travel and two week stay, plus the required $3,000 US dollar contribution to the orphanage your child comes from. I don’t know if they accept the euro, tho I don’t see why not, considering it’s stronger these days against the US dollar. If you are interested I recommend you point your browser to www.fwcc.org. It’s the portal to all things related to Chinese adoption including current Chinese law translated into English. Good luck. (the)duckster Hey Ducks! Just how IS Miss CR doing these days? Pictures would be an added bonus in email!! Got SNOW? pb…
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). So, why not try for one 3 years old or over ? In Germany as in most modern European countries, adoption is a service for children, not a service for adults with baby lust.
Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. steve
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). So, why not try for one 3 years old or over ? In Germany as in most modern European countries, adoption is a service for children, not a service for adults with baby lust. Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can. steve
Yea, I’ve heard some even like to start in the delivery room. And an American delivery room ‘ll do if that sort of thing’s frowned upon back home in Europe. Robin
Most people like to start at the beginning, if they can.
Most people…where? In Germany? In Europe? In the US? Worldwide? Do you have stats? How can you account for the large numbers of international adoptions from China and Korea? Those aren’t all infants – the several aparents I know who adopted from overseas adopted children from 24 mos to 5 years old. chickeyd
As an apar of a daughter adopted at 11 months from China I can tell you that we had to be vetted by two countries – the United States and the PRC. Chinese law is very straight forward and based on current situation you would qualify for an infant (we are seeing children as young as six months old coming to the US) in as little as six months time from the arrival of your dossier to China to referral. Mostly girls, but we’ve seen more and more boys – tho mostly with minor, correctable physical defects (cleft palate is very common). However, German law may be different, so you will want to consult with an international adoption agency with good ties to China who understands completely the laws of both countries. From start to finish the process costs $12-$15,000 US dollars which includes travel and two week stay, plus the required $3,000 US dollar contribution to the orphanage your child comes from. I don’t know if they accept the euro, tho I don’t see why not, considering it’s stronger these days against the US dollar. If you are interested I recommend you point your browser to www.fwcc.org. It’s the portal to all things related to Chinese adoption including current Chinese law translated into English. Good luck. (the)duckster
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). Even in case of an approval, the whole procedure takes up to several years. We are now looking for the possibilities of an internation adoption. This is only possible in countries that did not approve the respective convention of Den Haag to avoid trouble from the Jugendamt. Who has information and/or addresses (e.g. from Guatemala) ? In case that an adoption is officially legalised by local authorities of that country – what about legal entry of the child in Germany ? To make it clear: We do not want to BUY a child, nor support child trade or other illegal activities. But unfortunately we are forced to choose an inconverntioal way to finally fulfil our wish of an own child. THANKS for any information!!!
As an American, I don’t know the German laws at all. Some tips from what I’ve learned about international adoption (from an American view, of course): You really must work with an experienced agency that handles international adoption. The laws vary greatly from country to country. The agency you work with must (of course) also have a thorough understanding of German law. In the U.S., there are some people who try to ’short-circuit’ working with an agency, and usually they end up having miserable problems. Also, in some countries, the corruption of the local adoption process is particularly egregrious. Ukraine is one, Camdodia is so bad that our State Department recently banned approval of adoptiosn there, and sadly Guatemala can be another place where corruption is the norm. On the other hand, China has a fairly clean process that has won favorable reviews. A fair number of Americans (including several personal friends of mine) have adopted from China and report that the process is honorable and straight-forward. From an American point of view, adopting a child overseas means also getting the child adopted at home. There are horror stories here of children who, while adopted overseas, did not complete the process at home, only to be deported 20 or 30 years later for some unrelated infraction of the law. I don’t know German law, but it would seem to me that you’d want to do everything you can to ensure a legal (and ethical) adoption in your country in the end. Best of luck, steve
Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!).
So, why not try for one 3 years old or over ? In Germany as in most modern European countries, adoption is a service for children, not a service for adults with baby lust. Robin
Dear all, my wife (41) and I (35) are trying to adopt a child after unsuccessful ICSI-treatments. But according to the stupid German laws, the local Jugendamt will not approve an adoption of a child under 3 years for people over the age of 35 (although nowadays many woman in Germany have their children at the age of 40 or even above!). Even in case of an approval, the whole procedure takes up to several years. We are now looking for the possibilities of an internation adoption. This is only possible in countries that did not approve the respective convention of Den Haag to avoid trouble from the Jugendamt. Who has information and/or addresses (e.g. from Guatemala) ? In case that an adoption is officially legalised by local authorities of that country – what about legal entry of the child in Germany ? To make it clear: We do not want to BUY a child, nor support child trade or other illegal activities. But unfortunately we are forced to choose an inconverntioal way to finally fulfil our wish of an own child. THANKS for any information!!! Best regards, Johannes & Daniela from Germany