Home  

Dr. Jane Aronson Sets the Record Straight on E.J. Graff’s Ill-founded Claims about International Adoption

Dr. Jane Aronson Sets the Record Straight on E.J. Graff’s Ill-founded Claims about International Adoption

The following press statement was issued by Dr. Jane Aronson, Founder and CEO of the Worldwide Orphans Foundation in response to E.J. Graff reports on international adoption.

The recent media coverage of E.J. Graff’s investigative report claiming that international adoptions are somehow fueling an underground baby trading industry is a gross mischaracterization of thousands of legal adoptions that take place worldwide every year. Her report falsely alleges that birth mothers in impoverished countries are tricked and forced to give up (or sell) their babies to meet a greedy Western demand for healthy infants. She is wrong; the facts must be clearly laid out to stop the further spread of these myths.

Ms. Graff’s research fails to recognize that millions of children around the globe are parentless due to circumstances beyond their control. The truth is that grinding poverty, war and the AIDS pandemic have devastated entire communities throughout the developing world often forcing parentless children to live on the street for basic survival. In Africa, overstretched grandmothers are caring for sometimes ten or more grandchildren after losing their own children to AIDS. Many surviving older siblings are now the primary caretakers of younger brothers and sisters. And millions of children live in refugee camps after escaping violence and being separated from their parents or even witnessing their parents’ brutal murders in war torn countries.

Is Graff suggesting that if international adoption came to a complete halt, the orphanages, streets, sewers, and dumps in the developing world would magically empty of parentless children and that the cribs in orphanage nurseries would stand empty?

International adoption is an enormously complex issue; it’s emotional and highly personal and should not be dismissed in the broad generalizations and harsh tones of Ms. Graff’s various articles and interviews. Let’s look at the unsubstantiated allegations in Ms. Graff’s yearlong study contrasted with the on-the-ground reality:

ALLEGATION: Adoptive parents are unwittingly engaging in international trafficking of healthy children
FACT:
 Ms. Graff’s charge that adoptive parents are engaging (unknowingly or not) in the international trafficking of healthy children with parents for personal gain is factually inaccurate and flat-out wrong. While unscrupulous operators may exist, a vast majority of international adoptions are lawful.

As a pediatrician specializing in international adoptions and head of a leading organization seeking to transform the lives of orphans, I have witnessed and treated the deplorable health conditions of newly-adopted orphaned children of all ages, as well as orphans living in institutions around the globe. I’ve seen firsthand orphans living in appalling and squalid living environments, often facing severe psychological trauma, neglect and abuse. International adoption is one clear way to give these children a better future.

ALLEGATION: The official number of 133 million orphans worldwide is inaccurate.
FACT:
 UNICEF and other international agencies invest millions of dollars for epidemiologists, social scientists and other researchers to conduct responsible and rigorous statistical accounting and analysis of the number of orphaned children around the world. Here are the facts:
     • Globally, an estimated 133 million children are orphaned (children aged 0–17 who have lost one or both parents).
     • South Asia, East Asia and Pacific regions have 72 million orphaned children.
     • Sub-Sahara Africa alone has some 46 million orphaned children. (UNICEF)
Ms. Graff’s yearlong study dubiously cites unnamed sources, offers generalizations, and fails to name specific orphanages and experts to confirm her findings or support her questioning of the number of orphaned children.

ALLEGATION: The term “orphans” is wrongly defined.
FACT:
 The United Nations and other international agencies have defined “orphans” as children who have lost one or both parents. Ms. Graff seems to dismiss this internationally-agreed upon definition by imposing Western criteria--even Dickensian-- of who qualifies as an orphan. Her definition does not take into account the sheer vulnerability of families, particularly in countries devastated by poverty, war or HIV/AIDS. For example, if one parent dies of AIDS, the other parent is most likely to succumb to the disease as well, leaving parentless children.

Putting Forth Solutions to the World Orphan Crisis

Instead of blaming Western prospective adoptive parents for the existence of orphans in the world, we must focus on and invest in sustainable solutions to ending the all-too-real orphan crisis. Innovative strategies must be identified to raise awareness about the world’s orphaned children, and more resources must be devoted to tackling the root causes of why children are left behind.

