Campaigns

Complaints

Support

Search & Reunion

History & Heritage

Illegal Adoptions

Legislation

Media

Blogs

Discussion Group

Humour

Reading List

Links/Contacts

FAQ'sla

About Usn

Contact Us

Public Disclosured

adoptionireland  

ption

search reunion ireland

Haiti's orphans: the fine line between adoption and abduction

By: Almena Mayes, The Guildfordian

Posted: 2/12/10

On Jan. 12, 10 Baptist missionaries from Idaho were arrested at the Haitian-Dominican Republic border and charged with kidnapping and child trafficking.

The missionaries said they were just trying to take the children to a better life. The Haitian government, however, saw things differently.

According to the BBC, Jean Sainvil, a Haitian-born pastor now living in America helped the missionaries gather the children, load them onto a bus and proceed to the border.

Dominican authorities said the Americans had no documents to prove they had cleared the adoptions of the children through any embassy, nor did they have passports for the children. It became clear after the arrest that many of the children were not orphans.

Richard Danzinger of the International Office of Migration (IOM) told The Guilfordian that children found in disaster areas are not to be adopted outside of their native country for at least two years.

However, despite this policy, many fast-tracking adoption procedures are already under way in Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and the United States.

"Unfortunately many (child adoption) agencies feel that this (two year period) is far too long for a child to wait for a suitable family and better life," said Danzinger.

The IOM reported that in 2008, U.S. citizens adopted approximately 301 children from Haiti. As many as 600 or more were already in the queue for adoption to the U.S. prior to the earthquake. Those adoptions will go through; however, there will be very few new applications processed until the dust settles and the status of the children is properly verified.

"Haiti has long been known as one of the more difficult countries from which to adopt" Tanya W., a social worker from Newark, N.J, told The Guilfordian, "My husband and I have been trying to adopt a Haitian infant for almost two years."

Adoption.com states that prospective parents wanting to adopt a child from Haiti must acquire proper documentation from the surviving parent or legal guardian as well as the regional Justice of the Peace.

The documentation must then be submitted to the immigration authorities in Haiti, who in turn investigate the medical and psychological well-being of the prospective parents and child. Finally, the adopting parents or their legal representative must present the authorization in civil court and obtain a Haitian legal document known as the "Acte d'Adoption," which serves as the official adoption decree.

In spite of this process, child trafficking has grown in the aftermath of the earthquake.

Allissa Silverman, Deputy Director of the Southeast Regional office of UNICEF in Atlanta, Georgia, explained that Haiti is a target for many child traffickers because of its impoverished people.

"Parents hoping to give their children better lives fall prey to unscrupulous business people who, instead of giving the children the lifestyle and education promised, sell them into the sex trade industry or for illegal organ harvesting," she said.

UNICEF has already documented 15 confirmed cases of children missing from area hospitals.

© Copyright 2010 The Guilfordian

February 6, 2010

One sure consequence of disaster: adoption

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/haiti/one-sure-consequence-of-disaster-adoption/article1458459/

By Siri Agrell
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

When a group of American missionaries was arrested last weekend after trying to bring 33 children out of Haiti, troubling questions began to arise

When a group of American missionaries was arrested last weekend after smuggling 33 children out of Haiti, troubling questions began to arise about the impulse to whisk kids out of disaster zones. But trends in international adoption have always followed close on the heels of wars and humanitarian disasters, according to Queen's University professor Karen Dubinsky, whose book Babies Without Borders: Adoption and the Symbolic Child in Canada, Cuba and Guatemala will be released this spring. The story is always the same, she says. The disaster produces interest in orphaned children, an adoption system is opened, scandals develop and the system closes down. Move to another location and repeat.

Korea: The adoption of foreign children began in the United States during the Korean War from 1950 to 1953, when an American evangelical couple named Henry and Bertha Holt began a campaign to fight communism one child at a time. "They had missionary zeal and the Cold War behind them," Ms. Dubinsky says. "Some historians say they single-handedly invented international adoption."

Vietnam: In Canada, the first spike in international adoption began at the end of the Vietnam War, spearheaded by three Montreal housewives who got involved in a U.S.-led campaign called Operation Babylift. More than 3,300 infants were removed, although it was later revealed that not all were orphans. The project earned notoriety after an Operation Babylift plane crashed after takeoff in Vietnam, killing 141 children and volunteers. The adoption campaign led to a change to Canada's immigration policy, creating a new category for unaccompanied babies.

Cuba: From 1960 to 1961, 14,000 unaccompanied children were sent from Cuba to Miami as part of Operation Peter Pan. Although parents were promised that they would be reunited with their children, more than 7,000 were permanently stranded in the American foster-care and orphanage system after the Bay of Pigs invasion ended U.S.-Cuban relations. Decades later, one of those children - Maria de los Torres - would sue the Central Intelligence Agency for access to documents that revealed Cuban parents were responding to an American rumour campaign suggesting Fidel Castro was about to nationalize children. Now, there are rumours of a Hollywood movie about the event.

Romania: After Nicolae Ceausescu was overthrown and executed in the 1989 revolution, media attention directed at the sorry state of Romanian orphanages created a bump in interest about adoptees in former Soviet Bloc states.

