Home  

Entschließung zur Verbesserung des Rechts und der Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten auf dem Gebiet der Adoption von Mi

51996IP0392
 
Entschließung zur Verbesserung des Rechts und der Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten auf dem Gebiet der Adoption von Minderjährigen
 
Amtsblatt Nr. C 020 vom 20/01/1997 S. 0176

Adoption a better option to abandoning a child

Adoption
a better option to abandoning a child



E-mail
Print

The Probation and Childcare Department today appealed to mothers who
abandon their children due to economic and social reasons to hand over their
children to the department for adoption and to refrain from taking their
children’s lives or abandoning them as has been a trend in the recent
past.

Probation Officer Nirmali Perera said in Sri Lanka adoption had a
stigma attached to it and people often chose to hide it from society.

She
said people should have a positive view about adoption procedures as it was the
best alternative to give a home and a future for the little child.

Ms.
Perera said an infant or young child less than 14 years of age whom the parents
want to abandon because they were unable to support the child can hand them over
to the Provincial Commissioner of the Probation and Childcare Department in
their respective provinces.

If infants are found abandoned in a state
hospital the hospital will hand over the child to the Provincial Commissioner in
the area. The Provincial Commissioner will put the child in the waiting list for
adoption. “The parent can meet the Provincial Commissioner and hand over the
child. They may have to show evidence to prove that they cannot support the
child. However if the parent refuses to support the child then we will undertake
the responsibility to ensure the child is protected,” Ms. Perera said. “There
have been several incidents in the recent past where parents have allegedly
abandoned their children or killed them. Instead of doing so, we ask them to
hand over their children to us. The department will provide them a
home.”

Ms. Perera said parents took such drastic decision because of
poverty, disputes between the parents or because of unmarried girls who feel
they cannot support a child. “People choose to take very drastic measures when
they are in desperate situations of this nature as they are unaware of the
alternatives available for their children,” she said.

In Sri Lanka
children below 14 years can be adopted by sending a written request to the
Probation and Childcare Department’s Provincial Commissioner requesting for a
child to be adopted. Subsequently the applicant’s suitability will be
investigated and evaluated. If they fulfil the criteria they will be able to
register with the Provincial Commissioner for the adoption of a child.
(Olindhi Jayasundere)

As waiting times increase, fewer choosing adoption

As waiting times increase, fewer choosing adoption

WEDNESDAY, 19 OCTOBER 2011 14:09 JENNIFER BULEY NEWS

Waiting times of up to five years have would-be parents giving up plans to adopt, study finds

Even though fewer Danes are applying to adopt, the decline is less dramatic than in other countries (Photo: Colourbox)

Fewer people in Denmark today adopt children from other countries, mirroring a general global trend. However, the downturn here is less dramatic than elsewhere, according to a new report by the National Board of Adoption.

Factsheet Contemporary Slavery

Sale of children
Unscrupulous go-betweens have found that large profits can be made by arranging the transfer of
children from poverty-stricken homes to people with means-without guarantees and supervision to
ensure that the child's interests will be protected. In such cases, financial gain-for the parents as
well as the intermediaries-takes on the character of trading in children.