International adoption is just one solution to the world’s orphan crisis. Realizing that millions of orphaned children will never be adopted by a family was the reason I founded Worldwide Orphans Foundation (WWO). WWO offers orphaned children medical, developmental, and psycho-social care and educational opportunities. WWO’s goal is for orphaned children to have as bright a future as any child in the U.S., Canada or Europe, and become future leaders in their countries. By strengthening in-country capacity, WWO and its partners are working with communities to improve local socio-economic infrastructures to deal with poverty, the devastating AIDS pandemic, and other development challenges.

Finally, Ms. Graff’s inaccurate account of international adoption is extremely painful to both adoptive parents and their children. The blunt language accusing adoptive parents of orphaned children as being “baby snatchers” is painful and malicious, causing harm to these precious children and their devoted parents.

We must take a stand and demand that news organizations publish accurate reporting and research on international adoption. Misleading reports like Ms. Graff’s have the potential to create enormous damage to the work of reputable organizations delivering live-saving services to orphaned children worldwide and the adoption agencies that provide loving homes to millions of children in need of care and protection.

CONTACT: Shanta Bryant Gyan 646-290-8211• shanta@sbgcommunications.com
Meg Bode, Bode & Associates • 516-869-6610 • meg@bodeassociates.com

Single man adoption

Single man in NJ named Bruce: Got screwed around by an attorney in NJ
and a Russian facilitator and ended up going with Tree of Life for a
Romanian adoption.  With a toss of Adrienne Lewis of Global Adoption fame tossed in for measure:
www.geocities.com/adoptiondiary/index.html

Adoption Fraud - Romania

Adoption fraud

Q:A local adoption agency referred us to an attorney for an adoption from Romania while the moratorium was in place, assuring us that the attorney would be able to “get around it.” We paid thousands in fees, and, eventually, received a referral. Romania has since shut down its international adoption program completely, halting all adoptions. The attorney refused to return our money, so we reported her to the Police. What else can we do? Are there any federal agencies that can intervene?

A:Since you have already contacted the police and the attorney to no avail, I suggest that you consult a consumer fraud attorney now. I suspect you will have to sue the attorney to get your money back.

You should file a complaint with your local bar association, the state Attorney General’s office, and the state adoption supervisor. The Attorney General will likely have the most clout toward getting your money back, and will pursue the case more vigorously if you are also a resident of the same state. If not, ask your state’s Attorney General to put pressure on the one in the attorney’s state.

I think you should also file complaints against the agency, to hold it accountable for putting families at risk through misinformation.

Currently, adoption is regulated exclusively at the state level. After the U.S. becomes a party to the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, federal legislation will begin regulating agencies that oversee international adoptions. But at the present time, no federal agency has power over adoption service providers.
—Susan Freivalds
Editorial Advisor, 
Adoptive Families

Bulgaria to Ban Child Abandonment (3,360)

Bulgaria to Ban Child Abandonment 

“The Social Ministry and the Child Protection Agency are planning discussions with the Justice Ministry about some legal changes, according to which doctors, who consult mothers to abandon their children with disabilities, should be treated as criminals and punished with imprisonment,” Simeonova said.

She has explained that a political decision has been made on closing all orphanages and institutes for abandoned children with physical and mental disabilities within 15 years.

Operational program “Regional Development has ensured EUR 20 M for this purpose. Another EUR 23 M are expected to come from the program for Human Resources Development.

Currently, there are 131 institutes in Bulgaria, accommodating 6,336 children. In 2001, the number of institutions was 165 and the children who lived there was 12,609.

The first closed institutions would be the ones for children with disabilities. Their number is 24 and their inhabitants are 1,386. Even though 300 of them are already adults, they still live in the institution because they cannot take care of themselves.

According to the new plans of the Social Ministry, they should be taken out of the institutitons in the next three years. Some of them would be taken back to their biological families and other would be accommodated in protected houses for 8-10 people. Psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers would be available for them all the time.

