(Aspirant-) Adoptieouders

de minister van Justitie deelbemiddeling gaat afschaffen en procedures gaat verscherpen waardoor het onmogelijk wordt kinderen via deelbemiddeling te adopteren uit voornamelijk de VS. Met deze maatregel worden vele (aspirant-) adoptieouders getroffen, voor wie adoptie via de VS de enige/laatste mogelijkheid is (alleenstaanden en hetero- èn homo stellen). Daarnaast worden er vele (aspirant-) adoptieouders, die al vóór de ratificatie van het Haags Adoptie Verdrag door de VS in bezit waren van hun beginseltoestemming èn die reeds toestemming hebben ontvangen van de Minister voor deelbemiddeling VS, de dupe van deze maatregelen.

US urged to abandon ageing flood defences in favour of Dutch system
The US must adopt an integrated model of water management like the Netherlands, says New Orleans senator Mary Landrieu
Buzz up!
Digg it
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent

guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 June 2009 18.30 BST
Article history
 
Water slams over the side of a levee near the Industrial Canal in New Orleans during Hurricane Gustav. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP
America, now entering its hurricane season, was today urged to abandon the outmoded "patch and pray" system of levees – whose failure magnified the devastation of Hurricane Katrina – and borrow from the Dutch model of dykes and water management.
Mary Landrieu, a senator from New Orleans who was brought to tears during a helicopter tour of the destruction of 2005, said America needed to rethink its entire approach to low-lying coastal areas and adopt an integrated model of water management like that of the Netherlands.
The US has budgeted $14bn since Katrina to shore up the flood defences of Louisiana and other low-lying areas. "I believe I have found a great model that will work for protecting the people of Louisiana and the people of the Gulf coast," she told reporters.
Louisiana's ageing flood controls rely on a series of levees along the Mississippi river built over the past 80 years by the Army Corps of Engineers.
In the Netherlands, water management is incorporated into urban planning, taking into account parks and other open public spaces that could function as safety reservoirs in case of floods, and also barrier islands and wetlands.
"They have engineers and architects that build a flood control system that is integrated into the landscape," Landrieu said. "We have a one-size-fits-all military model that is out of date – building levees – when we should be managing water."
The Dutch also build to a far higher standard of preparedness than in the US, with structures designed to hold up in even the most extreme storms and flooding conditions. "The system we have now in South Louisiana and in some measures in much of the country is unsustainable," Landrieu said. "It is literally a patch-and-pray system and it doesn't even try to patch us to the same level that is customary in other parts of the world.
Landrieu was speaking on her second visit to the Netherlands to study water management since Katrina, and said she planned to ask Congress to approve funds to improve water management along the Gulf Coast.
This week marks the start of the hurricane season in the Americas. The US government's forecasting agency, Noaa, said there was a 70% chance of having nine to 14 named storms this season. As many as three of those storms could develop into major hurricanes, ranked category three or higher.
Katrina was only a category three storm when it made landfall in August 2005, but it was America's deadliest hurricane. The flood control system was breached at more than 50 places in New Orleans, leaving 80% of the city underwater for weeks. More than 1,800 people were killed; others were stranded for days without food or drinking water in sweltering temperatures, producing searing images of a human catastrophe and government failure.
Since Katrina, the senator has fought back hard against the idea – expressed repeatedly since 2005 – that New Orleans and the other low-lying regions of her home state are unsustainable, and that the population should ultimately be moved to higher ground.
Instead, she argued today that a redesign of the infrastructure for water management be extended from Louisiana to other low-lying coastal areas at risk of hurricanes, such as parts of Florida and Georgia.
Dutch officials contacted Landrieu soon after Katrina, saying there were strong geographic parallels between Louisiana and Netherlands. Both are low-lying coastal areas. Both host major ports, and both have experienced devastating floods; the Netherlands lost 2,000 people in 1953.
More than a quarter of the Netherlands is below sea level; Louisiana is 16% water, with the land sliced up by lakes, bayous, canals and the Mississippi river.
The Netherlands, though smaller, has a far more extensive network of flood protections. Louisiana has about 2,200 miles of flood walls and control structures, while the Netherlands has about 1,860 miles of outer-sea dykes and 6,200 miles of river dykes and canal walls.
Flood control systems in the Netherlands are built to withstand storms of a severity seen once in 10,000 years; in the US the levees are built to stand up to storms of a severity anticipated once in a century.
Landrieu was accompanied by the chairman of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, who comes from the lower ninth ward of New Orleans, the worst affected area by the storm.
Landrieu declined to give an estimate of the costs involved of changing America's approach to water management. "It's going to be in the billions but we are spending billions now," she said. "My effort here is to spend it better and get a safe result."