LEBENSBORN: ADOPTION NAZI STYLE

LEBENSBORN: ADOPTION NAZI STYLE PLATONIC EUGENICS The Lebensborn Project cannot be understood without placing it into the greater context of the international eugenics movement that began in the 1880s. The eugenics movement was driven by the emerging disciplines of psychology and sociology; that is, the question of why human beings behave as they do pursuant to national, racial, religious, economic, and class status. It was also driven by the belief that physical characteristics such as head size, facial features, size and configuration of genitalia, and eye and hair color determined a person’s value. Superimposed over these factors was the belief that the people of Atlantis as described by Plato were the prototype of the perfected human being and that through the practice of eugenics it was possible to bring humanity back to that state of perfection. Plato’s thoughts on eugenics and the breeding of philosopher kings and guardians for the Republic are found in Republic, Book IV. (For a detailed description see: Republic, Book IV, Re: Philosopher Kings and Guardians; Henri Estienne, 1578 [Stephanus] translation and numbers 460, 467, 467, 537, 541) Plato cites five criteria for children who are to become philosopher kings and guardians of the Republic: The race of the guardians is to be “pure.” Children will be put into the rearing pen and turned over to nurses. Mothers will nurse babies but will not know which one is theirs. Children of inferior parents and defective children will be put out of sight in secrecy as is befitting. Male and female guardian children will be educated as both philosophers and warriors. Children will be taken on horse back to witness battles and have their taste of blood like puppies. In the Republic it was a matter of eugenic policy that parents should bear children for the state for a defined number of years. Children were not for fulfillment or for “family,” but were for the health of the body politic. After the proscribed child bearing years were completed, Plato held that abortion should be compelled for any woman who became pregnant at forty or who had a husband over fifty. It was expected that parents would make every effort to abort the fetus or dispose of the newborn child of ensuing pregnancies if abortion was not successful. The father had complete control over the life of his [potential] child. Patria potestas refers to the power of Greek and Roman fathers to decide the fate of a fetus even before a child was born as well as the child itself. To abort a fetus or commit infanticide in ancient Greece was not a crime. Defective, deformed, or “wrongly born” babies were set out on hillsides to die of starvation. These babies were not considered a human person because a newly born child was not a human person until its father declared it a member of the family and that was not done until 5-7 days after birth for healthy children and up to a month for unhealthy children. 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY EUGENICS We need to take a close look at the eugenics movement because it was central to the institution of the Nazi Lebensborn Project. Eugenics is the study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding. The high point of the eugenics movement was the early 1880s to 1950s in the United States, England, and Germany. The eugenics movement was under girded by several philosophical currents. In England Sir Frances Galton became interested in patterns of genius running in families which he considered an inherited trait. Galton’s studies greatly influenced interest in psychological measurement and studies in human intelligence. Charles Darwin’s concepts of “natural selection” and “survival of the fittest” brought to their logical conclusion end in the perfect homo sapien. Darwin hypothesized, although later repudiated, what he called the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS). This hypothesis stated that human beings and the world would evolve in every level towards a more perfect state. In America the eugenics movement was spearheaded by two people: Margaret Sanger and Dr. Charles Davenport. Margaret Sanger’s primary concern for birth control originated as a consequence of her work in impoverished environments which led her to believe that “genetically inferior” persons should not have children and that centers for birth control should be placed in minority, impoverished, neighborhoods. Dr. Charles Davenport, eugenicist and zoologist at the University of Chicago, believed it was possible to “breed” moral traits “in to” and “out of” the human species. Consequently, he was virulently anti-immigration because he believed immigrants were genetically inferior. Superimposed over all eugenic theory is “Root Race Theory.” The “Root Race” (the Jews for the Nazis) was juxtaposed to the prototypical superior race (the people of Atlantis). The descendents of the people of Atlantis, the Aryans to the Nazis, would become pre-eminent, populate the world, and turn it into a utopia. However in order for this “Master Race” to succeed, the Root Race people would either have to die out or be exterminated. These were the only ways to ensure the pure blood lines of the Aryan descendents of the Atlantean people. Root Race Theory was held by some occultists, particularly Mme. Blavatsky, who was instrumental in the formation of the Theosophy Movement in Australia that spread to Europe and the United States. Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of the Super Man – the ultimate in human attributes and optimal functioning - became Hitler’s goal and was based on the fulfillment of human eugenic potential. NAZI EUGENICS Needless to say Adolph Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, and Josef Goebbels were keenly interested in the emerging field of eugenics. Consequently, they decreed that the following categories of people were genetically inferior, were unworthy of life, and were to be exterminated: Jews Poles (considered less intelligent, less noble than Germans in part because of their toleration of Jews in Poland) Mentally Retarded Mentally Ill Political and Philosophical Protestors Roma and Sinti (Gypsies) Mixed Race Religiously Unacceptable (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Evangelical Christians, “Political” Catholics and Protestants) Elderly who could not contribute People of Color Sexual Deviants (homosexuals, pedophiles, and those with “perversions”) The Nazis created laws to reflect their goal of transforming society by eliminating the Root Race of Jews by enacting what are known as marriage and race laws. These laws had a twofold purpose: first to “purify” the Aryan Race and secondly to eradicate the “inferior” Root Race of the Jews. This is the oxymoronic heart and soul of Endlosung or final solution to the “Jewish Problem.” Through eugenics people, like animals, would be bred towards Aryan perfection by anomalies being removed from the bloodlines The question for the Nazis was, “Who is a Jew?” The ¼ rule was widely applied as follows, “one who is descended from one or two grandparents who, racially, were full Jews defined as those who belonged to the Jewish religious community.” Thus in 1933 laws began to erase the legal rights of Jews and the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 erased not only Jewish citizenship but also access to courts, due process of law, and ownership of property. The term Judenrein means “free of Jews” and in 1935 a law was created that Jews and ethnic Germans were forbidden to marry. This law was to end contamination of German blood as well as the continuation of Jewish blood to the next generation. Other methods to achieve Judenrein included that a Jewish woman already pregnant entering some ghettos could have the child but in others was required to have an abortion. However, a woman who became pregnant after entering the ghetto was required to have an abortion. In either case, if she was not willing to do so it was forced upon her. Additionally, in concentration camps such as Auschwitz when babies were born they were immediately put to death or used for experimentation by the Nazis. Therefore, many Jewish midwives would smother or drown newborns and tell the mother her child had been stillborn. A live baby meant the mother would immediately be sent to the gas chamber because cohabitation between men and women was strictly forbidden. However, marriage and race laws also included a law favorable to German couples. The tax law of 1933 stipulated that German couples could get a loan that was paid off at the rate of 25% for each new child born. However, the poverty of the government as well as other social factors led to the failure to achieve the intended goal of large families. LEBENSBORN PROJECT Now that we have explored the cultural milieu that spawned Lebensborn we are ready to examine it. Lebensborn Eingetragener Verein (Registered Society Lebensborn) means “spring of life,” or “fount of life.” Heinrich Himmler created the Lebensborn Project on December 12, 1935 in response to declining birth rates in Germany. Himmler was the Oberfuehrer of the Schutzstaffel (the SS). The purpose of the SS was to enforce Nazi racial doctrine and Anti-Semitic ideals. In a lecture by Himmler to the Wehrmacht on January 1937 he cited the SS creed: “We have an ideological enemy…Bolshevism lead by international Jewry and Free Masons…all states and peoples who are ruled or are under strong Jewish-Free Mason influence will eventually be hostile to Germany and create a danger for us. Bolshevism is an organization of sub-humans, it is the absolute foundation of Jewish rule, it is the exact opposite of all which the Aryan peoples love, cherish and value. It is a diabolic outlook, because it appeals to the lowest and meanest instincts of humanity and turns those instincts into a religion. Its goal is the destruction of the white man. We are more valuable than the others who may now and always outnumber us. We are more valuable because our blood enables us to be more inventive than others, to lead our people better than the others, because we have better soldiers, better statesmen, a higher culture, a better character.” Himmler appointed George Ebner, M.D., SS as the Oberfuehrer of the Lebensborn Project. His official position in the Nazi hierarchy was: Chief, Main Health Department; Office of Race and Resettlement. The Lebesnborn Project was one of many divisions of the Office of Race and Resettlement. Ebner was appointed Oberfuehrer of the Lebensborn Project because he was considered an expert on matters of “racial hygiene” and an SS lecturer on “Problems of Racial Selection” for SS recruits. As Oberfuehrer of the Lebensborn Project, Ebner was personally responsible for the Steinhoering Lebensborn House which was the first Lebensborn facility. Here he presided over the birth of over 3,000 children and performed reproductive experiments on women. His other responsibility was that he determined which children from occupied countries met the criteria for “Germanization.” Ebner was captured near the end of the war and tried for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and membership in a criminal organization at Nuremberg. (October 20, 1947 to February 17, 1948: Final Judgment - March 10, 1948) He was acquitted of crimes against humanity and war crimes but convicted of membership in a criminal organization. He was released for time served and