Resources Authority (CARA) and District Women and Child Welfare Committee busted a racket of human-trafficking in which a homoeopathic doctor was allegedly involved in selling newborn babies at a hospital, following a raid in Ichalkaranji, Kolhapur, on Tuesday. He confessed to selling a new-born to a couple in Mumbai.

A case has been filed against him, his wife and the couple who adopted the baby, police said. Police said the couple will be arrested after interrogation. The doctor, Arun Patil, confessed to selling two babies in three months. He said he charged Rs 2 lakh for a baby.

Priyadarshini Chorage, district head of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), who was part of the team that conducted the raid at General Surgical and Maternity Hospital, said they received information from CARA officials about the illegal activities on Monday. "When we entered the hospital and asked Patil about the racket, he confessed. He claimed he was doing it in the interest of society and it was for free. He used to facilitate deliveries for unmarried women and would then sell the babies. He used to hand over the money received to the mother."

graph13

"He confessed to selling a four-day-old baby to a family in Chhattisgarh on December 23, 2017. The baby, born to a minor, was sold for Rs 2 lakh," she said. He also confessed to selling a newborn to a couple in Mumbai but has not revealed the details, she added.

An adopted child is a legal heir of a parent, the Madras High Court has said. The adopted child must get all rights like a biological child, the court also said. Justice K Ravichandrabaabu gave the ruling while allowing a petition from M G Mamtha and her adopted daughter C Soundarya challenging the rejection of their application for grant of legal heir certificate by a revenue department official. The judge directed the tehsildar of Dhenkanikottai in Krishnagiri district to issue the legal heir certificate to them which they had applied after the death of Mamtha's husband and adoptive father of Soundarya last year. The tehsildar had rejected the application on the ground that the second respondent being an adopted daughter cannot be considered as Class I heir as per the Hindu Succession Act. Mamtha and her husband S Chandrasekar had adopted Soundarya, daughter of the former's brother, in 1987 as per the family's custom and a deed of adoption was entered into on November 24, 1994. The judge said a perusal of the Hindu Succession Act and the decision of the Supreme Court would show without any ambiguity that an adopted child, from the date of the legal adoption, becomes the child of adoptive father or mother for all purposes. It should be borne in mind that such adopted child is the child of the adoptive family by legal creation, which confers all rights on the adopted child as a biological child.Soundarya becomes the Class I heir of the deceased and thus, entitled to get her name also included in the heirship certificate, he said, directing issuance of the document.

Read more at: https://www.oneindia.com/india/adopted-and-biological-children-have-similar-rights-madras-hc-2636396.html

Srinagar, Feb 06: Two of the three babies abandoned at the Lal Ded (LD) Hospital here last month have finally been adopted.

In January, two girls and a boy were found in the premises of the hospital.

Since then, the hospital staff has been taking care of them.

A senior official, requesting not to be quoted by name, told The Kashmir Monitor that the boy and a girl were adopted by two childless couples.

“It’s nice to see childless parents coming forward and adopting the babies. Although the boy is still with us, the girl has been taken by her new parents,” the official revealed.

Mumbai,abandoned children,Bombay high court

The judges were surprised to note that absolutely no attempts were made to trace the biological father of the girl, after her mother failed to report back(FILE)

The Bombay high court on Wednesday said child welfare committees must attempt to trace biological parents of abandoned children before declaring them free for adoption.

“With the advancement in technology, it is not difficult today to trace a person,” said a bench of justice Naresh Patil and justice Nitin Sambre. The bench was hearing plea filed by a city couple seeking direction to the child welfare committee (CWC) of Mumbai suburban district to declare a child put in their foster care free for adoption.

The couple, which wishes to adopt the two-and-half-year-old girl, approached the high court after finding the CWC was reluctant to declare the child free for adoption. The CWC has placed the girl in foster care of the petitioner couple ever since she has been surrendered by her biological mother.

ALSO READ

Suggest ways to restrict No. of vehicles in Mumbai: HC to govt

Decks cleared to acquire land for new prison in Mumbai: Maha

Act against developers not returning part of redeveloped

Use satellite mapping to monitor, protect wetlands: Bombay HC

COIMBATORE: An HIV positive mother has abandoned her 38 days old baby boy at a private orphanage located at Ramanathapuram here. The baby was handed over to the Coimbatore Medical College and Hospital (CMCH) on Wednesday. Doctors there said the child was healthy.

Resident medical officer, CMCH, Soundaravel said they were yet to ascertain if the baby was HIV positive. "We will conduct the tests soon. After that, the baby will be handed over to the child welfare committee. But, we will treat and monitor the child for 18 months. Another set of tests will be conducted then to ascertain if the baby has contracted the disease," he said.

According to Soundaravel, as many as 12 babies were abandoned in the city last year. "They were admitted to Don Bosco Anbu Illam and almost all of them are getting education in government and corporation schools. In 2016, 11 babies had been abandoned," he said and added the cases of HIV positive mothers abandoning their babies were not common in the city.

R Riyaz of orphanage Mercy Home said that the 22-year-old woman had given birth to the child in Theni. Her husband left her as she had been travelling to various cities and staying in orphanages. "Childline sent the woman and the baby to Mercy Home on January 20. On 28, she left the home saying she wanted to visit her family in Pollachi. As she did not return, we informed officials and handed over the baby to the CMCH," Riyaz said.