The next step of the reform includes the accommodation of the 450 children above three years of age who still live in institutions for children below three years of age.

The head of the Child Protection Agency, Nadya Shabani, has announced that all the children will be assessed by October 15 and will be accommodated in compliance with their health condition.

“A team of 276 expert from the agency is already working of the children assessments,” Shabani said.

The last phase of the reform envisions the accommodation of children between 7-18 years of age.

Bulgaria’s Deputy Social Minister has announced that they are planning the implementation of modern social services, which would help children from institutions change their living environment more easily.

“They will be accommodated only in big cities, so that qualified professionals could take care of them,” Simeonova said and added that professionals have already began special trainings on the modern services.

She has also explained that new stimuli for foster parents are considered, in order to continue the development of foster parenting.

According to her, adoptions have also increased by 1/3. In the beginning of August, the children, registered for full adoption were 3,360.

Amendments to the current legislation envision a ban on returning already adopted children by their adoptive parents. Simeonova has stated that there are about 10 such cases in Bulgaria every years.

“The psychological traumas from returning an adopted child are drastic,” she said.

The deputy minister pointed out that special attention would be paid on preventing child abandonment. She explained that there will soon be teams for family consultations, early identifying of mothers inclined to abandon their babies, consultations of pregnant women and for supporting mothers of children with disabilities.

Baby market

Baby market 
Last updated: 10/8/2010 9:15 
 
 

Sex work in Da Nang has facilitated the trade of unwanted infants, usually under the guise of social welfare

 
A view of the Hai Chau District Center for Abandoned Children in the central city of Da Nang. Neighbors say the center never takes care of children but, instead, gives them away. At least one of the center’s employees has offered millions of dong to mothers for their children.

 

“If I’d had money, I wouldn’t have sold my child. It’s only because I was born unlucky,” said a sex worker identified only as T.N.

N. recalled that the woman who bought her child several years back allowed her to live in her house for a month and keep the baby for one week before deciding to sell it.

“It was still blood-red when I gave it away, so poor! But if I kept it, where would I get the money to raise it?

“If I’d kept it, I would have had to pay the medical fees and for baby clothes [that the woman had put up],” the girl said. “This woman promised me VND26 million (US$1,333) for my baby.”

“I hope it would end up with some happy family. Staying with me would mean endless misery. My line of work chews people up and spits them out.”

She offered the following advice to mothers facing a similar situation: “If your life is not too difficult, don’t sell your baby. And if you choose to sell, don’t let yourself see it. You will be haunted for the rest of your life.”

A woman who has been living with T.N. for some time said N. spent a year saving up money before she began searching for her child.

“But she never found the center where she was told her child would be sent to live and study,” said N.’s friend.

A one-month investigation conducted by Thanh Nien revealed that no legitimate charities are offering such money for the unwanted children of sex workers.

Instead, there is a thriving trade in babies.

A sex worker in the area said many of her friends had sold babies for VND20 to 26 million. Some sold numerous children. One such mother was HIV-positive and another was a drug addict but they still managed to sell off their infants, she said.

Sex workers in the area referred to a female buyer named Xe who keeps a lookout for sex workers with growing bellies and offers them money for their babies as soon as they show signs of pregnancy.

“That lady buys quickly, pays quickly,” said one sex worker who asked not to be named. “She’ll buy any baby and never bothers to check if the mother is infected or HIV-positive.”

Xe only approaches strangers who do not want their babies during the final month of their pregnancy. She does so to ensure that the baby’s family won’t contact her or try to look for the child later.

When Thanh Nien tracked Xe down, she said she worked for an adoption center but refused to name it.

“I don’t want people to come asking for their children back,” she said.

The broker says that “there’s no way these babies won’t end up in a good family.” Xe said she follows the laws which only allow rich, childless couples to adopt.

According to her prostitute customers, Xe pays VND15 million for each baby. The transactions go more smoothly when the due date is close and the mothers have little chance to change their minds, the sex workers said.

