KUALA LUMPUR, June 4 — The High Court in Sibu, Sarawak has recently decided that the government should remove “bin Abdullah” from the official records of the name of a child adopted in Sarawak, in consideration of the child’s best interests and in line with the adoptive Muslim parents’ wishes and request.

In the April 6 written judgment sighted by Malay Mail, High Court judicial commissioner Christopher Chin Soo Yin ordered that this child “should be named as intended by his parents”.

The judge ordered the Sibu district officer and the National Registration Department to amend the name of the child in the special register (or the official records of adoptions in Sarawak), certificate of adoption, birth certificate, by removing “bin Abdullah” from his name “in accordance to the wishes of his parents”.

In the interests of the child and for privacy reasons, Malay Mail is withholding the names of the adoptive parents as well as the adopted child. For ease of reference, the adoptive father and adoptive mother are referred to as A and B, while the child is referred to as C.

The judge’s order was for the child’s name in official government records to be changed from C A bin Abdullah to just C A without “bin Abdullah”.

Vragen over adoptie van omgekomen, Hongaars meisje

Door

Roelie Post

-

4 juni 2021

Born in Ethiopia, they were adopted like thousands of other Ethiopian children. Torn from their family by a malicious association, they landed in French families who wanted to adopt. Now adults, they have been able to reconnect with their Ethiopian family.

These are stories marked by lies and concealment, where symbolic and physical violence mingle and entangle, split, troubled and broken identities. They were born in Ethiopia but were taken from their families, adopted through a Catholic association, the Children of Queen of Mercy.

Samuel is one of them . He arrived in France in 1996 with his two sisters. He remembers little of his biological parents, who died as a child. Before his adoption via the Children of the Queen of Mercy, he was placed in an orphanage.

I was not prepared for a departure for France. We were cleaned like cars to make us presentable.

When he meets his adoptive parents, very practicing Catholics, Samuel remains in the dark. With his two sisters, he arrived in Limousin in a family of six children, two of whom were adopted.

The government should as soon as possible investigate how Swedish authorities and adoption organizations have handled international adoptions to Sweden from the middle of the 20th century until today. This is the opinion of the Social Affairs Committee, which proposes that the Riksdag send an announcement, an invitation, to the Government about this. The Social Democrats and the Green Party have reservations about the proposal.

It has been three years since suspected irregularities in connection with adoptions from Chile were first noticed by the news media in Sweden. In Chile, a criminal investigation is underway into the abduction of children and irregularities in adoption.

Clarification of whether the adoption agency is needed

The Social Affairs Committee believes that the government should ensure that the adoption agency has functioned in Sweden. According to the committee, there is a need for an investigation of international adoptions to Sweden from, among other places, Chile since the middle of the 20th century until today. Such an investigation should also have an impact on how the work with international adoptions is conducted in the future.

The government should appoint an inquiry as soon as possible

Melbourne-born man Russell Moore has died in a US prison following a three-decade fight to be returned to Australia.

Moore, also known by his adoptive name James Hudson Savage, died at Apalachee Correctional Institution in Florida on June 2.

Russell Moore died in Florida on June 2.

Russell Moore died in Florida on June 2.CREDIT:DANIELLE SMITH

His US lawyer Richard Bourke, who spent decades working to help return Moore to his birth country, said the 58-year-old had a medical emergency.

Shyanne Klupp was 20 years old and homeless when she met her boyfriend in 2009. Within weeks, the two had married, and within months, she was pregnant. “I was so excited,” says Klupp. Soon, however, she learned that her new husband was facing serious jail time, and she reluctantly agreed to start looking into how to place their expected child for adoption. The couple called one of the first results that Google spat out: Adoption Network Law Center (ANLC).

Klupp says her initial conversations with ANLC went well; the adoption counselor seemed kind and caring and made her and her husband feel comfortable choosing adoption. ANLC quickly sent them packets of paperwork to fill out, which included questions ranging from personal-health and substance-abuse history to how much money the couple would need for expenses during the pregnancy.

Klupp and her husband entered in the essentials: gas money, food, blankets and the like. She remembers thinking, “I’m not trying to sell my baby.” But ANLC, she says, pointed out that the prospective adoptive parents were rich. “That’s not enough,” Klupp recalls her counselor telling her. “You can ask for more.” So the couple added maternity clothes, a new set of tires, and money for her husband’s prison commissary account, Klupp says. Then, in January 2010, she signed the initial legal paperwork for adoption, with the option to revoke. (In the U.S., an expectant mother has the right to change her mind anytime before birth, and after for a period that varies state by state. While a 2019 bill proposing an explicit federal ban of the sale of children failed in Congress, many states have such statutes and the practice is generally considered unlawful throughout the country.)

Klupp says she had recurring doubts about her decision. But when she called her ANLC counselor to ask whether keeping the child was an option, she says, “they made me feel like, if I backed out, then the adoptive parents were going to come after me for all the money that they had spent.” That would have been thousands of dollars. In shock, Klupp says, she hung up and never broached the subject again. The counselor, who no longer works with the company, denies telling Klupp she would have to pay back any such expense money. But Klupp’s then roommates—she had found housing at this point—both recall her being distraught over the prospect of legal action if she didn’t follow through with the adoption. She says she wasn’t aware that an attorney, whose services were paid for by the adoptive parents, represented her.

“I will never forget the way my heart sank,” says Klupp. “You have to buy your own baby back almost.” Seeing no viable alternative, she ended up placing her son, and hasn’t seen him since he left the hospital 11 years ago.

Demand outpaces supply in the private adoption world. As a result, middlemen can make huge profits, often with little oversight.

VIDEO

https://www.newsy.com/stories/the-profits-and-problems-with-private-adoption/

H.E Mr. Simon Mordue, Chief Foreign Policy Advisor to the President of the European Union Council, met with H.E Mr. Abdulrahman bin Mohammed Al-Khulaifi, Ambassador of the State of Qatar to the Kingdom of Belgium and Head of Mission of the State of Qatar to the European Union and NATO.

During the meeting, they reviewed the cooperation relations between the State of Qatar and the European Union, developments in the Middle East and the Iranian nuclear file.

.

Between 1994-2001, 26,293 children were adopted, of which 15,112 (57.5%) were adopted internationally

In 2015, Romania still had 4,060 adoptable children

In 2018, Romania had 50,608 children in the special protection system, of which only 3,123 children were adoptable

Marion Le Roy Dagen is 45 years old and has been living in France since she was six, when she was adopted. Since the early 1990s, he has come to Romania several times to help the country's orphans. And since 2014 he has been trying to help those adopted by families abroad.

She co-founded, together with two other women, the Romanian Orphans Association. I receive hundreds of requests, from all over the world, to help adopted children in Romania to find their families of origin. The chances are extremely small.

The Hague, 02 June 2021

Donor children and their mothers who litigate about the disclosure of the identity of their sperm donor are largely in the right by the court in The Hague. The donor data foundation for artificial insemination (SDKB) and the clinic must assess whether the donor's reasons for wishing to remain anonymous are compelling enough. If not, they must disclose the donor's identity to the children. The court therefore does not rule that that identity should already be disclosed.

Donor identity

The children were born after artificial inseminations in the years 1997-2000. During this time, seed donations were usually made anonymously. However, the mothers consciously opted for the sperm of a donor who had agreed with the clinic that his identity would be allowed to be disclosed. Later he was only allowed to refrain from doing so if there were serious reasons for doing so.

Artificial Fertilization Donor Data Act