died in 1974 still believing that Lebensborn was the salvation of German blood. The Lebensborn Project had a twofold purpose. The first was the creation of “racially pure” German children believed to be the next step in the development of the advanced Aryan race. To achieve this goal, young woman who were “racially pure” were selected to be impregnated by SS officers and give birth to a child in secret. These women had to undergo several days of physical and psychological testing to be accepted as Lebensborn mothers. Children produced by these unions were given to the SS who took charge of their education and adoption. However, Himmler soon determined that this process was too slow to provide the number of new Aryans necessary to build the Third Reich. To solve this problem he instituted a policy of planned kidnapping of children who had Nordic (Teutonic - German) features in the countries the Nazis defeated. POLISH LEBENSBORN Beginning in1939 children defined as “racial goods” were kidnapped in eastern occupied countries principally Poland. These children were brought to Lebensborn centers in German to be “Germanized.” They were told their parents had abandoned them so they would forget their parents and become good Nazis. If “Germanization” failed, the children were sent the concentration camp at Kalish in Poland to be exterminated. “Germanized” children were adopted by SS families and others considered of good blood and good Nazis. By the end of the war in 1946 it was estimated that more than 250,000 children had been kidnapped. Only 25, 000 were returned to their families or relatives after the war. Some who had been successfully indoctrinated believed they were German and refused to be returned home. The second purpose of the kidnapping part of the Lebensborn Project contained three elements: Depopulate occupied countries so they were more easily pacified. Depopulate the next generations to minimize resistance to occupation. Depopulate to meet the labor and land needs of the Nazis. In 1939 Himmler gave a Speech regarding the kidnapping of children in Poland for the Lebensborn Project. He said, “In the course of the next 10 years Poland will become a permanently inferior race that will be available to us for slave labor.” This is how he planned to achieve that goal. Poland was divided into three parts. The first part, the Eastern section, went to the Soviet Union which was Germany’s ally at the beginning of the war. The second part, Central Poland, was dubbed “the central government” which was administered as a supply area for human stock for German labor needs. The third part, the rich agricultural lands to the Northwest, was named the Warthegau and was incorporated into the Third Reich. This area was cleared of Poles and Jews, the Polish language was prohibited, and street signs were changed to German. By the summer of 1941 the area was settled by 200,000 ethnic Germans and looked like it had never been a part of Poland. All children in this area of “Nordic appearance” found in orphanages or foster homes were presumed to be German and were evacuated to Lebensborn educational institutions in Germany. How could such a feat be accomplished? In a 1939 secret paper Himmler wrote: “The first condition for the management of racially valuable children is a complete ban on all links with their Polish relatives. The children will be given German names of Teutonic origin. Their birth and heredity certificates will be filed in a special department.” (cf. American adoption, name changes, closed records, secret archives) In another secret paper in May 1940 Himmler wrote: “We have faith above all in this our own blood, which has flowed into a foreign nationality through the vicissitudes of German history. We are convinced that our own philosophy and ideals will reverberate in the spirit of these children who racially belong to us.” The man chosen to orchestrate this mass kidnapping of Polish Children was Lieutenant General Ulrich Greifelt who was the head of the central office of the SS in Poland. General Greifelt wrote in 1941 “Particular care must be taken to ensure that the term “Germanization” of Polish children does not come to public knowledge. The children should rather be described as German orphans from the regained Eastern territories.” In the winter of 1941, by a secret order signed by General Greifelt, the process of kidnapping Polish children for the Lebensborn Project began. Eventually all Polish children between the ages of 2-12 were examined and segregated into two categories: “racially valuable” or “racially worthless.” The “racially valuable” children were sent to Germany to be “Germanized” and the “racially worthless” were sent to the Kalish concentration camp to be exterminated. Children sent to Germany between the ages of 6-12 were sent to “childless families of good race” after their Lebensborn indoctrination. This is how the system worked. On secretly designate days children were kidnapped from the streets, from playgrounds, and from schools. If selected for “Germanization,” parents were told the child would be returned home after physical and IQ examinations that would determine future schooling. Suitability for “Germanizaiton” was predicated on the basis of measurements of 62 parts of the children’s bodies. Testing included: hair and eye color, the shape of the nose and lips, the hairline, toes and fingernails, condition of the genitalia, and neurological tests. Automatic disqualification included: persistent uncleanliness, bedwetting, farting, nail-biting, and masturbation. The parents of children selected for “Germanization” were told that their children were being sent to Germany for their health. The Lebensborn Project operated