Home  

White House Backs Kenyan Constitution Allowing Abortion

White House Backs Kenyan Constitution Allowing Abortion

By Tess Civantos

Published July 06, 2010

 | FoxNews.com

The Obama administration is offering incentives to Kenya to approve a controversial new constitution that would legalize abortion for the first time, promising that passage will "allow money to flow" into the nation's coffers, including U.S. aid.

But there's a hitch to that pledge. A federal law known as the Siljander Amendment passed in 2006 makes it illegal for the U.S. government to lobby on abortion in other countries -- and three U.S. lawmakers say they want a federal investigation into the promises made by the administration.

Kenya has long been ripe for a new constitution, one that will balance power in the country and prevent the kind of violent rioting that followed Kenya's 2007 presidential election.

The Obama administration has vocally expressed enthusiasm for the new constitution, which it says will provide for easier transition of power through more balanced branches of government.
But according to anti-abortion groups in and outside of Kenya, the constitution will cause harm to the nation by overturning its ban on abortion.

Article 26 of the proposed constitution states that abortion is allowed if "in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger or if permitted by any other written law."

The problem for some is how much that provision is left open to interpretation.

"There are parts of this constitution that violate human dignity," Rebecca Marchinda, director of advocacy for the human rights coalition World Youth Alliance, told FoxNews.com.

"A trained health professional could be anyone who has health training, including a student or a physical therapist," Marchinda said. "The provision is also broadly defined to include any kind of health, including psychological health or emotional health. Finally, this clause opens the way to create other laws that make abortion available on demand."

In a speech delivered last month in Kenya, Vice President Joe Biden urged the Kenyan people to pass the constitution in a referendum scheduled for Aug. 4.

"The United States strongly supports the process of constitutional reform. ... Dare to reach for transformative change, the kind of change that might come around only once in a lifetime," he said.

"If you make these changes, I promise you, new foreign private investment will come in like you've never seen," Biden added.

According to reports, U.S. ambassador to Kenya Michael Ranneberger told Kenyan officials in May that the U.S. has offered $2 million in taxpayer funds for "civic education" to support the process of enacting a new constitution.

That's a problem for Republican Reps. Darrell Issa of California, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Chris Smith of New Jersey. In letters to the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Government Accountability Office and U.S. Agency for International Development, the lawmakers said they want a federal probe to determine whether the administration violated federal law with its assistance.

"Any advocacy by the administration in support of the proposed new constitution would constitute lobbying for abortion," reads one letter sent in May. "There is no doubt that the administration is advocating for adoption of the proposed constitution."

Issa's office confirmed that the congressman has not spoken to Biden regarding the request for a federal probe, and they did not say whether they had received a response from the inspectors general.

Funding from the United States, meanwhile, is the least of the Kenyan pro-lifers' worries. They are facing violent and even fatal opposition from constitution supporters within their own nation.

A peaceful anti-constitution protest and prayer service on June 13 turned violent when two bombs exploded, killing six people and injuring over 100 more, according to Kenyan newspaper The Standard.

Not only are constitution opponents being bombed, their leaders are being arrested. Three members of the Kenyan parliament were taken into custody on June 16 on charges of alleged hate speech relating to their prominent leadership in opposing the new constitution.
Three other members of parliament were also accused of hate speech, including Higher Education Minister William Ruto, widely seen as a leader in the campaign against the new constitution.

Obadias Ndaba, who works in the World Youth Alliance branch in Kenya, told FoxNews.com that the government "is trying to do everything it takes to pass the constitution."

"The US VP Biden, while in a visit here, promised that Obama would visit the country only if the constitution is passed," he wrote in an e-mail Friday.

"What is clear is that we are having a powerful elite in government supported by foreign powers against the weak forces of church leaders (plus few politicians under threat of hate speech) with huge support in the population but with less means and security to get their message across," he wrote.

Requests for comment sent to the vice president’s office were not returned.

German forum: Subject: Re: Betrifft: [Äthiopienforum] - LOBBY

Message: 9669
From: ="smalltype">Von:Karen Husemann
Received: Mo Jul 05, 2010 4:26
Subject: Re: Betrifft: [Äthiopienforum] - LOBBY


Liebe Anke, lieber Jörg, liebes Forum,

danke für die interessanten Literaturhinweise, sie sind lesenswert.

