Eight adoptees sued the State for negligence in their adoption from Sri Lanka in the 1980s. They argue that the government did not intervene even though it should have known about the many abuses. The adoptees want the government to recognize this negligence and reimburse the costs they incurred to trace their origins.

"We want the judge to determine that the government is liable for the damage suffered by these eight people," says lawyer Mark de Hek, who started the legal proceedings on behalf of the victims. The hope is that there will also be justice for other adoptees in a similar situation.

Child theft and baby farming

It has been known for decades that many things went wrong with adoptions from Sri Lanka. The first signals date from 1979. Since then, stories have regularly emerged about incorrect files, baby theft, so-called baby farms and human trafficking. In 1987, a Sri Lankan study found that the vast majority of adoptions were illegal.

The fact that the Dutch state was repeatedly informed of abuses from Sri Lanka from the early 1980s was evident from the report of the Joustra committee in 2021. At the request of the government, that committee investigated the role of the Netherlands in international adoption. The abuses included baby farming and child theft. According to the committee, the Netherlands did not intervene and the government did not come up with solutions.

The children welcomed by “Village of Peace and Love” were transferred to other centers, a senior judicial source told L’Orient-Le Jour .

Human trafficking, sexual assault, initiation into drugs and alcohol: an association responsible for caring for children exposed to danger or abandoned by their parents, "Village of Peace and Love", located in Mansouriyé in the Metn, was closed and sealed by Joëlle Abou Haïdar, single criminal judge ruling on minors' cases in Mount Lebanon. 

The magistrate's decision, published Friday and consulted by L'Orient-Le Jour , was taken after observing several "flagrant violations" allegedly committed by the NGO against the children it welcomes. According to the judge's decision, the director of the association is accused of "complicity and participation in a criminal act" for not having informed the court that a man, a member of the association, "sexually harassed two minors, forced them to have sex with him, take drugs and masturbate.” One of the girls even admitted in court that she wanted to die because she could not be in a relationship with the man since he is married.

Justice also accuses the director of the NGO of having taken minors to nightclubs and allowing them to consume alcohol. One of the teenagers, drunk, then attempted suicide. The director also allegedly threatened the children with prison if they informed the court of the practices carried out within the association, and would have verbally attacked them. Minors were also allegedly brought by the person in charge to her home and forced to do the cleaning. The text finally denounces the fact that the NGO does not take “physical, psychological and health security” measures.

Personal profits
In addition to these accusations, the association is also singled out for human trafficking, after having children adopted for financial remuneration. “We open this type of association under the guise of charity but in reality it is mainly to make personal profits,” criticizes a senior judicial source at L’Orient-Le Jour. "The leaders of these associations collect funds from NGOs, they barely spend for the good of the children and pocket the rest of the money", regrets this source, who accuses the association of having "monetized an adoption for several thousand dollars" and falsified papers (including a birth certificate) to make it appear that the child was the family's biological son, in order to facilitate the procedure. A second similar case was going to occur but was finally discovered in time, she continues.

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday took up an interesting question concerning Hindus: Would an illegitimate child born out of a void or voidable marriage be entitled to the property of parents or have coparcenary right over the properties belonging to a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)?
As some of the contesting counsel veered towards a consensus that under Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 a child born to a void or voidable marriage would be entitled to an equal share with children born to the legitimate wife/husband from the parent’s property, some others propped a doubt as to whether that property would include the self-acquired property of the parent or the inherited ancestral property. Arguments plumbed the depths of existing jurisprudence and threw up several hitherto judicially unattended nuances emerging from Section 16, which provided a clarification to the property right of an illegitimate child and limited it to parental property. Only clarification given by Section 16(3) is that such a child would have no rights over properties of other members of a HUF.
 

This was explained by some counsel as a bar on the right of an illegitimate child over the properties held under HUF, where every child born to valid marriages within the undivided family is entitled to a share of jointly-owned property the moment he/she takes birth.
Even after day-long engrossing arguments, when a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra intended to reserve the verdict, several counsels desired to place their submissions on this issue, forcing the court to schedule further hearing on Thursday. The genesis of the issue was from a trial court in Karnataka, which in 2005 ruled that children born of illegitimate marriage had no coparcenary rights over ancestral properties of parents. A district judge reversed the trial court’s view.

However, the Karnataka HC ruled that “Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act makes it clear that illegitimate children only had the right to the property of their parents and no one else. It said that once the HUF/ancestral property is divided on the death of the parent, the illegitimate child can have share in the portion of property that accrued to his/her parent, but with a caveat that such a right would emanate only if such parent died without a will”. When the Karnataka HC’s ruling was challenged before the SC, a two-judge bench had on March 31, 2011 referred it to a three-judge bench and framed the question—whether illegitimate children are entitled to a share in the coparcenary property or whether their share is limited only to the self-acquired property of their parents under Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act?
In 2011, the bench had said, “The court must remember that relationship between the parents may not be sanctioned by law but the birth of a child in such a relationship must be viewed independently of the relationship of the parents. A child born in such a relationship is is entitled to all the rights which are given to other children born in a valid marriage. This is the crux of the amendment in Section 16(3).”