Russia: In 1990, Russia made adoption open to foreign parents. Ms. Dubinsky says interest was fuelled by U.S. investigative television shows that aired hidden-camera footage of substandard orphanage conditions. Unlike with other countries, the narrative around Russian adoptions focused on the physical and mental health of the children.

Guatemala: In the early 2000s, Guatemala had the dubious distinction of having the highest per-capita adoption rate in the world. Civil wars in Latin America drew international attention to the region, and soon the poor country was cashing in on its children. "In Guatemala, it just started to become a business, nothing more," Ms. Dubinsky says. "It was a country in deep poverty that began to see its only value in exporting its children."

China: The increase in adoptions from China did not emerge out of a single event. The introduction of the country's one-child policy in 1979 and the Tiananmen Square massacre a decade later drew global attention to the country's human-rights abuses, and adoptive parents to its shores.

Indonesia: In the aftermath of the 2004 Asian tsunami, many well-meaning families rushed to adopt as an immediate way to provide help. "That's probably one of the first times that ever happened," Ms. Dubinsky says. "It's also the first time mainstream child-welfare organizations started saying it wasn't the right response."

Ethiopia: Adoptions from Africa were not popular until the late 2000s, despite decades of well-publicized suffering, and were influenced by the celebrity families of Angelina Jolie and Madonna. Ethiopia experienced a surge of foreign adoptions three years ago.

Middle East: Although recent global conflicts have been focused on the Middle East, Islamic nations are the exception to the adoption trend. Muslim nations do not allow Western-style adoptions, although they do have a system for caring for orphaned children. "It's an interesting parallel," Ms. Dubinsky says. "I don't think we saw the same kind of human-rights coverage and calls to adoption agencies after the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions."

Americans held in 'illegal adoption' probe

Sunday, January 31, 2010 - 10:02 AM

http://www.examiner.ie/breakingnews/world/americans-held-in-illegal-adoption-probe-444247.html

Consensus ‘paves way for referendum on children’

http://www.sbpost.ie/newsfeatures/consensus-paves-way-for-referendum-on-children-46920.html

24 January 2010  By Niamh Connolly Political Correspondent

After two years of talks and more than 60 meetings, a cross party Oireachtas committee will next month 
publish a report to strengthen children’s rights in the Constitution. Demands for such changes have been 
heard since the Kilkenny incest case committee reported in 1993. Since then, a succession of reports 
has exposed a litany of state failures to protect children from physical and sexual abuse.

Now, a consensus decision of a Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children will finally 
pave the way for a referendum later in the year - provided the government accepts the committee’s 
formula of words. The final decision on a referendum will be a matter for cabinet, according to Fianna 
Fáil deputy Mary O’Rourke, who chairs the committee.

‘‘I feel we have done the very best we could: it was achieved by consensus and I’m satisfied it came 
about that way," O’Rourke said.

The committee agreed that the proposed amendment would take the form of a ‘‘declaratory paragraph’’ 
devoted to the specific rights of the child.

Successive high-profile child abuse investigations have urged changes to the Constitution which 
subordinates the rights of children to ‘‘the inalienable and imprescriptible rights’’ of the family.

Two previous reports of the committee recommended legislative changes, rather than a referendum. 
But the third report, which will be submitted to cabinet next month, contains wording for a referendum.

Fine Gael deputy Alan Shatter, a family law solicitor and member of the committee, said he was confident 
it would be accepted by government.

‘‘It is because we reached a consensus that we would be very optimistic that the report will be accepted 
by government, and that we will have a referendum based on what the committee recommends," said Shatter.

Shatter said he saw no reason why it could not be held next June, when it would coincide with outstanding 
issues also requiring a constitutional amendment. These include the move to establish a civil court of appeal 
and Fine Gael’s proposal to change the laws on judges’ remuneration and pensions.

Shatter declined to comment on the precise wording on the basis that he ‘‘wanted to preserve the integrity 
and confidentiality of the process’’.

However, it remains unclear whether the government will accept the committee’s recommendation, as the 
issue is fraught with legal difficulties. There is always a fear that it could spark resistance from certain groups 
which believe that bolstering state protection for children would be an intrusion into the family.

A further challenge for the committee was to enhance protection for all children, regardless of the marital 
status of their parents, without creating a conflict in how the Constitution views the family based on marriage.

The conundrum was summed up by Barry Andrews, Minister of State for Children, at a contentious meeting 
of the committee last September.

He said the goals of the amendment were to ‘‘recalibrate the balance of the rights of children more heavily 
in their favour and . . . achieve equality in the Constitution in regard to all children, whether marital or non-marital’’.

The committee was set up two years ago to review the government’s wording for the 28th Amendment of the 
Constitution Bill 2007 for a children’s rights referendum.

The government’s original amendment affirmed ‘‘the natural and imprescriptible rights of all children’’. But the 
committee soon found the draft was ‘‘not fit for purpose’’, in the words of Labour Party deputy Brendan Howlin.

Andrews provoked serious disquiet at the September meeting, when he told members that he would revert to 
the government’s original 2007 draft wording.

His suggestion was rejected by committee members, including O’Rourke, who insisted that the government’s 
draft wording was not in the best interests of children.

In a hard-hitting rebuff to Andrews at the time, Shatter questioned whether the committee had become a ‘‘talking 
shop about children’s rights and concerns’’.

The government’s original amendment was seen as falling short in that it obliged the courts to "[endeavour] to 
secure the best interests of the child’’ in all adoption, guardianship, custody and access cases."