Xe persuades the mothers to give birth at Da Nang Hospital, and she provides clothes and essential items for the baby, as an added incentive.

“Remember, you must not enter the hospital right away but sit at the front and wait for me,” Xe said. “And don’t say anything inside the hospital, just pretend that I’m your aunt or sister-in-law,” she told a mother.

An obstetrician at Da Nang Hospital, who asked not to be named, said she had never heard of a charity organization willing to pay for delivery costs and postnatal care in addition to such a large payoff to a woman who wants to abandon her child.

Infant trade in disguise

Another sex worker who recently sold her child advised women in her situation to look for a nurse named My, around 40, at

Teresa Hospital, the former name of Hai Chau District Medical Center in the central Da Nang City.

“I don’t buy babies, I just help you give birth and I introduce the baby to someone and you will get whatever they give,” My told a girl seeking her help.

She asked the girl not to provide her real name to doctors. “Just make up some name and I’ll take care of the rest.”

Soon after their initial meeting, My introduced the girl to a woman named Phuc, who insisted on having conversations in dark and vacant corners of the hospital. During these exchanges, she only allowed one person to stay with the pregnant girl.

“This matter shouldn’t be known by many people,” she said.

Like Xe, Phuc wants the mother to promise to cease contact after the deal is done. Phuc claimed she has worked for an adoption program for many years and guaranteed that the baby would end up in a “very good” family.

Phuc promised a girl seeking her help a “support” fee that “won’t be small.” The broker said her organization will pay for the mother’s medical fees, baby clothes and housing until delivery.

A trace of her landline number revealed that she works for the Center for Abandoned Children in Hai Chau District.

The center is almost always locked inside and nearby residents said they’ve never seen the center care for a single baby.

It gave all the babies away and usually not to good families, the neighbors claimed.

There’s suspicion that the center bought babies and lied about them being left at their doorstep. Then, the center ran newspaper ads asking for the mothers to return and claim their babies, which certainly never happened.

After 30 days, the center could legally give the baby away.

Nguyen Van An, deputy director of the Da Nang Department of Labor, War Invalids and Social Affairs said the agency can only check up on how the centers treat their children; it’s the job of the Justice Department to find out how the babies are admitted and who they are sent to.

However, An said current law requires that if an adoption center receives a baby from its mother, it must obtain a note listing her personal information and the reason she cannot take care of the baby.

The note must then be certified by a local government official.

An said that if an adoption center helps a mother cover the cost of her hospital fees, milk, medicine and pays a stipend of VND100,000-200,000, that’s acceptable.

“But if there’s negotiation and a lot of money involved in the exchange, that’s the case of infant trading which is banned,” An said.

India - attempt to change Sharia law

The Background:
 
All India Muslim Personal Law Board was established at a time when then Government of India was trying to subvert Shariah law applicable to Indian Muslims through parallel legislation.Adoption Bill had been tabled in the Parliament. Mr. H.R.Gokhle, then Union Law Minister had termed this Bill as the first step towards Uniform Civil Code. Ulema, leaders and various Muslim organisations successfully convinced the Indian Muslim community that the risk of losing applicability of Shariah laws was real and concerted move by the community was needed to defeat the conspiracy.
It was a historic moment. This was the first time in the history of India after Khilafat Movement that people and organisations of Indian Muslim community belonging to various schools of thought came together on a common platform to defend Muslim Personal Law. First such meeting was convened at Deoband on the initiative of Hazrat Maulana Syed Shah Minnatullah Rahmani, Ameer Shariat, Bihar & Orissa and Hakeemul Islam Hazrat Maulana Qari Mohammad Taiyab, Muhtamim, Darul Uloom, Deoband. The meeting decided to hold a general representative convention at Mumbai. Therefore, a historic convention was held at Mumbai on December 27-28, 1972. The Convention was unprecedented. It showed unity, determination and resolve of the Indian Muslim community to protect the Muslim Personal Law. The Convention unanimously decided to form All India Muslim Personal Law Board.
 