Deborah was brought to the Netherlands from Sri Lanka together with her twin brother. At least, that was the story. At the age of fifteen, she discovers that her alleged twin brother is not related to her at all. The real twin sister was too sick to fly, so two very young children were hastily swapped.

Deborah's fight to put this right appears to finally be coming to an end this summer. 

By Jeroen Pen

Deborah Hageman was adopted in 1985 and left Sri Lanka for the Netherlands. She is one of many: thousands of fellow sufferers travel the same route. The demand for adopted children rose to a record high at the end of the last century. There is a lot of money to be made from Sri Lankan babies and toddlers, so the supply should not lag behind. In a short time, an industry is created in which shrewd and malicious intermediaries call the shots. There is widespread tampering and fraud with birth data and adoption documents. Blinded by their desire to have children, Dutch adoptive parents turn a blind eye, or worse.

Something continues to gnaw at them, they are still too young to put their finger on it, but many of them feel that their adoption story is not right. Once the adopted children become teenagers, adolescents and adults, they start exploring. With often drastic consequences.

In a shocking incident reported from India’s eastern state of West Bengal, a couple sold their eight-month-old baby for 200,000 Indian rupees or $2,400. The bizarre development is said to be from the state’s North 24 Parganas district.

A police investigation is going on, and the child’s mother, named Sathi, has already been arrested. However, the father of the baby, named Jaydev, is absconding.

How did they get caught?

Interestingly, it was the couple’s neighbours who sounded the alarm. Their neighbours in the Panihati Gandhinagar area grew suspicious after they noted the child’s absence and the sudden change in the couple’s behaviour.

A six-year-old boy's life was permanently changed in a wonderful and emotional moment as he happily welcomed the news of his adoption. The poignant scenario portrayed the joy and pleasure of finding a permanent family. Finding a loving and permanent family remains a pipe dream for many foster children. However, that goal became a reality for one young kid, bringing joy and smiles to all who watched the poignant scene. 

This is the best reaction to being adopted you'll ever see. 

Harvey, six, of Smithfield, North Carolina, had been with his foster parents, Brian and Megan Raby, since he was two. Harvey's happiest place was, without a doubt, their home. However, like any foster child, he had an unspoken desire to know he had a permanent family. 

Fortunately, his foster parents shared his feelings towards Harvey. As a result, they secretly agreed to adopt him. They informed him of the wonderful news after it was official, and his reaction was amazing!

Humankind's Facebook page has shared the video, which is surely a watch for everyone. The clip is captioned by saying, 'When you come home, you come home. A foster child is overjoyed to learn that he has been adopted.'
 

Debra Lynn Murphy-Scheumann, 66, of Spring Hill, passed away on October 20, 2020 at the University of Kansas Medical Center.

She was born on July 27, 1954 to Kenneth and Beverly (Shaffer) Murphy in Newton, Iowa. She was the second child born into the family. As a child she was raised with her family around Dike, Iowa, where she received her high school diploma. She would later receive a Bachelor and Master’s Degree from the University of Northern Iowa. Debra held many hats during her working years and all those occupations included helping others. She was a nurse, magistrate, social worker, professor, director of several non-profit organizations and eventually founded a non-profit organization called Special Additions, Inc. Debra truly had a heart of gold and loved children and wanted all children to have a family. In September of 1993 she opened Special Additions, an adoption agency that specialized in special needs and international adoptions. During her time at Special Additions, Debra served as Executive Director and placed over 850 children in forever homes. She also served on a National Board where she would travel to Washington, DC to advocate for the children. She opened children’s homes in Romania (Deb’s House) and Moldova. In September of 2001, she received the Angel in Adoption Award which meant the world to her. Debra and her husband Brent were also foster parents to many children over a 20 year time span.

Debra married Brent Scheuman on June 4, 1983. Debra’s family meant the world to her and it is evident that she instilled the importance of family in her own family.

Debra leaves behind her loving husband, Brent; 4 daughters, Guri (Samuel) Sanders, Charity (Jeff) Bennett, Allison Scheumann, and Georgianna Pahon; 7 sons, Shannon (Brianna) Morrow, Joshua (Julie) Morrow, Austin Scheumann, Alex Scheumann, Derek Scheumann, Kyle Scheumann and Lukas Scheumann; loving mother; Beverly Murphy; one sister, Pamela (Gary) Stumberg; one brother, Kent (Vicki) Murphy; 2 brother-in-laws, Todd (Traci) Scheumann and Brian Scheumann; 13 grandchildren, Josh, Kirsten, Audrey, Nathan and Sydney Bennett; Erik, Gabe, Leo Sanders; Addison, Caden and Brynley Morrow; Brody and Landen Morrow; and so many more family and friends.