Childcare groups said this would actually dilute the rights of children as, under the Guardianship of Infants Act, 
the rights of the child are ‘‘paramount’’.

Childcare groups want the Constitution to provide for the children of some married couples to be adopted to avoid a repeat of the ‘Baby Ann’ case in 2006. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that a two-year old girl should be taken from her adoptive parents and returned to the custody of her birth parents after they withdrew consent for her adoption.

A constitutional change would remove some of the obstacles to adopting children in care. There are more than 5,000 children in care in Ireland, most with foster families. The change would also address problems faced by adopted children and birth parents in tracing their relatives.

In Ireland, birth parents have no statutory right to trace adopted children.

Last October, the committee sought eight more weeks to come up with its proposed wording for a referendum. Last week, it said it would publish the report after its final meeting on February 3.

A referendum on children’s rights is among the pledges of the new Programme for Government negotiated between Fianna Fáil and the Green Party last autumn.

The programme appeared to put an end to a possible return to the government’s original draft. It specified that the referendum should be based on the work of the committee, which was welcomed by O’Rourke at the time.

A bipartisan approach, with mostly private meetings away from the gaze of the media on this politically-sensitive matter, was adopted by the Oireachtas parties to avoid gamesmanship.

Submissions were made by a range of chi ld protection groups, including Barnardos, Cari, the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, ISPCC, One in Four and the Rape Crisis Network of Ireland.

© Thomas Crosbie Media 2010.

January 23, 2010

Call for halt to Haiti adoptions over traffickers

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6999280.ece

Martin Fletcher in Port-au-Prince

Thousands of children unaccounted for since Haiti’s earthquake are at risk of falling prey to child traffickers, aid agencies have wearned, as fears were raised over at least 15 children who have vanished from hospitals within the past few days.

Unicef, the UN children’s agency, warned that "traffickers fish in pools of vulnerability. We know from past experience that trafficking happens in the chaos that usually follows emergencies." A Unicef adviser, Jean Luc Legrand, said he knew of at least 15 cases of children disappearing from hospitals.

Save the Children, World Vision and the British Red Cross have called for an immediate halt to adoptions of Haitian children not approved before the earthquake, warning that child traffickers could exploit the lack of regulation. There has been a surge in offers from well-meaning foreigners.

Rupert Colville, spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that child enslavement and trafficking was "an existing problem and could easily emerge as a serious issue over the coming weeks and months".

Nearly 30 agencies helped by the UN peacekeeping mission and the Haitian government are urgently pooling information and resources to counter the threat. They are are touring hospitals and orphanages, broadcasting radio messages, and increasing surveillance of road traffic, the airport and the border with the Dominican Republic.

The scale of the problem is potentially enormous. Haiti is awash with children, with 45 per cent of its population younger than 15. One UN official estimated that between 40,000 and 60,000 children were killed, orphaned or separated from their families by the earthquake, which struck while most were still in school, and anecdotal evidence suggests many have been left to fend for themselves.

One small orphanage visited by The Times yesterday said it had turned away ten children because its buildings were badly damaged. A World Vision official in Jimani, a town just across the border in the Dominican Republic, said eight orphans and 25 unaccompanied children — many injured — had turned up there by Tuesday. A UN official spoke of people driving to the airport in expensive cars and putting children on outgoing flights without any documentation.

The alarm is particularly acute given Haiti’s dire record of child abuse. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees reported in 2008 that 29 per cent of children under 14 were already working, and roughly 300,000 were ‘restaveks’ (a creole corruption of ‘rester avec’) whose impoverished parents send them to work for wealthier families in the hope they will receive food and shelter.

Some were cared for and educated, but others were "sexually exploited and physically abused; and are unpaid, undocumented, and unprotected". When they turn 15, and must by law be paid, many are turned on to the streets to join as many as 3,000 other children who survive on the streets of Port-au-Prince as vendors, beggars or prostitutes.

Minister wants to help children in Haitian orphanages

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0122/1224262842741.html

MICHAEL O'REGAN

Fri, Jan 22, 2010

Minister of State for Children Barry Andrews said he had discussions with ministerial colleagues and others about assisting children in Haitian orphanages.

He said he would like Ireland to help by supporting the reconstruction of orphanages and by facilitating the provision of respite accommodation to children and parents, as had happened in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident.

“It may be possible for us to agree fostering arrangements,” Mr Andrews added.

“The difficulty with adoption is that a Haitian parent might come to Ireland in three or four years time to look for his or her child. They might find that a bond has already been developed between the child and the adoptive parent.”

It was clear, said Mr Andrews, that the State would be liable if it had not carried out the correct adoption procedures with due diligence. “This underlines some of the difficulties that exist in this area,” said Mr Andrews.

“Adoption should not necessarily always be the first option for people who have a strong urge to protect and care for children.”

Speaking during the debate on the Adoption Bill, he said that reference had been made to the right to access information that helped one to trace people involved in adoptions.

“The adoption board has been operating a national adoption contact preference register for the last few years,” he added. “The issue of tracing can cause serious, complex and sensitive issues to arise.”

Mr Andrews said that while there was a lot of interest in the register, matching could have limited success.

“Clearly, there needs to be a balance between the right to privacy of a person who gives up a child for adoption and the right of a child to know who his or her parents are,” he added. It was hard to reflect those balancing rights in law, said Mr Andrews.

