Revised 'acceptable term' in the Out-of-home placement guideline

If children are removed from home, then according to Dutch law it must be decided for each child within an 'acceptable period' where the child will definitely grow up. This term is further elaborated in the Out-of-home placement guideline. In practice, the wording of the directive sometimes leads to unbalanced decision-making. The three owners of the guideline, the professional associations NIP, NVO and BPSW, and the Netherlands Youth Institute (NJi) delete the current passages in the new version of the guideline, in which the acceptable term is specified.

The revision of this guideline has been in progress since the autumn of 2021. In this review, new insights on the various factors that influence 'the acceptable time frame' will be prioritized. In the meantime, it is important for the application of the directive not to strictly observe the time limits specified in the directive. Joint, careful decision-making is essential, which does justice to the specific situation of the child and the family.

Do not use fixed terms

In the guideline (and substantiation, work cards and information for parents) in various places time limits are mentioned within which decisions about out-of-home placement or back placement should take place. These terms are indicative, i.e. intended as an example. They are not universally applicable. We note that youth professionals apply these terms too strictly in practice. We can imagine that the firm wording of the relevant passages in the directive could lead to a misinterpretation.

Finally. The government's long-awaited position is here. The suspension is lifted. There will be 1 intermediary organization. More intensive cooperation with (possibly a limited number of) countries. Goal: even better guarantees. Relief prevails at ANW HQ. Of course there are still many questions and a lot will come to everyone in the near future. But the most important thing: new parents are becoming available for children for whom the biological parents cannot, do not want or are not allowed to care. And that's what we do: we help find parents for children

n

"Is adoption still of this time?" I read. Is war still of this time? Love sickness? Death? The maddening prose of progress of the time readers, who know exactly what time it is on the clock of world history. In the adoption case, a decision will be made today in The Hague about the 'intercountry adoption stop' that has been in effect since February 2021. Is it okay again, a little bit? Because adoption is no longer hip and happening, while in my time, well, I was adopted once.

That noble thing had to get rid of that kind of development cooperation, because those aspiring parents wanted children, and there was certainly an egocentric motive. But how the zeitgeist has changed: adoptive parents, especially of foreign children, are now robbers, imperialists, neo-colonialists, 'white saviors' and, if we go on and on, Putin supporters. How was it again? There are orphanages in distant countries that are full, there are Dutch people who would like to have a child, and that's how those parties were linked. We now know that a lot went wrong: orphans turned out not to be real orphans, papers were forged and the adopted child was sold over the counter. Sometimes.

This total, intercountry adoption by the state can be compared to an absolute ban on car traffic, given the many deaths. No one is allowed to drive a motorized vehicle anymore. Everyone for? No, because people drive cars and motorized, and adoption was and is an exception.

I just read on the NOS site: 'The surnames of Dirk Jan and Christiaan are known to the editors, but have been omitted at their request.' Dirk Jan and Christiaan are a couple, probably a gay couple, because the site mentions 'partner' and that's always right. The two are waiting for a baby from the United States, and they've been doing that for a long time now. These men have become more or less suspicious. D.J. and C. would have been even better, because the state-imposed adoption ban has made them half criminals, not people who want children.

I'm decency to do that for personal reasons, because I won't posthumously say that about my parents.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a petition seeking simplification in the process of adoption in India.The matter was listed before the be

bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant. The PIL was filed by a charitable trust "The Temple of Healing" through its secretary Dr. Piyush

Saxena.When the matter was called for hearing, Dr Piyush Saxena, appearing as petitioner- in-...

After an adoption stop of a year, children from abroad will soon be allowed to be adopted again under strict conditions. A great relief for Dirk Jan and his husband Christiaan, who have been working on adoption for years. "A lot is still unclear about the new rules, but we hope that we can decorate our children's room soon."

The attic of Dirk Jan (33) and Christiaan (35) has been waiting for years to be transformed into a children's room. "We have already completed the courses and medical examination. Last year we were about to get the green light so that we can be considered for adoption," says Dirk Jan (full name is known to the editors).

But then came that damning report on the adoption system. Due to the abuses, an adoption stop for foreign adoptions was immediately introduced.

Stricter conditions

The procedures for adoptions from abroad will resume in the coming months. However, stricter conditions will be introduced and mediation will be in the hands of a single government organisation. Minister Franc Weerwind (Legal Protection) announced this today.

Adoption of children from abroad is possible again. A new mediation organization to be set up must ensure that corruption, child trafficking and fraud are eradicated. Moreover, it is always necessary to first look for suitable reception in the country of origin.

Franc Weerwind, Minister for Legal Protection, writes this in a letter to the House. As long as care in one's own environment is not possible, adoption to the Netherlands will remain an option if this is beneficial to the child. Weerwind has decided this after discussions with those involved. The minister is going to flesh out the system even more specifically.

After the damning report of the Joustra Commission, an investigation into abuses in adoptions from 1967 to 1998, all intercountry adoptions were suspended in February 2021. The committee doubted whether an alternative system was possible. Now that a new, centralized system is being set up, experts are wondering: how will the government ensure that abuses are eradicated?