Ich habe mit unserem Freund Dany Cohn-Bendit (Grüner EU-
Parlamentarier Frankreichs) über das Thema Auslandsadoption (AA)
gesprochen, und er ist bereit und interessiert unsere Diskussion,
soweit das hilfreich sein kann, zu begleiten. Er selber hat eine
fundierte, konstruktiv-kritische Haltung zum Thema AA. Er kennt Roeli
Post und die Debatte ums Thema und bittet uns, sobald wir unser
Dossier/Konzept erstellt haben, es an ihn weiterzuleiten. Angepeilt
habe ich mit ihm, dass wir Mitte August etwas schicken. Anke, was
sagst du dazu?

Die mail an kuw habe ich am Sa. gesandt.

Und Anke: Vielen Dank, dass du bereit bist dich (neben Allem anderen)
so intensiv mit dem Thema zu befassen!

Gruß
Karen

Ugandan adoption odyssey over for Washington couple

Ugandan adoption odyssey over for Washington couple

by CHRIS DANIELS / KING 5 News

NWCN.com

Posted on July 5, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Updated today at 12:50 PM

 

SNOHOMISH, Wash. --  -- Little Jeremiah crawls on the floor, unaware of the long journey he's already taken.

"I'm so relieved to finally be home," said Sarah Stratton, as she watches her son acclimate to new surroundings.

Stratton spent four months in Uganda, trying to finish the adoption process.  She says U.S. Embassy officials tied up the process for weeks, without much of an explanation.

"I am honestly not sure what the root cause is," said Stratton, "I wondered at a certain point, if the embassy would ever let us come home."

So did her husband Mike. "We were kinda stuck," he said.

The State Department has been paying close attention to Ugandan adoptions, even posting on their website " a U.S. consular officer must ensure that the adoption is legal under Ugandan law and that the child is qualified under U.S. Immigration Law to immigrate to the United States" and "depending on the orphan status...and circumstances...the investigation may take up to several months to complete."

After 108 days, Stratton and Jeremiah finally got the green light.  They landed in Seattle on Saturday, and the frustration quickly went away.

"Once you have that baby in your arms, you'd never do anything different," said Mike.

"It's a difficult experience, but it is worth every second," said Sarah, "He's an American citizen now, and home for the Fourth of July."

Orphans’ lives hit by legal snags

Orphans’ lives hit by legal snags


Nandini R Iyer, Hindustan Times
New Delhi, July 05, 2010
There are children languishing in orphanages across India for over three years despite people applying to adopt them, because of delays in the legal process of adoption. This, despite a Supreme Court ruling that cases be processed within two months from the date of application.
Concerned over the number of children stuck in orphanages, Union Minister for Women and Child Development Krishna Tirath has written to Law Minister Veerappa Moily.
Sources told HT that Tirath’s appeal to Moily came after she learnt at an internal meeting, that the cases of several children in the care of the Uttar Pradesh State Council had been pending for over three years due to legal delays.
“In addition, cases of over 150 children housed with the Missionaries of Charity in Kolkata were pending. Other cases were from Ashray in Bangalore, the Sant Bhure Lal Trust in Punjab and nari niketans in Punjab, the minister was informed,” sources said.
A ministry official said that, “Dr Moily has been going out of his way to help with legislations concerning women and children and we are very hopeful he will do something about this…it concerns the lives of so many unfortunate children.”
In her letter to the Law Minister, Tirath pointed out despite rules and guidelines “in practice …the legal process to adopt a child carries on well beyond the stipulated two months. The objective of adoption, is in a way, compromised by the delay…kindly intervene…for expediting the legal process so that the time taken by the Courts is in conformity with the rulings of the Supreme Court of India.”
In the case of L.K. Pandey versus the Union of India (1984), the Supreme Court had directed that petitions for adoptions should be disposed of expeditiously. And as far as possible within a period of two months from the date of filing the application.

Everybody’s Children

July 5, 2010
Everybody’s Children
By Diana Markosian
RIA Novosti
http://www.russiaprofile.org/files.site/bw.gif
The International Scandals Surrounding Foreign Parents Who Abuse Adopted Russian Children Have Obscured the Challenges that Russian Orphans Face at Home

Tucked quietly away in an isolated corner of Russia, far from civilization, is an orphan village called Kitezh Children’s Community. The houses are shaped like castles, the sun is beaming and a dozen or so happy children are playing in the yard, just like in every good fairy tale. But this is not your average Russian orphanage. Only a few lucky orphans from the thousands growing up in modern Russia are privileged enough to live here; volunteer parents, able to provide a home and a future, officially adopt the children.