Melanie Verwoerd: Adoption of Haitian children calls for great care

http://www.herald.ie/opinion/melanie-verwoerd-adoption-of-haitian-children-calls-for-great-care-2025057.html

By Melanie Verwoerd
Thursday January 21 2010

Last Thursday, three days after the Haiti earthquake, there was a moment of joy.

Redjeson Hausteen Claude (2) was pulled from the ruins.

As rescuers lifted him out, his mother Daphnee Plaisin ran forward and he spotted her, giving a delighted smile of recognition as only a child can do for his mother.

But imagine if Daphnee was not there -- she might have gone for water. Imagine if they took Redjeson to one of the care points for separated children.

Perhaps his mother could not find him or did not hear amongst all the chaos that they took a baby out of the rubble.

And then a few day later, he gets shipped off in a plane to Ireland -- with his mother never realising that he was alive.

On this page yesterday, Sinead Ryan wrote a piece suggesting that Irish people should start adopting babies "now".

Amongst others, she encouraged people who want to adopt babies to email Minister Barry Andrews TD with their request.

I am sure that we all want to do something to help the children of Haiti. But what needs to happen now is for children to be taken care of in Haiti.

This is what Unicef and many of our partners are trying to do -- to the best of our ability.

The priority is to make sure that children are safe, fed and medically looked after.

Our next priority is to reunite them with their parents or family members. Before we can even consider any adoption, we have to ensure the children are truly orphaned and that there are no surviving relatives.

To cut any corners in the adoption procedures would be extremely dangerous.

During the Indian Tsunami in 2005, traffickers immediately started preying on vulnerable children -- both for the sex trade and also for foreign adoptions.

Reports from our staff in Haiti indicate that in the field hospitals, suspicious people are already attempting to remove children without permission.

Without any doubt there will be many children orphaned by the earthquake, who, in months to come, will need a good home.

In the interim, the best thing to do is to support those agencies that can look after the children and try to unite 
them with their families.

To suggest other wise is irresponsible and dangerous.

Minister Barry Andrews, T.D. Announces Government Decision to Suspend Bilateral 
Intercountry Adoption Negotiations with Vietnam

http://www.omc.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1226

Thursday, 14th January 2010

The Government has decided to suspend indefinitely negotiations on a new bilateral intercountry adoption 
agreement with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.  This will have the effect of suspending intercountry adoption
 from Vietnam until such time as the Adoption Bill 2009 has been enacted and Ireland and Vietnam have both 
ratified the provisions of the Hague Convention. 

The decision, which will cause bitter disappointment for the many families hoping to adopt from Vietnam, was 
taken in response to the serious findings and recommendations contained in the report on intercountry adoption commissioned by UNICEF and the Vietnamese Ministry of Justice and carried out by International Social Services (ISS).  An earlier report published last August by the Vietnamese Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs (MOLISA) was also considered in making the decision. 

The UNICEF/ISS report, which was accepted by the Vietnamese Government, “proposes that Vietnam suspends 
intercountry adoptions for the necessary period during the year 2010 that will enable it to ensure optimal 
implementation of the Hague Convention and to prepare for the entry into force of the new law on adoption 
in 2011”.  The Report also raises serious questions regarding adoption practices in Vietnam, including as follows:

(a) inter-country adoptions from Vietnam are essentially influenced by foreign demand, i.e. the availability of children who are “adoptable” abroad corresponds more to the existence of foreign prospective adopters than to the actual needs of “abandoned” and orphaned children;

(b) the circumstances under which babies become “adoptable” are invariably unclear and disturbing;

(c) the inter-country adoption  system is grounded in a remarkably unhealthy relationship between the mediating agencies and specific residential facilities; and

(d) Governments and central authorities of “receiving countries” collectively at least, and individually in many 
instances have not effectively committed themselves to applying the basic principles of the Hague Convention or the recommendations of the treaty’s practical operation, in their dealings with Vietnam.

Speaking this afternoon, the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Barry Andrews, T.D. said, “I am acutely aware of the disappointment that will be felt as a result of this announcement.  Most prospective adoptive parents that I have met in recent weeks have above all else asked for certainty and an end to the speculation about the Government’s intentions.  Though this is not the news many were hoping for, it will allow prospective adoptive parents to make future choices based on the fact that intercountry adoption with Vietnam will be suspended until Hague ratification is completed in both countries.”

The Minister added, “I am fully convinced of the Vietnamese Government’s commitment to improving child protection services.  They are well advanced in putting in place the legislative framework that supports safe and secure domestic and intercountry adoption.  Child protection practice is improving.  However, the latest expert opinion points to worrying practices today.  Of greatest concern is the question of whether the child is “adoptable”.  The issues of consent and the exchange of fees are critical in the adoption process.  These two fundamental features of adoption law must be addressed prior to any bilateral agreement.  I am confident that in the near future Vietnam will ratify the Hague Convention and at that time, I would hope and expect adoptions to resume.”

This decision comes at the end of a very difficult process for prospective parents.  The path to intercountry adoption is difficult and made more so in Ireland by the excessive waiting times.  I have pointed to provisions in the new Adoption Bill that will, I hope, provide potential to reduce the waiting lists by creating a new assessment process.  The nature of intercountry adoption is that countries “open” and “close”.  Both receiving and sending countries will at times suspend intercountry adoption arrangements.  It is very possible that by the time the person wishing to adopt from a certain country of origin gets a Declaration of Eligibility and Suitability that their designated country may have closed and they are then forced to look at other sending countries.” 