Still high on Amsterdam trip, Landrieu promotes adoption of Dutch model (part one)
By Admin
Editor’s note: US Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has returned from leading a group tour of the Netherlands to explore the feasibility of adapting Dutch strategies to reduce flood risk in Louisiana. Mary’s post-trip comments suggest that she has decided to climb two political “Everests:” (1) promoting the adoption of the Dutch model for “saving” the Mississippi River delta; and (2) challenging the authority of the US Army Corps of Engineers to continue managing the Mississippi River and its delta. These related subjects both made my (two) typing fingers itch so I decided to write about them in serial fashion again (this is the first piece, which is much longer than normal but I couldn’t decide how to subdivide it).

Back from Holland, our "Little Dutch Girl" demonstrates a low tech solution to flood control!
First, I think that Mary deserves a hearty pat on the back for articulating the geopolitical analogies between Holland and Louisiana. These comparisons are not original but Mary’s words carry much more clout than mine - and probably yours!
Senator Landrieu has a strong record of support for restoring the Louisiana coast and it’s terrific to see her get fired up, devoting serious time and energy to coastal issues again. Thus, I sincerely celebrate her coastal enthusiasm. 
On the other hand, I’m concerned that some of Mary’s statements, if taken literally, may raise public expectations on the basis of optimism that isn’t tempered by realism. For example, promises to preserve and secure all of south Louisiana from future flooding are not grounded in credible science and they fail the “pollyanna sniff test.”
The goal of this piece is to critically review what has been written about Mary’s current vision. My impressions of her point of view were informed by: (1) a letter on the Dutch trip from the Landrieu office; (2) a recent first hand report on the trip by Steven Sabludowski in an essay published on June 2 in BayouBzz.com; (3) articles written by Richard Webster and Mark Schleifstein subsequent to a June 6 Landrieu press conference, published in CityBusiness and the Times-Picayune, respectively; and (4) a June 8 story by Evan Lehmann in EEnews.net, also based on the press conference (link doesn’t access full article).
Quotes from the underlined sources are shown in blue and my editorial comments are in red:
Landrieu letter:

Minister: strengere regels adoptie uit VS
Minister Hirsch Ballin wil regels doe-het-zelf-adoptie flink aanscherpen 
 

’Amerikanen kunnen wachten op gezond kind’
 