Twenty-five year old Maria Pichugina is the director of the Kitezh center in Orion, about 60 kilometers south of Moscow. She has spent most of her life in the orphanage, but not as a foster child. Pichugina’s mother moved to Kitezh ten years ago with her two daughters to devote her life to the plight of Russian orphans. 

The community was set up nearly 20 years ago by former Moscow-based radio journalist Dmitri Morozov in response to the growing number of street children in Russia, and as an alternative to the state institutions. “In the 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, there were a lot of kids who didn’t have homes, and no one cared,” Morozov said. “People were too busy worrying about making money. There was an attitude on behalf of the government and on behalf of the people that this was not our problem.”

The situation has barely improved since then. According to a 2008 trial census, Russia has around 700,000 orphans. The vast system of orphanages presently in place dates back to the early Soviet period, when many orphans appeared on the streets following the Civil War, and orphanages became part of the communist education system. Since then it has grown and perpetuated itself, while alcoholism and the general destructive tendencies in society supplied children in need of parental care. Up to 80 percent of children in today’s orphanage system are so-called “social orphans” who have been taken by the authorities away from their problematic families.

The recent cases of mistreatment of Russian adoptive children in the United States have brought the pitfalls of international adoption into the limelight, but several fundamental questions have been brushed over: why does Russia have so many orphans in the first place? And what is the country doing to solve the problem?

More than 1,500 Russian children were adopted in the United States in 2009, putting Russia in third place in the number of children taken from there after China and Ethiopia. Over the years, Morozov has kept a close eye on Russia’s adoption trend, and believes that international adoption is the country’s way of ignoring the actual problem. “It seems to be the easiest way for bureaucrats who don’t care very much about what is really happening,” said Morozov. “In the last few years we have actually been moving in the right direction. I see that the government is trying to develop the structure: for instance, non-governmental organizations are emerging. But Russia is a big society and we have to contain the problem.”

For years, a major hurdle in the adoption process in Russia was its bureaucracy. Deacon Alexander Volkov adopted a son three years ago. The process itself, he said, was the most difficult part, and for many Russians it is an ordeal they are not willing to go through. “It was very hard for years to adopt a child. The system just didn’t allow it, and people didn’t want to deal with it,” said Volkov. “Now the government and volunteers are starting to take care of this situation. Many orphanages are even closing because people are adopting so many children.”

But while negotiations on an agreement to regulate Russian-U.S. adoptions draw to a close, Russia’s domestic orphan problem lingers on. The Russian Children’s Welfare Society (RCWS), a non-governmental organization based in New York with an office in Moscow, estimates that the proportion of declared orphans is four to five times higher in Russia than in Europe or the United States. Some 30 percent live in orphanages. Most are children who have been either given up by their parents or removed from dysfunctional families by the authorities. As of 2009, there were 2,176 orphanages in Russia. That number has grown by more than 100 percent in the last decade, reports RCWS, whose main mission is to help Russian orphans. 

Morozov believes that the problem is twofold: the number of abandoned children is rising but too few Russians are willing to take them in as their own. At Kitezh, things are different, he says; adoptive parents are not only willing to look after the children, but they also devote their entire lives to the cause. 

Pichugina and her husband have adopted five children in the past four years. She is now expecting her first biological child. “I don’t even think of them as anyone else’s children, but my own,” said Pichugina, whose own mother has adopted ten children in Kitezh. “Once you’ve taken them in you are inseparable from them. They are my own children.”

Anastasia and her younger sister Vera have lived with Pichugina for four years. Though at first glance they may act like the average teens, the two are wise beyond their years. They have to be, they say. Their mother and younger brother both died four years ago. “After she died, our father was too drunk to take care of us, and he left us,” said Anastasia, who is now 14. “Sometimes I feel sorry for myself, and just say: ‘why me?’ Life is not fair. But you have to get over it. I can’t do anything about what happened.”