He said the stigma of HIV was still persistent in the society. "Even rich families abandon children. We have 30 children aged between 5 and 21 in our home. Four months ago, we helped a woman and man, both HIV positive, to get married. They are planning a baby as well. Now there is treatment to ensure HIV negative child for such couple," Riyaz said.

(Google Translation)

Children adopted from Chile may have been taken without the mothers consent. See how it's been here. Photo: Chilevision / Wikimedia Commons

Sweden at the center of illegal adoptions with Chilean children

Many of the children adopted from Chile to Sweden during the 70's and 80's may have been taken from their mothers without their consent. It shows a review that Chilean journalists have done in cooperation with SVT. A former head of the Chilean child welfare authority SENAME claims that an unknown number of children were exposed to trafficking in human beings.

It was during the years 1971 to 1992, thus largely during the Pinochet dictatorship, as more than 2,000 children were adopted from Chile to Swedish couples. Over the years, these adoptions have been questioned and there have been previously information that many of them were not entitled to many mothers to take care of the children by means of various persuasive campaigns - and sometimes in kidnapping-like forms.

January 30, 2018. Why UNICEF's Views Are Wrong. We have been asked to comment on UNICEF's anti-international adoption position. UNICEF takes the view that, according to its charter and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), it would rather a child have the chance to have a safe and healthy childhood with his or her own family and, in any event, remain in his or her country of origin. The first problem with this statement is that UNICEF interprets these words as meaning that in-country institutional care is preferable to international adoption. We do not. UNICEF has promoted "Permanency." Permanency is a concept which translates into permanent, in-country foster care or group homes. We believe that children are best served by permanent, loving families, where ever they may be found. But UNICEF's solution suits many stakeholders because UNICEF backs up its ideology with money--especially money for group homes. As they used to say in Britain, "jobs for the boys." But the children are the losers.

The second problem is that many countries of origin do not view children from minority groups, such as Roma or indigenous people, as part of their national group. This disparity leads to UNICEF, on the one hand condemning international adoption, and on the other, decrying the treatment of Roma or indigenous people. The children are caught in the middle and get nothing.

Finally, on international adoption, UNICEF references its charter, the Declaration of Human Rights and the UNCRC. Two comments. After the UNCRC was passed, most countries signed and ratified the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption (the "Hague") which, as a legal matter, supersedes the UNCRC. UNICEF avoids referencing the Hague because the Hague supports international adoption over intercountry institutional care. The CRC (arguably) does not.

A further issue with human rights treaties. The various enumerated children's rights do not include the right to family. This problem arose from the drafting of the first of the post-war human rights conventions, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (1948), and persists to this day. The Declaration was written in the shadow of the German Lebensborn program which saw more than 250,000 children from Eastern Europe kidnapped and taken to Germany to be raised as Aryan German children. The 1948 Declaration condemned this action by stating that every child is entitled to his/her nationality. But the Declaration did not include a child's right to a family because in the context of the Lebensborn program, kidnapped children had two families--their birth families and the German ones they were given. By omitting the right to a family, the 1948 Declaration created the negative precedent which then gets embraced in the UNCRC. We have been working to plug this hole for years. We are still trying.

.

Why is Maneka Gandhi, the minister of women and child development, determined to shift the process of adoption of children out of the domain of the courts and place it under the control of an executive magistrate (district collector)?

Adoption, as defined in Section 2(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, “means the process through which the adopted child is permanently separated from his biological parents and becomes the lawful child of his adoptive parents with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that are attached to a biological child”.

Severing of ties with an existing family and creating permanency in a new family requires due diligence and precaution. These concerns have been addressed by the Supreme Court of India, the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) and the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) in the past. Obviously, Gandhi thinks differently and feels the judicial process is cumbersome and time-consuming and so believes that the executive magistrate will help expedite this process.

The minister, however, seems to overlook the fact that the overworked district collector is already busy with the task of implementing over 100 separate programmes. He/she is hardly in a position to be able to personally scrutinise and verify every document for adoption. The chances are that he/she will hand over the task of scrutinising this to juniors.

Also, at the district-level, the executive magistrate is a nomenclature that is used to cover several revenue officials, including even tehsildars. Will tehsildars now decide which child is to be given in adoption to which family?

The Minister of Health, Social Services and Equality, Dolors Montserrat, has appeared in the new Commission on the Rights of Children and Adolescents created this legislature in the Congress of Deputies, where she has announced her will to launch "a Pact of State for Children "that addresses, from the political and territorial consensus, the necessary protection of children.

For the minister, this pact should be established based on three lines of action, which could be framed in the three categories of children's rights enshrined in the Convention and known as the "three pes": promotion, protection and participation.

Likewise, to work on this Pact, the minister proposes "to constitute a study subcommittee that addresses the state pact for childhood in the" three pess "and analyzes the needs of the different models and family situations to which we have to respond as shared custody and custody, the delimitation of the concept of a single-parent family and aid for large families.

Promotion and support of the family

Minister Dolors Montserrat has begun her intervention defending the role of the family in the protection and promotion of childhood. "This Government is clear that protecting and supporting families is the main way to protect children and provide them with greater present and future well-being." For this reason, he has underlined the need to support families, which each one forms, so that they can fully assume their responsibilities.