Mogen Nederlandse stellen baby’s blijven adopteren uit de Verenigde Staten? Over deze kwestie debatteert vandaag de Tweede Kamer.
De emoties lopen hoog op in het publieke debat over adoptie uit de Verenigde Staten. Minister Hirsch Ballin (justitie) wil de regels hiervoor flink aanscherpen, tot ongenoegen van onder meer de Nederlandse homobeweging. Die vreest dat het voor homostellen nauwelijks meer mogelijk is om een kind te adopteren, als de minister de deur naar Amerika inderdaad op een klein kiertje zet. Want andere landen accepteren geen adoptieouders van gelijk geslacht.
In de Tweede Kamer verdedigt Hirsch Ballin vandaag zijn standpunten, met het Haags Adoptieverdrag in de hand. Dat bepaalt onder meer dat de ondertekenaars hun best moeten doen om voor kinderen in eigen land een adoptie- of pleeggezin te zoeken. Interlandelijke adoptie wordt gezien als een laatste optie, voor kinderen die echt niet in eigen land kunnen worden ondergebracht.
Tot vorig jaar konden Nederlandse stellen alleen uit de Verenigde Staten adopteren via een doe-het-zelf-adoptie, in jargon ’deelbemiddeling’ geheten. Maar sinds de VS in mei 2008 ook het Haags Adoptieverdrag ratificeerden, mag deze vorm van adoptie niet meer van Hirsch Ballin. Hij wil deelbemiddeling sowieso verbieden, omdat die volgens hem niet goed te controleren valt.
De minister liet ook onderzoeken of Amerikaanse kinderen niet door Amerikaanse stellen kunnen worden geadopteerd. De uitkomst: zeer jonge kinderen kunnen ’zonder al te veel problemen’ een plek krijgen in een Amerikaans gezin, zo schreef hij afgelopen maandag in een brief aan de Kamer. Als er in het vervolg Amerikaanse adoptiekinderen naar Nederland komen, dan moeten dat volgens hem vooral kinderen van vijf jaar of ouder zijn, of kinderen die speciale zorg nodig hebben.
Om vooral homostellen tegemoet te komen, kondigde Hirsch Ballin in diezelfde brief twee nieuwe maatregelen aan. Momenteel is er één Nederlands adoptiebureau, Stichting Kind en Toekomst, dat adopties uit de Verenigde Staten regelt. Als het aan de minister ligt, komt er daarnaast nog een tweede bureau, dat zich gaat specialiseren in adopties door stellen van gelijk geslacht.
Bovendien mogen aspirant-ouders zelf contact zoeken met een van de zeventien goedgekeurde adoptieorganisaties in de Verenigde Staten. Dit lijkt een soort ’deelbemiddeling light’: hebben de aspirant-ouders dit contact eenmaal gelegd, dan dragen zij het over aan het Nederlandse adoptiebureau. Dat maakt er vervolgens een adoptie via volledige bemiddeling van.
Het is de vraag of Hirsch Ballin met deze maatregelen de voorvechters van de doe-het-zelf-adoptie tevreden stelt. In een gezamenlijke verklaring stellen de belangenvereniging van zelfdoeners in adoptie en homo-organisatie COC onder meer dat deelbemiddeling minstens even verantwoord en goed gecontroleerd is als de ’gewone’ adoptie via een Nederlands adoptiebureau. Ook bestrijden zij dat er voor baby’s genoeg Amerikaanse adoptieouders te vinden zijn. Vooral Afro-Amerikaanse kinderen zijn moeilijk te plaatsen in hun eigen land, zeggen zij.
Tegenstanders van deelbemiddeling hebben zich ook gemeld bij de Tweede Kamercommissie voor justitie. Onder hen zijn United Adoptees International, de organisatie van volwassen geadopteerden, Unicef, Cordaid en de Stichting Against Child Trafficking.
Zij onderstrepen, met de minister, het Haags Adoptieverdrag, waarin interlandelijke adoptie een laatste redmiddel wordt genoemd. Dat er voor zwarte kinderen geen Amerikaanse adoptieouders te vinden zouden zijn, valt volgens hen niet te rijmen met het feit dat Amerikanen zelf veel (ook zwarte) kinderen uit het buitenland adopteren.
© Trouw 2009, op dit artikel rust copyright.

GroenLinks wil behoud deelbemiddeling voor homo-paren
Datum nieuwsfeit: 11-06-2009

 
Vindplaats van dit bericht

 
Bron: GroenLinks

 
Printversie

 
Zoek soortgelijke berichten
--> 
 
 

Born in America, adopted abroad

By Dawn Davenport | Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor

Adrian Stokkeland, a 2-year-old in Canada, dances with his mom to the music of Elvis and sleeps with his most treasured possession, a box of toy cars. Emma Sonnenschein, an energetic 19-month-old in Germany, loves to "help" her mom around the house. Elisa van Meurs, a 5-year-old in the Netherlands, is a real girly-girl. Her favorite outfit is a Minnie Mouse dress, paired with a Snow White tiara and pink Barbie shoes.

NCFA Responds to Madonna Adoption Controversy

The real news behind the headlines is not that Madonna has finally been approved by a Malawian court to adopt an abandoned and orphaned child after months of delays, but that there are some groups of so-called child welfare advocates who openly and without a hint of shame fought to deny a little girl a family by insisting that she live the rest of her childhood in the deprivation of Malawai’s orphanage system. An orphanage is no place to live, and in fact, many children in orphanages never survive childhood. Those children fortunate enough to survive the disease, squalor, and loveless conditions of an orphanage emerge, as adults, completely unprepared for the challenges of life. Many become victims again to homelessness, the sex trade, and crime. The anti-intercountry adoption crowd argues that a child belongs in his country, surrounded by his or whole culture, while at the same time asking that more money be given so they may provide the child with minimal institutional care. But common sense dictates that a starving, dead, or traumatized individual has no opportunity to enjoy the benefits of his or her culture.

Given that fewer than 50,000 children find families through intercountry adoption each year, it is obvious that intercountry adoption is not the solution for the majority of the millions of orphaned children around the world. Thus, best practices dictate that every effort be made to preserve families and encourage domestic adoption worldwide. For thousands of children, however, intercountry adoption is a solution, and self-described child welfare advocates who argue otherwise are guilty of furthering their ideology at the expense of the very children they claim to represent.

Chuck Johnson

Chief Operating Officer and Vice President, Training and Agency Services