Children’s Homes in all of the occupied lands and was in charge of “reeducation” of the children. The Ministry of the Interior lent legal status by conferring on the Lebesborn Society the right of civil registry and guardianship enabling the organization to issue official birth certificates with invented places of birth, dates of birth, and false names which is the ultimate form of control of a human being. (cf. American adoption, closed records system, some state laws allow the same types of false information to be recorded on adoptee amended birth certificates) This process became the standard from of kidnapping children for the Lebensborn Project in all countries conquered by the Nazis. Consequently, the Nazis committed a double infamy: first in stealing children from their parents in occupied lands; secondly by deceiving their own people about the lack of integrity of their actions. NORWEGIAN LEBENSBORN As heinous as the kidnapping of Polish and other children was one country, Norway, capitulated to the Nazis and worked with them to advance the cause of Aryanism. The legitimate government was forced into exile and a puppet administration under Vidkun Quisling took over the reins of power. This government supported The Lebensborn Project and urged Norwegian women to become pregnant in its homes. It is documented that at least 8,000 children were fathered by Nazis in Norway in the interest of The Lebensborn Project – far more than were born in Germany where the estimate is about 3,500 – 4,000 children. The Lebensborn children of Norway became the object of tremendous hate, discrimination, and mistreatment after the war. Many were sent to institutions for the mentally retarded and insane as well as juvenile facilities that were run as prisons. They were denied education by law and comprise the lowest segment of Norwegian society. In recent years they have banded together to tell their story and are demanding reparations from the government for a lifetime of discrimination and mistreatment. The Norwegian Court of Appeals denied their claim. LEBENSBORN MOTHERS Although this is an essay about Lebensborn children, it is important to know what happened to their mothers. As badly as the Lebensborn children were treated in Norway their mothers were treated worse. After the war many were dragged into the streets, striped naked, beaten, and their heads shaved. This was not a one time affair but could happen anytime. It could even happen if they were just walking down the street and were recognized as Lebensborn mothers. They were also denied the government subsidy that all Norwegians receive and no “respectable” man would marry them. Most were unable to find meaningful work and have lived their lives as prostitutes and in poverty. With the defeat of the Nazis the infamy of all they had done came to light. However, the Lebensborn Project, created in secrecy, remained a secret to most Germans until very recently. For German women who became Lebensborn mothers believing it had been their patriotic duty, it must have been an agonizing experience to try to reconcile the “noble cause” they had been recruited to be a part of with the defeat and consequent humiliation of Germany. These women had been true believers just as were the SS officers who impregnated them. After the war many of the officers were dead and those that were still alive quickly denied they had ever been Nazis. The Lebensborn mothers, just like the birth mothers of America after the war, were forced by shame and social convention to continue to live that part of their life in secrecy. It has only been in the last 5-10 years that the Lebensborn children have banded together and gone public about their identity. Most of the mothers continue to hide their secret and reunification between mothers and those they gave birth to are very rare. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CHILDREN After World War II the United Nations set up a program to reunify stolen children with their parents called, The United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). In the summer of 1946 the United States Department of State issued an order to resettle all Russian children in the American administered section of Germany, including those from the contested Ukrainian and Baltic border regions, in America, Canada, and Australia. Per this order American UNRAA workers were “advised” not to allow Soviet liaison officers into Displaced Persons camps or to expose unaccompanied children to them. Today there is no documentation of this State Department Order either in State Department records or the National Archives. The only document found that even refers to the practice of “American Lebensborn” after the war is dated March 19, 1946 in a paper by Eileen Blackey, Chief Child Search & Repatriation Consultant at UNRRA headquarters. On page 10 under the heading “Problems Concerning Nationality Status” Ms. Blackey refers to, “continuing difficulties regarding a clear directive affecting Ukrainian and Baltic children.” Of the reported 200,000 Polish children missing about 25,000 were reunited with their parents or other family members after the war. In 1946 two groups of 100 Russian children were sent to Russia for reunification. There is no record of how many other children were reunited after the war. There is no record of how many children of contested nationality (Russian, Ukrainian or Baltic) stayed in Germany; were returned to their natal nations; sent to America, Canada, or Australia; or were otherwise resettled. There is also no idea how many kidnapped Lebensborn children, ignorant of their true identity, remained in Germany after the war and have lived their lives believing themselves to be natal Germans.