“When any Government enters into a bilateral international adoption agreement, there is an expectation that the Government has satisfied itself that current policies and practice in the country of origin are robust.  A level of security and comfort is derived from the fact that a Government has signed up to such an agreement.  While accepting that an element of risk always attaches to intercountry adoption, the standard required to allow a Government enter into a bilateral agreement is high.  At this moment, there is sufficient evidence to caution against entering into such an agreement with Vietnam,” said the Minister.

The Government has committed to providing technical assistance to the Vietnamese authorities in the area of child welfareand protection to help prepare the way for ratification of the Hague Convention should the Vietnamese wish to avail of such an offer. 

The Minister stated, “I am very conscious that people will be left asking where they should now turn in order to effect an adoption.  I have asked the Adoption Board to identify Hague countries that would be willing to enter into administrative arrangements with Ireland, which would facilitate intercountry adoption. I understand that the Adoption Board has made contact with a number of jurisdictions in the hope of establishing new arrangements to facilitate intercountry adoption.  

Furthermore, having met with the Adoption Board to discuss future arrangements for persons with Declarations of Eligibility and Suitability for Vietnam, the Board has agreed the following arrangements:

• all couples/individuals currently with a declaration of eligibility and suitability for Vietnam may select a new country to adopt from, subject to submitting the usual change of country report to the Adoption Board, but may also retain their current place on the HHAMA list for Vietnam, which is being maintained;
• in the event of Vietnam reopening, those on the Vietnamese waiting list, whose declarations have not been used in the meantime to effect an adoption in another country, will be in a position to proceed without delay and having regard to their position on the Vietnam list. 
• all couples/individuals currently with a Declaration of Eligibility and Suitability for Vietnam but who have sought to change in recent months will be in a position to avail of the foregoing arrangements.

Couples/individuals wishing to change their country of origin are advised to contact their local social worker who will facilitate the change.  The HSE has indicated that the process will not involve the need to revert to the Local Adoption Committee.

“I am confident that Vietnam will ratify the Hague Convention in the near future.  It is significant that the Hague Conference has identified Vietnam for priority assistance this year.  In this regard, I hope and expect that Vietnam will reopen for intercountry adoption with Ireland in the not too distant future,” said the Minister. 

The Minister concluded by saying, “I am very conscious of the position of the children who have been adopted into this country from Vietnam in recent years.  We all have a responsibility to these children and the status of their adoptions is not in question.  These adoptions have gone through a lengthy legal process and have been entered into the Register of Foreign Adoptions.  Any discussion on today’s announcement should take this into account.”   

ENDS  

State decision suspends adoptions from Vietnam

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0115/1224262377981.html

CAROL COULTER Legal Affairs Editor

Fri, Jan 15, 2010

THE GOVERNMENT has decided to suspend intercountry adoptions from Vietnam until both Ireland and Vietnam have ratified the provisions of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption.

Minister of State for Children Barry Andrews announced last night the Government had decided to suspend indefinitely negotiations on a new bilateral intercountry adoption agreement with Vietnam, with the effect of suspending adoptions.

He said the decision was taken in response to the “serious findings and recommendations” contained in the report on intercountry adoption commissioned by Unicef and the Vietnamese ministry of justice and carried out by International Social Services (ISS). Among the issues raised were: the conclusion that intercountry adoptions from Vietnam were essentially influenced by foreign demand rather than the needs of “abandoned” and orphaned children; the circumstances under which babies become “adoptable” were invariably unclear and disturbing; and the intercountry adoption system was grounded in a “remarkably unhealthy relationship between the mediating agencies and specific residential facilities”.

“I am acutely aware of the disappointment that will be felt as a result of this announcement,” Mr Andrews said. He said most prospective adoptive parents had asked for certainty above all else, and though this was not the news they were hoping for, it would help them make future choices.

He said he had asked the Adoption Board to identify Hague countries willing to enter into administrative arrangements with Ireland to facilitate intercountry adoption.

Other interim arrangements include permitting people with a declaration of eligibility for Vietnam to select a new country, while maintaining their place on the list for Vietnam, pending the ratification of Hague.

The Government had also committed to providing technical assistance to the Vietnamese authorities in the area of child welfare and protection to help prepare the way for ratification of the Hague Convention should the Vietnamese wish to avail it, he said.

The Helping Hands Adoption Mediation Agency, which specialises in adoptions from Vietnam, expressed its regret at the decision, and also stated that attempts to meet Mr Andrews to discuss the situation had been refused.

Helping Hands chief executive Sharon O’Driscoll said it had worked tirelessly with both Irish families adopting from Vietnam, and those on the ground in Vietnam. “Since our formation and presentation of credentials to the Irish Government in 2006, we have ontinually pointed out to the Irish Government our concerns with the process and what points needed to be addressed in order to improve standards,” she said.

“Helping Hands would strongly recommend that the Irish Government engage with the rest of the international community to help in improving adoption conditions in Vietnam as the door has now simply been slammed in the face of helpless young Vietnamese children who are in need of loving and caring families.

