Friday, August 14, 2009

Adoption & Fraud in the News & Blogosphere

First, important legislative news regarding inter-country adoptions:

I join with PEAR and all concerned about ethical adoption practices in opposing
Senate Bill 1359/ A3110, known as the FACE Act. I urge all interested parties to read a very thorough and detailed analysis of this and another bill in question by PEAR, with many links. 1359/3110 is intended to simplify the adoption process by conferring U.S. citizenship retroactive to birth.

73Adoptee writes:
"Adoptive families would apply for a Consular Report Of Birth which, like an amended birth certificate, makes it appear "as if" the adoptee was born to the adoptive parents. Proponents of the bill say this will help adoptive families by eliminating some of the paperwork and expense, and help adoptees by offering them the same inalienable rights as a U.S.-born citizen. There are plenty of concerns about this proposed legislation which have been remarked upon by bloggers in the adoption community. From where I'm sitting, it looks very much like erasing adoptees' identities."

I share PEAR's, Ethica's and others concern for the status of children who lawfully enter the United States for the purposes of adoption but, through no fault of their own, have "parents" who fail to finalize the adoption. I likewise share their thoughtful concern about backdating citizenship documents to the date of birth, thus obliterating a person's life before entry into their newly 'adopted' nation.

I likewise share
grave concern about placing the power of the “competent authority” in the hands of the sending country.

I disagree, however, that such power would be better in the hands of the receiving country, especially the U.S.

As I will be posting elsewhere, I have met with Ana Escobar whose case proves conclusively how DNA reports - with photos attached - are systematically being falsified...AND the U.S. government is issuing VISAS for such children with obviously fraudulent paperwork.

Interpol, which oversees international crime including human trafficking and smuggling, does not include such practices for the purpose of adoption. This is an oversight that clearly needs to be addressed by all concerned with these deceptions. Interpol explains the difference between trafficking and smuggling, and the trafficking definition could easily include adoption, but currently does not.

But clearly, we cannot leave this important final watchdog position in the hands of the country whose demand is creating the situation, and a nation based on the capitalistic support of adoption as an enterprise and the ethnocentric rescue myths of adoption.

This bill is being considered in two committees in the House of Representatives and one committee in the U.S. Senate:

In the House:

House Committee on Foreign Affairs:
Phone: (202) 225-5021
Members on the Committee who are also available to hear your opinions:

House Judiciary Committee:
Phone: 202-225-3951
Find members of the committee who would be happy to hear your opinions:

In the Senate:

Senate Judiciary Committee:
Phone: 202-224-7703 (Democrats) or 202-224-5225 (Republicans)
To find members of the committee who would be happy to hear your opinion:

Please consider joining this Facebook group formed in opposition to the FACE Act, which I am pleased to report has more than 300 members!

This brings me to the first of three blogs I'd like to call your attention to today:

- Stephen Osborn, who together with his wife Shyrel run a group home for Guatemalan children, many disabled. God has given this couple their calling and likewise bestowed upon Steve a way off articulating the heart of the situation:
[H]onest people in the adoption community had warned against initiating adoptions from Guatemala as early as 2006. But the potential parents were hearing different stories. The Adoption agencies as late as the fall of 2007 were still saying these children would die if not adopted. When your heart is inclined to adopt, choosing which of the conflicting reports to believe is a no brainer. Hmmm. Unintended pun there. It is a heart issue, not a brain issue. The only problem is that the conflicting reports on one side were conscientious attempts to protect these hearts. The other, a shameless attempt to profit from the desire of these hearts. And a lie."
- A friend, follower and regular commenter of this blog, OSoloMama has written a heartfelt (as always) exploration of her feelings surrounding helping her adopted daughter search for her roots from initially "her parents were not so much feared as invisible" to a realization that "it’s better to talk about the question mark than to stay silent."

- Meanwhile, back here at home,
- Utah is at it again: yet other contested adoption being fought by a father whose rights are being - as usual - ignored and abrogated. As is typical of all such cases it involves deceit and deception that crosses state lines. Those who support this father, Cody Mitchell O’Dea, have set up a blog post and a petition and donation for legal fees request.

1 comment:

Osolomama said...

I think inter'l adoptees should be considered landed immigrants, or permanent residents, in their new country and be allowed to retain the citizenship of their original country until such time as they are able to make a decision about citizenship. The problem is that in the U.S., I gather your gov't confers many more rights on a citizen and you can even be thrown out of the country for a minor offence if you aren't one. That is the dilemma many inter'l a-parents face. But shortcutting to citizenship does definitely shortchange the adoptee's right to identity and heritage.

RussiaToday Apr 29, 2010 on Russian Adoption Freeze

Russi Today: America television Interview 4/16/10 Regarding the Return of Artyem, 7, to Russia alone

RT: Russia-America TV Interview 3/10

Korean Birthmothers Protest to End Adoption

Motherhood, Adoption, Surrender, & Loss

Who Am I?

Bitter Winds

Adoption and Truth Video

Adoption Truth

Birthparents Never Forget