.

BETTER STAY AWAY FROM PREETMANDIR, Mr BHASIN

Kaumudi Gurjar

Special CBI judge takes serious note of MiD DAY expose, tells Preetmandir former managing trustee J S Bhasin not to violate court order again by entering orphanage premises

LESS than four months since a MiD DAY sting operation at the Preetmandir orphanage showed former managing trustee J S Bhasin violating a court order that had restrained him from entering the Preetmandir premises, Special CBI Judge D R Mahajan took serious note of the MiD DAY expose and warned Bhasin against repeating the act.

It may be recalled that even as the Preetmandir controversy over allegations of financial irregularities and child trafficking was raging and the case was being heard in courtrooms, MiD DAY had found Bhasin in the office of the adoption home.

A MiD DAY reporter posing as a prospective adoptive parent had photographed Bhasin seated in the orphanage with other office staff, flipping through office files.

Special CBI Judge Mahajan took notice of the report and, while hearing the application filed by employees of the trust who had earlier pointed out that Bhasin was interfering in day- to- day matters of the trust, directed him to neither enter the office nor intervene in the proceedings and working of the trust.

The complainant in the case has filed an application requesting the court that the case of alleged trafficking of grandchildren of one Kisabai Lokhande from Ahmednagar be further investigated by CBI teams who have already filed a chargesheet on the financial irregularities and child trafficking from Preetmandir under Section 173( 8) of the CrPC. The court postponed the hearing on this matter after CBI public prosecutor Manoj Chaladan sought time to file a reply on this case.

A criminal writ petition against Preetmandir was filed by Sakhee Pune and Advait Foundation Mumbai in 2006 demanding CBI investigation in financial irregularities, kidnapping and corruption cases.

Bhasin was granted conditional bail in August 2010 on medical grounds.

A CBI team filed a chargesheet on March 11 this year against Preetmandir former MD, former CARA chairperson J K Mittal and four people who had also procured anticipatory bail.

 

No application for inter-country adoption in 2011

No application for inter-country adoption in 2011  
 

ARJUN POUDEL

KATHMANDU, Oct 17: Inter-country adoption from Nepal has come to a standstill with the Ministry for Women, Children and Social welfare (WCSW) receiving no application from foreign parents for adoption after the government adopted strict measures in 2009. 

The ministry has not received even a single application for inter-country adoption in 2011. 


The ministry had temporarily suspended inter-country adoption following reports of rampant irregularities in the inter-country adoption process. “The ministry received more 500 applications for inter-country adoption each year. But no application has been registered this year,” said Anandaram Pokhrel, secretary at the ministry.

According to Sher Jung Karki, legal officer at the ministry, prospective adoptive parents have to now apply through the internet to adopt Nepali children. “They cannot visit Nepal to select children without the consent of the government,” he added. Adoptive parents need to submit documents permitting adoption from their respective countries and apply through registered adoption agencies. Earlier, they directly dealt with Nepali orphanages. 

The new regulation has hit the orphanages permitted to send children for inter-country adoption hard. “Out of 38 registered orphanages, only 29 have renewed their licenses, while others have shut down,” Pokhrel said. 

Before the suspension, the care centers and their agents tampered with documents and sent children illegally for adoption. Adoptive parents paid a huge amount to get the children of their choice. “Adoptive parents can now choose only gender and age,” Karki said, adding, “Family selection committee of the ministry now gives priority to children whose files arrive first to the ministry,” he added. 

The government has also fixed a fee of US $ 8,000 for inter-country adoption. The orphanages get only US $ 5,000 and the remaining amount goes to the state. The matching process now can also take up to six months before the children are handed over to adoptive parents. 

Karki said the government adopted stricter measures also to maintain transparency in the process of selecting children. The government took such a decision under pressure from international agencies, including the report of the Hague Conference. 

The report released by Hague Conference in 2009 pointed at a number of weaknesses in Nepali adoption system, including falsification of documents and lack of proper child protection system. The Hague´s study also found instances of children, who were not orphans, being given away for adoption by parents as well as orphanages. Nepal is signatory to the Hague Convention on child rights.

Following the disclosure, the United States and some 10 European countries have also suspended adoption from Nepal, some officially and others unofficially. 