“The Government has also managed to alienate the dozens of Irish families who are currently in the process of adopting Vietnamese children, many of whom have patiently waited years to do so.”

Shane Downer, chief executive of the International Adoption Association, expressed deep disappointment with the Minister’s decision and said the report was based on “flawed, fragile and incomplete analysis”: “The report itself is based on a nine-day trip to Vietnam, which only included visits to two of the 58 Vietnamese provinces. Neither of the provinces visited by the ISS team are provinces from which Irish applicants currently adopt.”

Anger as Government bans Vietnam adoptions

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfausnqlojkf/rss2/

By Fiachra O Cionnaith

Friday, January 15, 2010

THE Government has "slammed the door in the face" of young couples attempting to adopt by suspending services from Vietnam.

Reacting to Minister for Children Barry Andrews’s decision to prevent adoptions from the Asian country, Irish group Helping Hands claimed the move would destroy countless people’s hopes to start a family.

"We would strongly recommend that the Irish Government engage with the rest of the international community to help in improving adoption conditions in Vietnam.

"Currently the door has simply been slammed in the face of helpless young Vietnamese children who are in need of loving and caring families," warned the group’s chief executive, Sharon O Driscoll.

"Our numerous requests to meet with government leaders to discuss the situation, particularly Minister for Children Barry Andrews, have been mystifyingly dodged or refused," she added.

The comment came after the Mr Andrews moved to temporarily ban all adoptions from Vietnam until a full review is carried out.

In November, Helping Hands denied reports it was under investigation by the Adoption Board over fees it charged people to adopt from Vietnam.

It followed a Unicef’s International Social Services report, which was critical of the make-up of the agency’s fee of $11,100 (€7,286), of which $9,000 consists of "humanitarian aid".

Hundreds of parents in limbo on adoptions

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/hundreds-of-parents-in-limbo-on-adoptions-2014999.html

By Dearbhail McDonald, Legal Editor
Friday January 15 2010

HUNDREDS of parents were last night thrown into legal limbo as the Government announced that it will not renew negotiations for a bi-lateral adoption agreement with Vietnam.

The cabinet decision to suspend adoptions indefinitely followed two disturbing reports surrounding the adoption of abandoned and orphaned babies from the south-east Asian country.

The decision, reached at a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, will provide clarity to some parents who have been waiting for months to see if the Irish Government would renew its agreement.

But it provides a dilemma for thousands of parents seeking to adopt babies from abroad as six out of 10 babies adopted from foreign countries are sourced in Vietnam.

In recent months, Children's Minister Barry Andrews received two significant reports regarding child welfare, protection and adoption in Vietnam that led his department to suspend adoption negotiations between the two nations.

Last night Mr Andrews said that he was "acutely aware of the disappointment that will be felt".

"Most prospective adoptive parents that I have met in recent weeks have above all else asked for certainty and an end to the speculation about the Government's intentions," he said.

"Inter-country adoption with Vietnam will be suspended until Hague ratification is completed in both countries."

The Irish Independent has also learned that the Government was unlikely to support or sanction the adoption of 20 babies whose prospective Irish parents were already at an advanced stage of the process.

These are a small cohort of adoptions that the Vietnamese authorities had agreed could go ahead despite the lapsing last May of a bilateral agreement on adoption between the two countries.

Fine Gael has asked the Government to introduce an interim adoption agreement to allow couples already cleared for the process to adopt Vietnamese children.

Compatible

Irish parents can apply to adopt from 85 countries whose laws are compatible with Irish laws.

Apart from Vietnam, the biggest source countries to Ireland are Russia, Ethiopia and China. Some 400 inter-country adoptions take place each year.

Vietnam is expected to ratify the Hague Convention, the main international statute governing international adoptions, next year.

Ireland signed the Hague Convention in 1993 and is expected to ratify it next March.

Sharon O'Driscoll, chief executive of Helping Hands -- which had been criticised by a United Nations-commissioned report -- said the mediation agency was at "an utter loss" as it had worked tirelessly with Irish families adopting from Vietnam, as well as those "on-the-ground" in Vietnam.

"We have continually pointed out to the Irish government our concerns with the process and what points needed to be addressed in order to improve standards," she said.

Adopted – but we didn't know

How does it feel to discover as an adult that you were adopted as a baby? We talk to four people who came to terms with finding out later in life

Kate Hilpern

The Guardian, Saturday 2 January 2010

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jan/02/adoption-children-family

Hilary Moon, 60, was 48 when she discovered that she was adopted. She is divorced.

"I was at my uncle's funeral when my cousin's husband wandered up to me and said, 'I've been wanting to meet you, because we're both adopted.' It was a huge shock – how could it not be? On the other hand, I had an instant explanation as to why I'd always felt like a square peg in a round hole when it came to my family.

"I once said to my mother, 'I've always felt like I was found on a doorstep.' She got terribly upset, and I later learned that was the point at which she confided in my cousin's husband. She chose him because he's a vicar. She assumed he'd keep it to himself.  

"My mother had died by the time I found out the truth, but my father hadn't, so I asked him about it. He was an unpleasant man and simply said, 'Well, nobody else would have you.' I threw a cup of tea at him, said that at least it meant I wasn't related to him and we never spoke again.

"Was I angry? Of course I was. I had been advised not to have children because my mother and brother had both had severe diabetes and had gone blind and died early. To learn I wasn't blood-related to them means I made an enormous decision based on fiction.

