The U.S. has set another precedent based on the Hague in sending two sisters: Komal and Shallu back to India, three years after being adopted by a Minnesota couple.
The couple was told the girls were 12 and 15. The older girl displayed disruptive, acting out, angry behavior and the mother thought she seemed older than 15 so took her to doctors to test her theory. She alleges that the girls are 15 and 21 and based on that and that the agency committed fraud, the girls were sent back. Full story here.
Obviously, had she been more obedient, this would not have happened. Was this a terminated adoption because the children didn't "bond" and behave as expected?
It is most interesting that when the U.S. adoptive parents are pressing the issue and unhappy with their "goods" they received - perhaps not as represented - the government steps in and calls it VISA FRAUD! Yet the Government does nothing when the complaints are coming from the parents whose children were stolen!
Note that in both cases, fraudulent Visas may have been issued.
This case was decided based on age testing which is far less conclusive that the DNA testing to confirm or deny kidnappings.
Recently, at the Practising Law Center conference, I heard Pat O'Brien of "You Gotta Beleive!" an organization advocating for aging-out "emancipated" foster kids. Pat tries to find them families. He said many of the families he interviews say of their foster kids "I would keep Johnny forever" as a foster child but are reluctant to adopt. The litmus test he uses to test their commitment is asking them:
What can your child to to stop being a member of your family? REAL parents, know the answer is absolutely nothing! Even if one of your children were hurting other of your children (not claimed in this case), you'd get him the help he needed but you'd never get rid of him entirely!
The Melichars are suing the adoption agency for $50,000.
Are they really the wounded parties here? If it is true that the girls were much odler than claimed, the girls say they were told to lie. The agency denies it, of course.