But these were not the only countries adopting Nepali children. According to Dharma Raj Shrestha, executive director of the Central Child Welfare Board, people from around 72 countries adopted children from Nepal in the past.  

Of late, even the US has shown interest to adopt orphans and children formally abandoned by families. The ministry is listing the number of orphans and abandoned children living in different child care centers.

 

 
   
Published on 2011-10-17 01:55:51

ICAN Information

ICAN Information

International Child Advocacy Network (ICAN) was formed in 2002 with a mission to help, without waste. We decided to partner with organizations that are already doing good work. All Directors of ICAN are strictly on a volunteer basis. There are no salaried employees, and we cover our own travel expenses and administrative costs. By cutting out salaries and overhead, we’re able to give all donations to the people who need it most. We are committed to working with organizations that are responsible in how they spend the funds gifted to them.        Image


Camp Masala! One of the goals of ICAN is to help adopted children gain knowledge of and maintain pride in their birth country. We established Camp Masala Indian Heritage Camp in 2004 because we wanted families to be able to attend a fun camp with an emphasis on education. Camp Masala is 100% self supporting by attendance fees, although donations specifically earmarked to help with camp programs are accepted. Through a generous donation, ICAN established a scholarship fund to help families attend camp.  www.campmasala.org .



Some of the organizations we help support include:

Care + Share of Vijayawada, India: We can’t say enough good things about Care + Share and the wonderful people who run it! They run a literacy center in the four slums; rescue children from the streets and house & school them; supply prosthetic limbs & braces to children & adults; provide food and medical assistance in the slums of Vijayawada; and much more! Care + Share also provides Emergency Relief to thousands when disasters strike – they helped over 4000 families after the 2004 Tsunami. Many Camp Masala families already sponsor a child through Care + Share. If you are interested in sponsoring a child in India, Care + Share makes it very easy – you can sponsor a child online through the website. You will get letters from your child, photos, annual reports and you’ll know you are making a lasting impact on a child’s life! If you are interested in learning more, visit their website at: www.careshareindia.org .

St Catherine’s Home of Mumbai, India: St Catherine’s rescues young girls from prostitution, provides shelter and care services for children with HIV, and provides a safe shelter for unwed mothers.

Prem Dan in Mumbai, India: 'Prem Dan' in Hindi means "a gift of love". Prem Dan is a 25-year-old institution that runs 3 schools to feed and educate street children and slum children. www.premdan.org .


Prerana in Mumbai, India: Prerana’s activities include development and re-integration of women and child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. Their aim is to prevent trafficking of women and children for prostitution and pornography.



Hogar Nuevo Amanecer in Guatemala City, Guatemala: An orphanage for children in Guatemala City.

Centro de Salud in Santa Clotilde, Peru: A mission hospital serving 100 villages spread out along 435 miles of the Napo River in northeastern Peru. None of the villages has electricity, water, or telephone services. The hospital serves over 20,000 indigenous people who have little or no access to healthcare. The mission includes a 30 bed hospital, an outpatient clinic, a dental clinic, a pharmacy and public health programs.

International Child Advocacy Network (ICAN) is exempt from federal income tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code as an organization described in Section 501(c)3. Our Tax ID#: 47-0869226. 100% of all donations are sent directly to the projects we support.

To donate to Camp Masala or any of the above projects, send your tax deductible donation to:

ICAN - PO Box 94, Hamel, MN 55340

ICAN Information

ICAN Information

International Child Advocacy Network (ICAN) was formed in 2002 with a mission to help, without waste. We decided to partner with organizations that are already doing good work. All Directors of ICAN are strictly on a volunteer basis. There are no salaried employees, and we cover our own travel expenses and administrative costs. By cutting out salaries and overhead, we’re able to give all donations to the people who need it most. We are committed to working with organizations that are responsible in how they spend the funds gifted to them.        Image


Camp Masala! One of the goals of ICAN is to help adopted children gain knowledge of and maintain pride in their birth country. We established Camp Masala Indian Heritage Camp in 2004 because we wanted families to be able to attend a fun camp with an emphasis on education. Camp Masala is 100% self supporting by attendance fees, although donations specifically earmarked to help with camp programs are accepted. Through a generous donation, ICAN established a scholarship fund to help families attend camp.  www.campmasala.org .