"I've mellowed now. My mother had such a bum deal in life – a husband that had affairs and a son who died young – that it's hard to feel anger towards her. She and I got on well, and I'm thankful for that. And although I still have negative feelings towards my father, who is now dead, I think that's probably more to do with how he treated my mother.

"About eight years ago, my biological sister sought me out. She put me in touch with my birth mother, to whom I look incredibly similar. I've met others in the extended family, too, and I even changed my full name to what it was before the adoption. With all my adoptive family dead, and a large birth family still alive, it just made sense to me. But, actually, they're a funny lot and I can't say I feel any great bond with them.

"The whole situation has left me feeling neither part of my adoptive nor my biological family, and the lack of a sense of belonging in either can make me feel lonely if I let it. When people ask me who is my next of kin, I say, 'I haven't got one', because that's how it feels."  

Mandy Sullivan, 52, is divorced with three grown-up children. She found out she was adopted when she was 36.

"I've never had a good relationship with my mum. She had a baby that died at a week old and from very young I realised I could never replace that baby. But one day, when I was 36, something else came to light that further explained things – I wasn't even hers.

"I found out by chance. I became a mature student and the university administration office requested my birth certificate. I'd never seen it and my mum kept saying she couldn't find it. In the end, she gave me a piece of paper that I duly showed the university office. The administrator looked at me and said, 'This isn't your birth certificate.' She must have registered that I didn't understand and explained, 'I'm sorry to tell you this, but it's your adoption certificate.'

"I felt sick. My whole life had been a lie. It was horrendous and not helped by the fact that I was right in the middle of a bad divorce and my house was being repossessed. I didn't do anything about it for three or four years. I thought about it constantly but I felt I had to prioritise finding a job, moving house and settling my three daughters.

"Eventually, I wrote my mum a letter. I thought, I can't just ring her up and blurt it out because she'd get defensive. She got defensive anyway. In a short, sharp tone, she said my dad didn't want me to know because he was afraid of me feeling rejected and different. I believe her – my dad and I were very close until he died when I was 25. But I don't accept that it was all him. It must have been a joint decision. She said she planned to write it in a letter that I'd get after she died, but what a cop out.

"Our relationship has continued to go downhill since that letter. The main thing she seemed concerned about was that her relationship with my daughters didn't suffer. A few years ago, when she had a massive stroke, I felt we might be getting a bit closer, but as soon as she was on the mend the old barriers went up. These days she doesn't want much to do with me.

"About 10 years ago, I decided to apply for my adoption file. It's funny – despite always feeling different to my adoptive family (I'm tall, they're not. I'm a bookworm, they don't read books at all), I remember still thinking the social worker might come in and say it was all a big mistake – that I wasn't adopted at all. But, of course, she didn't.

"I didn't discover much more than what my mother had divulged, however – that my adoptive father had been in the pub having a drink with a friend, who said that his sister-in-law couldn't cope with her baby. Apparently, my dad came home and asked my mum, 'Why don't we adopt her?'

"I've never looked for my birth mother. I don't think I could cope with another mum rejecting me. But I'm in quite poor health andincreasingly worried that it's hereditary, so I think I might get in touch just to find out my medical history.

"Every area of my life has been affected by what I found out. I have great problems trusting people – both men and friends – and once I do trust someone, I seem to find it really hard to say goodbye, even if the relationship is really rubbish. On a positive note, I'm closer than ever to my daughters – they're the only blood relations I know."

Chris Lines, 63, is married with three grown-up children and one granddaughter. He found out that he was adopted three years ago.

"My wife and I were in a local garden centre when I spotted the daughter of my mum's next-door neighbour. She was with a little girl, who she introduced as one of her three grandchildren. The other two, she explained, were adopted from Vietnam. She turned to the girl and said, 'This man was adopted too, you know.'

My wife and I looked around to see who she was talking about. She felt awful – she thought I knew. It turned out she still remembered going in the taxi with her mum and my mum to pick up a five-month-old baby – me – from the Salvation Army all those years ago.

"The way I deal with most problems is to deny their existence. I didn't want to think about it, but my wife prompted me to check the official birth records in Liverpool and, sure enough, my name wasn't there.

"With both my parents dead, I approached two elderly aunts. They knew all about the adoption, and even told me my original name – Dennis Kelly. The moment I heard that name was when it really hit me. My legs gave way. I felt I'd lived for 61 years as one person, but really I was another.  

"It turned out everyone in my adoptive family knew. I'm still amazed nobody told me because it's a huge and close family. They've all since said they thought I'd been told. My mother had an ectopic pregnancy and was advised not to get pregnant again, so she doted on me as her only child. I think they felt that if I discovered I was adopted, I might look for my real parents and they'd have to share me or even lose me.

"I did decide to look for my biological parents. It struck me that the only blood relations I knew were my own children. Even though I used the charity After Adoption, it was a long search because when we found out that I was born in a home for "wayward mothers", we assumed my mother had been young. Then we discovered she'd been 39.

"I was sad to learn that she had died, but I did find a cousin who agreed to meet me. When he produced a box with four or five photos of my mother, I was speechless. There she was, smiling and laughing. She really did exist. Another relative I later found, remembered her as larger than life and always smiling. I liked hearing that.

