Letter to MEP Ana Gomes (French Lobby)

Document type: Web page copy

Publication date: 6 June 2006

To Mrs. Gomes

Madam,

We acquainted ourselves with the letter you sent to Mrs. Gibault after her interpellation of all the members of the European Parliament concerning the abandoned children of Romania.

AS EUROPEAN CITIZENS. WE CAN ONLY BE NOTHING BUT APPALLED BY THE WHOLE OF YOUR ASSERTIONS THE SUPPORT OF WHICH IS OPEN TO DOUBT.

When you speak about “objective evaluation”, as an association of adoptive families made up of many specialists in the subjects that you only skim over, we have no option but issuing very serious reserves.

Indeed, we, adoptive parents of children born in Romania, but also, for some of us, professionals of health and social matters, and above all, EUROPEAN CITIZENS, WE AWAIT FROM OUR INSTITUTIONS, AND THUS IN PRIORITY FROM ITS REPRESENTATIVES, TO CARRY OUT QUALITY DEBATES.

However, your declarations to your European Parliament colleagues reveals :

1 - False information ;

2 - Truncated information, completely taken out of their context ;

3 - An obvious ignorance of the international adoption procedures as well as pre- & post-adoption procedures in the children’s host countries ;

4 - A lack of knowledge about the childhood protection systems in the countries of the European Union ;

5 - The absence of some information, either by ignorance or by voluntary omission.

You will find below the whole of the elements that seemed to us paramount to enumerate and compare to your assertions, as well as, in each case, the reliable references on which we rest to support our argumentation.

You are the one to decide to read or not our positions because it is quite obvious that it belongs to you, as a member of the European Parliament and a European citizen, and above all, as a human being, to face up to your responsibilities.

1-/ You stress that the abandoned children situation improved in Romania : may we point out to you that, being given the situation at the starting point, i.e. when the situation of the orphanages was initially known worldwide, after Ceaucescu’s fall, this situation could obviously only improve !

NGOs, Romanian authorities and European institutions committed themselves so that the situation indeed improves : do we have to remind you that many NGOs are financially supported by ordinary citizens who feel very concerned by the dramatic situation of abandoned children ?

2-/ We want moreover to insist on raising the unbearable tone which you use to speak about the aged or handicapped children, “that nobody wants to adopt in Romania or abroad”, to go back on your very words.

However, as opposed to what you affirm or simply think, and that without having taken the trouble to check anything, there are many adoptive parents of children born in Romania (at least 60%) who adopted old children and/or children suffering from psychomotor delays, if not irremediable handicaps.

These children were seldom handicapped from birth ; it is indeed THEIR LIVING CONDITIONS prior to their adoption which are at the roots of their handicap : lack of care or stimulation, errors of diagnosis, inappropriate counselling for Rom children, normal in the beginning, to be placed in centres for mentally handicapped persons, prolonged stays in maternity wards for lack of place in the orphanages …

3-/ The adoption of these “special needs” children can be easily demonstrable if, by any chance, you had the will to consult official reports. And yet, the reality of this situation well-known by many fieldwork specialists did not even touch you !

We could of course sing the praises of the adoptive parents who carried out, and still carry out, a hard struggle, quiet most of the time, to allow their children to reach a certain degree of autonomy in their social life as adults.

However we prefer here to pay tribute to these children who, with tenacity and great courage, face up to their many difficulties.

4-/ We also remind you that the parents applying for an adoption known as a “pipeline case” have often been waiting for more than 4 years for the children who have grown since then and are thus now aged more than 6, if not 7, 8, 9 years old on average, or even more…

Here is what contradicts your words which insinuate that only infants hold the interest of the foreign families wishing to adopt Romanian children !

5-/ It is true that we are hardly surprised : there are, according to you, to take again your own words, “the good products” and the “downgraded products” ; this approach is indeed in relation to the inflation of “economic” expressions which sprinkle your speech, treating children like “objects” in a very thinly veiled manner.

6-/ You claim you proceeded to a “direct observation of the situation” (of the abandoned children) “in Romania”.