Some of the organizations we help support include:

Care + Share of Vijayawada, India: We can’t say enough good things about Care + Share and the wonderful people who run it! They run a literacy center in the four slums; rescue children from the streets and house & school them; supply prosthetic limbs & braces to children & adults; provide food and medical assistance in the slums of Vijayawada; and much more! Care + Share also provides Emergency Relief to thousands when disasters strike – they helped over 4000 families after the 2004 Tsunami. Many Camp Masala families already sponsor a child through Care + Share. If you are interested in sponsoring a child in India, Care + Share makes it very easy – you can sponsor a child online through the website. You will get letters from your child, photos, annual reports and you’ll know you are making a lasting impact on a child’s life! If you are interested in learning more, visit their website at: www.careshareindia.org .

St Catherine’s Home of Mumbai, India: St Catherine’s rescues young girls from prostitution, provides shelter and care services for children with HIV, and provides a safe shelter for unwed mothers.

Prem Dan in Mumbai, India: 'Prem Dan' in Hindi means "a gift of love". Prem Dan is a 25-year-old institution that runs 3 schools to feed and educate street children and slum children. www.premdan.org .


Prerana in Mumbai, India: Prerana’s activities include development and re-integration of women and child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. Their aim is to prevent trafficking of women and children for prostitution and pornography.



Hogar Nuevo Amanecer in Guatemala City, Guatemala: An orphanage for children in Guatemala City.

Centro de Salud in Santa Clotilde, Peru: A mission hospital serving 100 villages spread out along 435 miles of the Napo River in northeastern Peru. None of the villages has electricity, water, or telephone services. The hospital serves over 20,000 indigenous people who have little or no access to healthcare. The mission includes a 30 bed hospital, an outpatient clinic, a dental clinic, a pharmacy and public health programs.

International Child Advocacy Network (ICAN) is exempt from federal income tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code as an organization described in Section 501(c)3. Our Tax ID#: 47-0869226. 100% of all donations are sent directly to the projects we support.

To donate to Camp Masala or any of the above projects, send your tax deductible donation to:

ICAN - PO Box 94, Hamel, MN 55340

Caught in the middle


Opinion   

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |

Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Opinion - News Analysis

 

Caught in the middle

 

 

 

IN THE U.S., Angelique and Daniel Hatch decided to adopt a child, definitely `one from India'. In the area in which they lived, Minnesota, there were many children from the subcontinent, living their lives as Americans. This was enough to convince the Hatchs to apply to a local adoption placement agency to find them a child from India.

 

Following this up, the agency contacted Precious Moments, in Hyderabad, which sent the picture of four-month-old Zuleika to them. That seemed to be a dream come true for the couple, who decided to go ahead and adopt the child officially born on March 15, 2000. Papers were sent back and forth and a fee paid for home study reports and other legal requirements. After the mandatory period was over, the Hatchs believed they would become the parents of the baby. Little did they realise what was in store.

 

The family court cleared the decks for the American couple to adopt Zuleika and take her to the U.S. on December 5, 2001. The Guild of Service, which had a CARA licence then and had issued an `abandonment certificate' for the baby, issued an NoC on December 12, once again, facilitating the adoption of the child.

 

The State Government, in the family court, consented to let the Hatchs adopt Zuleika, satisfied with the Home Study report. However, subsequently, it was decided not to allow this adoption, following scrutiny by a three-member committee that averred that the adoptive mother was suffering from "Crohn's Disease" and therefore would not be able to take care of the child.

 

The Department of Women's Development and Children's Welfare filed an appeal in the High Court asking it to stay the family court verdict of December 5. In their arguments, the couple's attorneys brought in a report from the University of Minnesota, where Angelique Hatch had received treatment for her condition. The letter gave her a clean bill of health and added that her "mild digestive disorder was not life threatening".

 

The judge accepted that the couple was indeed fit to adopt the child and thereby dismissed the Department's appeal. The order was pronounced on February 11, this year. The Hatchs, however, are still running from pillar to post to take home the baby, presently housed in Sishu Vihar.

 

``We admit that there were some scandals and babies were bought and sold, but how can we be responsible for that,'' asks Angeline Hatch.

 

Meanwhile, Zuleika is approaching her second birthday.

 

 

Ramya Kannan