Establishment of the Board:
 
All India Muslim Personal Law Board was established at a time when then Government of India was trying to subvert Shariah law applicable to Indian Muslims through parallel legislation.Adoption Bill had been tabled in the Parliament. Mr. H.R.Gokhle, then Union Law Minister had termed this Bill as the first step towards Uniform Civil Code. Ulema, leaders and various Muslim organisations successfully convinced the Indian Muslim community that the risk of losing applicability of Shariah laws was real and concerted move by the community was needed to defeat the conspiracy.
As per the decision of the Mumbai Convention, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board was formally established at a meeting held at Hyderabad on April 7, 1973. The pioneers of this movement to protect Islamic Shariah in India, Hazrat Maulana Qari Taiyab Qasmi (Rahamatullah aley) and Hazrat Maulana Syed Shah Minnatullah Rahmani (Rahamatullah Aley) were elected founder President and General Secretary of the Board
 

SC seeks Centre’s response on adoption laws

SC seeks Centre’s response on adoption laws 
S. S. Negi
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, July 15
Taking into account various legal lacunae on adoption in the face of country having 12.5 million orphans, the Supreme Court today issued notice to the Centre and states seeking their response why the laws relating to adoption should not be made more practicable.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan sought the replies from them on a petition by a Christian organisation pointing out that due to stringent laws only about 4,000 children were adopted every year.

The Evangelical Fellowship of India (EFI), which brought the issue before the Court, made a particular reference to the difficulties faced by non-Hindus in adopting a child in the absence of a law for them.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Gopal Subramaniam, taking a “proactive” stand on the issue said the Centre was open to laying down comprehensive guidelines to make adoption more practical but at the same time keeping in view the safety of children to ensure that they did not fall in wrong hands.

EFI, which claimed to have under its control 30,000 churches all over he country, said at present only the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act provided proper guidelines for adoption of children and confer on them the rights in the properties of adopting parents.

“But Christians, Jews, Muslims and Parsis cannot legally adopt a child. They can only avail of the guardianship under the Guardianship and Ward Act, 1956. The status of guardianship also ceases once the ward attains the age of majority,” senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, moving the petition said.

“Every child has a right of a family, better life and basic minimum medical facilities and the relaxation in the laws could pave way for thousands of destitute finding homes for themselves,” he said.

He also cited the rulings of Kerala and Bombay High Courts, which had given positive directions regarding relaxation of laws on adoption.

The petition was moved in addition to another PIL pending on the issue, filed earlier by social activist Shabnam Hashmi.

The ASG said the Government would file a detailed affidavit explaining its view point in totality while laying down the guidelines as per the amended Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, But the Government at the same time has to keep in mind the “sensitivities” of various religious groups while laying down the guidelines, he said, pointing out that the procedure to be adopted has to be based on “common acceptable norms”.

The Government in its earlier affidavit had stated that there was no “legislative vacuum for recognition of right of every child to be adopted under the Juvenile Justice Act as it was an inclusive legislation, covering all children as well as parents irrespective of their religion and sex.”