Deb is preceded in death by her loving father, Kenneth Murphy and her grandparents Lester and Bertine Shaffer and Loren and Gladys Murphy.

A memorial service will be held for the family on November 6th at Lord of Life Lutheran Church in Leawood, Kansas.

A celebration of life will be held on November 7th from 2:00-7:00 pm at Lord of Life Lutheran Church in Leawood, Kansas. This will be open to the public.

In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to contribute to a memorial bench at the Overland Park Arboretum for family and friends to remember Debra. In addition, additional monies will be donated to TLC, a foster care organization that Brent and Deb used to help many foster children. Please send any memorials to Brent Scheumann 19712 Norton St., Spring Hill KS 66083-8448, or:
PayPal: DebMemorialFund@hotmail.com
Venmo: @Brent-Scheumann



To leave a special message for Deb's family, press the "Share Memories" button above.


 

Penwell-Gabel - Funeral Home (913-768-6777) is assisting the family

Hello, Issue 12/ June 2023 IACN QUARTERLY Catch up on the latest updates on webinars, trainings and conferences from our network Updates from the Field Learnings and experience shared by our fellow members Events and Announcements + Role of Master Trainers in Transforming Family-Based Alternative Care in India | Minu Kumari, DCPU, Purnea District, Bihar Voices from the Field Strengthening Communities, Preventing Family Separation | Anita Sinha, Child in Need Institute Railway Children India’s Early Gatekeeping Efforts | Lopamudra Mullick, Railway Children India Case Study: Aftercare Group Homes at Snehalaya | Joyce Connolly, Snehalaya Kinship Care to Ensure Safe Childhood in Gujarat- Meenal’s Story | Shilpa Vaishnav, Samvedna Trust, Hemalee Leuva and Muhammed Afsal.K.K, UNICEF, Gujarat Family-based Care Solutions through Foster Care | Dr. Shilpa Mehta, Devashish Mishra and Shivani Singhvi, Foster Care Society Bal Panchayat (Children's Parliament): The Journey of Child Participation in the Community-Level Prevention Project in Gujarat | Sonal Chauhan and Geeta Desai, Miracle Foundation India Ensuring Child Participation: Assessment Tool for Children in Residential Care | Gurneet K. Kalra, Udayan Care Faith for Children - Stories of Inspiration from Tamil Nadu | Changing the Way We Care Team, Catholic Relief Services Webinar: Gatekeeping as a Systematic Process: Preventing Child’s Separation |IACN andMiracle Foundation India Advancing Family Strengthening and Family-Based Alternative Care: Key Outcomes of the Deliberation Meeting with Stakeholders| Miracle Foundation India Graduation and Induction Event - Learning in Fellowship Together | Udayan Care 5th Biennial International Conference on Alternative Care for Children in Asia (BICON) | Udayan Care UNICEF/UN0377847 PHOTO CREDITS: RAILWAY CHILDREN INDIA Assessment of Strategies to Develop Resilience in Children in a Residential Child Care Model of India ‘Kinship Care in India- A Case Study Documentation Dear Colleagues, We are happy to bring to you the 12th issue of the IACN Quarterly. It covers a range of family-based care interventions focused on facilitating the participation of children and strengthening gatekeeping mechanisms in the rural and urban contexts. Another write-up highlights work with faith-based organisations in protecting children and improving outcomes for families in need. The case studies demonstrate the effective implementation of non-institutional forms of alternative care, such as kinship care, foster care and aftercare in rehabilitating children without parental ties. The issue also brings out the role of Master Trainers in transforming family-based alternative care in India. Please check the Events and Announcements section to read about the webinar organised by IACN and Miracle Foundation India on Gatekeeping as a Systematic Process and important upcoming events. We appreciate everyone who helped make this newsletter edition possible. If you wish to share resources or information for the IACN website or quarterly or would like to discuss any issues of mutual concern, please reach out to us at iacnsecretariat@iacn.in. We look forward to your continued support. Sincerly, IACN Secretariat

(Key Findings at a Glance)

Report : India

Submitted to :
National Commission for
Protection of Child Rights,
th 5 Floor, Chanderlok Building,
36, Janpath,
New Delhi – 110001

It seems clear that adoption law reform won’t be a priority before the October general election. This will be bitterly disappointing for many New Zealanders.

Despite some significant progress, the Ministry of Justice has revised its timeline for delivering final proposals from the first half of this year to “in due course”. This means there is still no clear end in sight to what has already been a prolonged and frustrating process.

Most importantly, those touched by adoption – including extended families – continue to feel the enduring effects of the antiquated and outmoded Adoption Act 1955.

At the heart of the need for reform lies the “closed” form of adoption the law introduced. This has meant those adopted between 1955 and 1985 were prohibited from knowing their biological parents and family.

It wasn’t until the passing of the Adult Adoption Information Act in 1985 that adopted people (aged 20 or above) gained the right to seek identifying information about their biological parents.