"It might sound funny, but a big relief to me was that I had been born in Liverpool and that I have Irish blood in me – both things I'd been brought up to believe and am fiercely proud of. What isn't true, however, are all the little genetic links I'd always taken for granted – my youngest daughter having my aunt's eyes; my eldest daughter having her grandmother's legs.

"I think I'd rather not know I'm adopted, but it has helped explain some things – for example, why I sometimes felt as a child that I wasn't quite the same as the other children in the family. Also, one of my aunts told me that when my parents got me I didn't make any noise, presumably because, for the first five months of my life, nobody had come when I cried. I wonder if that's why I've always been quite introverted."

Peter Clark, 61, was 39 when he found out he was adopted. He is married and has four sons and five grandchildren.

"The thing I remember most about the day I found out that my mother didn't give birth to me, was this feeling of standing with my back to the edge of a cliff because everything behind me – everything I'd known to be true – felt as if it was a lie and I literally didn't know who I was.

"It even made me question the right to have my father's war medals. As the eldest of five children, I'd been in possession of them. I took them out of the drawer by my bed that night and felt it was wrong for me to have them, because he wasn't my real dad.

"I don't think my parents ever intended to tell me. My mother says it's because I was a sensitive child and they didn't want to upset me. When I asked her why she still didn't tell me in adulthood, she said she gave my father, who had died when I was 21, a deathbed promise to keep the secret. I think the real reason was a fear that I would abandon her in favour of my birth family. Even when my mother did finally tell me I was adopted, the first thing she asked me was never to make contact with my birth mother.

"She finally told me just before I went on an overseas business trip. There were some complications over my visa and passport, which prompted questions around my birth certificate and the identity of my parents. It must have made my mum panic.

"I was gobsmacked because I'd never had any inkling. It's not as if adoption is taboo in our family. One of my brothers adopted four children and my wife's brother adopted three. I felt very angry with her about the web of deception for a long time and although I've worked through that now, I still hold a strong belief that people have a fundamental right to know about their origins.

"I realised I needed to know my roots. It wasn't easy – the search for my birth mother took six years. I had an unconscious fear of rejection, so I'd make some progress in finding her, then take a step back. She was also hard to find. Even with the help of an adoption charity, it took a couple of hundred phone calls and many letters to find her.

"My first meeting with Agnes, when I eventually found her living in the United States, went wonderfully, and although she never acknowledged who I was to her friends and family – which I found hard – we continued a warm relationship until she died in 1996. About two years later, I plucked up the courage to search for other members of my birth family and I'm now in contact with my cousins, aunts and uncles too – although, sadly, I was never able to get any information about my father.

"It's good to know where I came from, although I have no regrets about being adopted and my adoptive family feels no less my family than before. Three of my siblings say it doesn't make them feel any differently towards me.

"Sadly, one of my brothers – who, I learned last year, was the only one who knew before me that I was adopted – doesn't feel like this. But we have a difficult relationship for other reasons. One of my other brothers recently had my father's watch repaired and said he felt I should have it. Given how I'd felt about the war medals, it was a significant gesture."

Child's Death Causes Portland to Review Foreign Adoption Rules

Many people look to adoptions out of state, where other families seek to regain custody of children in the United States. But when a child is killed or abused, this brings new concerns about placement of children where communication is poor.

In 2005 a child was killed in Mexico after being sent there where her aunt and uncle, selected by Oregon authorities, were given custody. Instead the child was abused for months, then murdered in June of 2005. This happened even as teachers of the child, named Adriana, reportedly were calling social workers but couldn't get them to act. The social workers had been relying on updates about the child's progress from telephone calls with Mexican authorities and the aunt and uncle who were found to be the abusers who killed the Adriana.

This incident caused Oregon to take a second look at the way foreign adoptions are done. A moratorium earlier in the year has just been lifted even as new rules are being implemented to assure the safety of foster children, according to a report in the Portland Oregonian on New Year's Eve.

Oregon is not alone in worrying about foreign adoptions and the time and distance as a problem that interferes with good communication and follow-up. Foreign adoptions of Russian children have been popular for a number of years, but these slowed down because of poor communication and issues with licensing of various agencies even as there were reports of adopted children who were abused or killed.

Since 1990, when Russian adoptions were made open to foreigners, 13 children have been murdered, 12 of those have been within the United States. This has caused the Russian Education Ministry, which oversees the adoption of Russian children by foreigners, to be increasingly careful in scrutinizing foreign adoptions.

In 2003 USA Today had a report on the status of foreign adoptions reviewing some of the problems involved. Some of the problems include babies that have been stolen from natural parents then sold to adopting ones, long delays in procedures and bureaucratic snafus of various kinds.

Even as Oregon is tightening the rules on foreign adoptions, recognizing there are children taken from the United States abroad and children brought into the state, all of whom need to be supervised, foreign adoption by Americans is reported to be at its lowest level since 1996 according to a recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

This is said to discourage adoption advocates who recognize folks continue to be interested in foreign adoptions. The problem, the report goes on to say, appears to be corruption and neglect in some of the host countries where children are waiting.

Neglected children without families continue to wait for someone to provide them a home, even as the complications continue from incidences of abuse, neglect and death that produce increasing bureaucracy. In the meantime Oregon is putting together new rules and procedures to protect children in what authorities declare they hope will be a fair and reasonable way.

Back to Articles