The attitude toward orphans in Russia is slowly shifting. There is no overnight solution. Anastasia knows that her past will not define her, but she is part of the minority. The future for most Russian orphans is still rather nebulous

Lobby in contact with Cohn-Bendit

Message: 9669

From: ="smalltype">Von:Karen Husemann

Received: Mo Jul 05, 2010 4:26

Subject: Re: Betrifft: [Äthiopienforum] - LOBBY

Liebe Anke, lieber Jörg, liebes Forum,

Anke Hassel about Romania for Export Only - black hat

Message: 9666

From: ="smalltype">Von:hugh williamson

Received: Sa Jul 03, 2010 7:13

Subject: Re: Betrifft: [Äthiopienforum] - LOBBY

Lieber Jörg,

Let's not treat children as pets: Bombay high court

Let's not treat children as pets: Bombay high court
Mayura Janwalkar / DNA
Friday, July 2, 2010 0:53 IST
 
 
Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Thursday said that Indians have no right to brag about their culture and heritage, if their children in adoption centres are treated as “commodities”.
You may also want to see
·                                 SSC schools set to follow CBSE, introduce grade system
·                                 One Kurla rape culprit held, others at large
·                                 Ashok Chavan wants ministers to 'connect' with aam admi via janata durbars
·                                 Centre scheme comes to aid of failed adoptees
·                                 Students in a spot over Mumbai university's late call on PhD selection
Related videos
·                                 Heavy rains disrupt normal life in Mumbai
·                                 D Sivanandhan takes over as Maharashtra's police chief
·                                 Tadoba-Andheri Tiger Reserve officials happy with more space for tigers in reserve
The court was hearing a petition file by NGOs Advait Foundation and Sakhee, which had sought action against Preet Mandir, an adoption centre in Pune.
Peeved at the state of affairs, the court said the government, which is obligated to place children from adoption centres with caring families, had done little to stop it from becoming a “corporate venture”.
“We are very colour-conscious. Adoption centres charge more for a fair baby, while an HIV-positive child is offered at a discount,” justice BH Marlapalle said.
Interestingly, a letter written by government secretary Vandana Krishna to the Central Adoption Resources Agency (Cara), stated: “Even if an adoption agency is run with a selfish or business motive to make money, it is not a crime or illegal. Many schools, colleges, educational institutions, hospitals are run as a business today.”
Krishna’s letter stated that it is not the government’s duty to ensure that NGOs operate on charitable basis, nor is it necessary that adoption agencies should operate incurring losses.
Expressing concern over the 450 children at Preet Mandir, the court had earlier asked Cara to take a decision about the rehabilitation of these children. However, counsel for Preet Mandir told the court that closing the adoption centre — facing allegations of malpractices — would not solve the problem.
“The children are young and attached to the staff of the adoption centre. Many attend school and their psychology needs to be taken into consideration. Children are not vegetables or cattle to shift them from one place to another,” the counsel said.
The court asked the state to frame guidelines on how it plans to monitor private adoption homes. There are 69 adoption centres in Maharashtra.
“The state will have to play a very vital role,” the court said. It also suggested that information regarding adoption homes should be centralised and available online.
Justice Marlapalle said the matter has to be looked at in its totality by the state government. “On the one hand, we must go by the reality — number of unwed mothers, number of families selling children owing to abject poverty. We only hope that these [adoption centres] will not be breeding farms. Let us not treat children as pets.”

We hope adoption homes won’t be breeding farms: HC

We hope adoption homes won’t be breeding farms: HC

 

 

Expressing concern over the 450 children at Preet Mandir, the Bombay High Court on Thursday observed that we should not talk about rich culture and heritage of our country if we treat children in adoption homes as “commodities”.

 

 

The division bench of Justice B H Marlapalle and Justice Anoop Mohta were hearing petitions filed by NGOs Advait Foundation and Sakhee seeking action against Preet Mandir, alleging various irregularities by the adoption centre. Preet Mandir lawyer said closing down the adoption centre would not serve any purpose. The lawyer argued that the children are young and attached to the staff of the adoption centre and should not be treated as vegetables or cattle to shift them from one place to another.

 

 

Justice Marlapalle said the state government should look into the matter. “On the one hand, we must go by the reality — number of unwed mothers, number of families selling children owing to poverty. We only hope that these adoption centres will not be breeding farms. Let us not treat children as pets.” The court observed that even the government-run centres are full of malpractices. “It is the state’s responsibility. The number of such children is bound to go up while there is poverty in this country.” The court was of the view the government is duty-bound to rehabilitate the children in adoption centres, however, he said these are slowly turning into “corporate ventures”. The judges asked the government to formulate guidelines on how it plans to control private adoption homes. “We want the government to apply their mind independently, constitute a committee keeping in mind SC guidelines with respect to adoption,” the court said. The court has adjourned the hearing for four weeks.

Fri Jul 02 2010, 02:58 hrs