Gamete offspring have 'right to know' biological parents

Gamete offspring have 'right to know' biological parents
 
 
By Neal Hall, Vancouver Sun October 27, 2010
 
 
One Toronto man spent years searching for his sperm donor "biodad" and eventually learned he had 13 half siblings, an unusual civil trial heard Tuesday.
Barry Stevens, a 58-year-old Toronto filmmaker, found out when he was 18 that he was conceived through artificial insemination using donated sperm.
His mother revealed the truth after the death of Stevens' father, who didn't want his children to know.
Stevens spent years searching for his biological father, including 16 years of DNA detective work, before learning that the man who was his father was the husband of the female doctor who had done the artificial insemination of Stevens' mother.
Finding his father was a satisfying experience, lawyer Sean Hern told B.C. Supreme Court Justice Elaine Adair.
Stevens found he had 13 half siblings, whom he met, and may have several hundred half siblings, the lawyer said.
Stevens' documentary about his search, titled Bio-Dad, aired on CBC last year.
The happy-ending story was contained in Stevens' affidavit, which was read in court Tuesday by Hern, one of two lawyers representing Olivia Pratten, 28, who was born in B.C. and now is a Toronto journalist.
Pratten contends that those born through "gamete" donation of sperm and eggs should have the same rights to information about their biological parents as adopted children when they reach age 19.
She wants to have B.C.'s Adoption Act struck down as unconstitutional and replaced with legislation that will preserve the records of gamete donors -- which now only have to be kept for six years -- so they can be revealed to gamate offspring when they turn 19.
Although Pratten was raised by a mother and father, who are separated, she argues that it is important to her well-being and identity to know the ancestral background and medical history of her biological father.
"You can come from the most loving family and you still want this question answered," Hern argued in court.
Pratten's lawyers, including Joe Arvay, have filed in court affidavits of both sperm donor offspring and sperm donors. One donor's affidavit said he believes donors should have consensual contact with offspring seeking to fill in the blanks about family and medical history.
The court was told the sperm donor was paid up to $50 for each donation he made at the Vancouver fertility clinic run by Dr. Gerald Korn, now is in his 80s and retired. The man, who believes he may have dozens of offspring, has registered with the online donor sibling registry, the court was told.
 

Kazakhstand party to Hague Convention

Kazakhstan will become a party to the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption(Convention) on November 1, 2010. 
 
Government of Kazakhstan stated it will not accept any new intercountry adoption dossiers until it completes adoption reforms, which is expected to be March 2011, at the earliest.
 
Processing of Convention adoptions from Kazakhstan
 
Until the Government of Kazakhstan becomes a party to the Convention, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will not process a Form I-800A (Application for Determination of Suitability to Adopt a Child from a Convention Country), that indicates an intention to adopt a child from Kazakhstan.  For this reason, prospective adoptive parents should not attempt to initiate any new adoptions in Kazakhstan at this time.  On or after November 1, 2010, a U.S. citizen seeking to complete a Convention adoption of a child habitually resident in Kazakhstan may file a Form I-800A as specified in the Form I-800A instructions.
 
Prospective adoptive parents and adoption service providers should be aware that the Government of Kazakhstan continues to revise its intercountry adoption regulations, including those that will establish the number of and requirements for foreign adoption service providers.   The Government of Kazakhstan stated it will not accept any new intercountry adoption dossiers until the adoption reforms are complete and its intercountry adoption process meets Convention standards.  The Government estimates these reforms will be in place and that new intercountry adoptions may resume in March 2011.  Prospective adoptive parents are warned not to enter into any agreement, implied or stated, regarding the prospective adoption of a child in Kazakhstan until such a time as the Government of Kazakhstan establishes the requirements and regulations governing the intercountry adoption of its citizens.  The United States Central Authority cautions adoption service providers that they should not offer or appear to offer adoption services in Kazakhstan (other than for those transition cases still being processed under the former regulations) until the Government of Kazakhstan authorizes specific adoption service providers 

Transition
 (orphan) cases
 
Prospective adoptive parents who may already have filed a Form I-600 or Form I-600A should also be aware of the Government of Kazakhstan’s position on “transition” cases.  The Government of Kazakhstan announced that cases will qualify as transition only if the Kazakhstani Embassy or Consulate General sent the dossier to the Kazakhstan Ministry of Foreign Affairs on or before May 25, 2010.  These transition cases will be processed under the former procedures. Hague implementing measures will not affect the processing of these adoptions.  Thus, prospective adoptive parents who filed a Form I-600A or Form I-600 before November 1, 2010, may need to file a Form I-800A, if the dossier was not sent by May 25, 2010.
 
Information regarding adoption requirements and procedures in Kazakhstan will be posted as soon as it is made available. 

Updated: October 2010
 

Ambassador Roemer and Ambassador Susan Jacobs, India

Ambassador Roemer and Ambassador Susan Jacobs, Special Advisor for International Children’s Issues, met September 16, 2010. Ambassador Jacobs is visiting to discuss India’s accession to the Hague Convention on the civil aspects of International Child Abduction with senior Government of India officials.