“Adoptees are told to just be grateful that we were chosen. And yet so many of us are struggling.”

When Alé Cardinalle first met her biological mother and siblings, she was surprised by how familiar their love felt. Born in Brazil, Cardinalle was adopted by a New Jersey couple when she was an infant. On the eve of her 28th birthday, Cardinalle found and contacted her birth mother on Facebook, and the two women arranged a reunion in Brazil.

The flight to Brazil tested Cardinalle’s nerves. She was traveling thousands of miles to visit a home full of strangers in a country she did not remember. “But my mother pulled me into her house and pulled me onto her couch and into her lap, even though I was probably almost twice her size,” Cardinalle tells Teen Vogue, laughing. “She looked at my fingers and looked at my toes and, like, it was just so primal to me. Like how you would look at your baby.”

More family members poured into the living room, half-siblings, and a stepfather who all greeted Cardinalle breathlessly between hugs. “It was just such an abundance of love,” she recalls.

Later, Cardinalle asked the question that had burdened her for entire adult life: Why did her birth mother choose adoption?

On April 11, the Dutch government published its position and decision memorandum with various annexes ( more information here ). On April 12, Stichting Wereldkinderen, together with the other permit holders, spoke with the Ministry of Justice and Security. Stichting Wereldkinderen is happy and relieved that the Dutch government indicates in these documents that intercountry adoption will remain possible in the Netherlands in the future.

In the interest of the child, it is the hope of the World Children's Foundation that the Dutch government will quickly provide clarity regarding the resumption of granting permissions in principle, as indicated in the letter to the House of Representatives. That there will soon be more clarity with regard to the various proposals to change the current system. Without further details and planning, there remains a great deal of uncertainty for all involved.

The minister states in his letter that one thing is certain: 'the past does not equal the present and the system of intercountry adoption has improved in recent decades.' Stichting Wereldkinderen is happy to contribute to possible further improvements. The proposals in the letter and accompanying documents are a possible first step in the right direction. Whether the direction as now set out by the minister will lead to improvements compared to the current system will have to be shown from the as yet unknown details.

Stichting Wereldkinderen is pleased that there is more clarity and we would like to thank the minister for this. For questions, the Ministry of Justice and Security has compiled a 'FAQ' with telephone numbers. The official press release can be found here .

.

“Adoptees are told to just be grateful that we were chosen. And yet so many of us are struggling.”

When Alé Cardinalle first met her biological mother and siblings, she was surprised by how familiar their love felt. Born in Brazil, Cardinalle was adopted by a New Jersey couple when she was an infant. On the eve of her 28th birthday, Cardinalle found and contacted her birth mother on Facebook, and the two women arranged a reunion in Brazil.

The flight to Brazil tested Cardinalle’s nerves. She was traveling thousands of miles to visit a home full of strangers in a country she did not remember. “But my mother pulled me into her house and pulled me onto her couch and into her lap, even though I was probably almost twice her size,” Cardinalle tells Teen Vogue, laughing. “She looked at my fingers and looked at my toes and, like, it was just so primal to me. Like how you would look at your baby.”

More family members poured into the living room, half-siblings, and a stepfather who all greeted Cardinalle breathlessly between hugs. “It was just such an abundance of love,” she recalls.

Later, Cardinalle asked the question that had burdened her for entire adult life: Why did her birth mother choose adoption?

By Elvira Loibl

Introduction

The case concerned the decision by the Norwegian authorities to allow the adoption of a child by a ‘Norwegian Christian’ foster family against the wishes of his mother, a Muslim Somali refugee. The judgment seems to reflect the new Zeitgeist regarding adoptions, which came to be viewed more critically within the past couple of years. This is due to the serious abuses and human rights violations that have been uncovered in past adoptions as well as the fact that adoptions are highly invasive as they cut the child off from his family and culture of origin. The judgment of the ECtHR’s Grand Chamber in Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway strengthens the position of parents, whose children have been removed, and whose interests traditionally played a minor role in the welfare systems. It further emphasises the importance of the child to maintain ties with their family and their cultural and religious origins.

Facts

The case concerns a Somali woman who immigrated to Norway in 2010 as a single underage mother with her one-year old son where she was granted asylum status. In order to be assisted in caring for her child, the applicant had stayed at a parent-child-centre, which notified the child welfare services that it considered the applicant’s child to be at risk. The child welfare services issued a care order regarding the applicant’s son, arguing that the case clearly involved gross physical and emotional neglect. The child was subsequently placed with ethnically Norwegian foster parents, who were active Christians, even though the applicant had requested that her child should be cared for by her cousin or a Somali or a Muslim family. The Country Social Welfare Board, however, had claimed that it could not find a foster family with a more similar cultural background and that it considered it more important that a placement was chosen on the basis of the child’s need for stability. For three and a half years, the applicant was allowed very limited contact with her son.