Well, not at all, Madam : in fact, you spent one weekend in Romania, within the framework of an organized tour guided by representatives of the Romanian authorities, this in two institutions, located in the diplomatic district of Bucharest and known for a long time for their amenities adapted to their environment, i.e. benefiting from a high level of services.

This can, at most, be described as a “visit”, but certainly not as an evaluation, nor as a direct observation of a whole childhood protection system. This visit had moreover one particular connotation since it took place less than a month before the publication of the reports on the enlargement of the EU to Romania and Bulgaria.

7-/ In your curriculum vitae, you boast about being a member of “Amnesty International” NGO : allow us to be more than surprised by this reference, since it is certainly not with “Amnesty” - an NGO we respect a lot, and this all the more as some of our members and sympathizers are indeed active members -, that you learned how to evaluate the conditions of imprisonment in a given country, while at the same time you were guided by the authorities of the evaluated country! Because, in this case, “Amnesty International” would have stopped a long time ago to talk and be listened to in the absence of independence from the authorities of the appraised country !

8-/ In your recent report sent to your European colleagues, you put forward the basic premise that all the problems of childhood in Romania are not solved.

We would really have appreciated that you argue more about this precise point.

But we suspect that a visit in Romania during the time of only a weekend hardly allowed you to get acquainted with the work of a lot of nongovernmental organizations, Romanian and foreign, who have committed themselves to improve the situation of the abandoned childhood in Romania since Ceaucescu’s fall.

9-/ About corruption

With regard to the Swiss couple about whom you speak in your declaration, and who would have paid (according to you) 9000 US dollars to intermediaries, you knowingly omit the following facts (or you are unaware of them - but, in this case, it would have been better to get detailed information beforehand !) :

a-/ Several Swiss couples had engaged in adoption procedures via a Swiss adoption agency called “ROMADOPT”, which they paid for up to 6000 US dollars each in 2001.

b-/ ROMADOPT worked in relation with a Romanian foundation, and this relationship was mandatory before the end of the year 2000, according to the Romanian law into force at the time.

c-/ These adoption procedures were suspended by the June 2001 moratorium, having in fact a retroactive effect to the 13/12/2000.

d-/ In March 2004, following a complaint of the Swiss applicants - because ROMADOPT, in relation with the Romanian foundation (which, however, did not have at the time, any more authorization to practise in this field !), claimed for a second payment from them before continuing the adoption procedure -, the Swiss government took immediate adapted measures : advice given to the Swiss citizens engaged in an adoption procedure with ROMADOPT not to pay anything, interdiction for ROMADOPT to continue payments to the Romanian foundation (decision of April 2004), interdiction for ROMADOPT to handle any adoption request for children born in Romania except at the risk of penal sanctions …

e-/ In this precise case that you highlighted in your recent declaration towards your European colleagues, corruption on behalf of the Swiss families desiring to adopt a child was never proven, but, quite on the contrary, a blatant act of breach of trust by a Swiss adoption agency, in relation with a Romanian foundation previously accredited by the Romanian Government. However Swiss authorities - but not Romanian authorities unfortunately ! - reacted as soon as they received the complaint.

(Of course we hold a copy of the official documents issued by the Government of the Swiss Confederation, proving our argumentation).

10-/ In practical terms, between 1997 and 2001, all foreign adopters had to cope, as part of their adoption procedures, with mandatory middlemen, in fact “foundations” depending on Romanian private law, approved by the Romanian authorities.

These foundations organized adoption procedures in exchange for remuneration, and it had been decided so by the Romanian Governments at the time.

In theory, a part of these fees was intended – so said the accredited foundations - to be for local lawyers pleading the plenary adoption request in front of the Romanian courts.

Another part of the fees was assigned as a donation to the orphanage where the child had been waiting for his/her adoption.

The total sums asked by the foundations were, on average, between 4500 and 6000 US dollars, openly and publicly known by the Romanian authorities since the foundations had to give them an account of all the fees paid !

The Romanian Central Authority for child welfare had worked out a system of points for the foundations : however, to the great regret of many adoptive families, between 1997 and 2001, there was never any control of the foundations by the Romanian authorities.

Nevertheless, if the local authorities had decided otherwise, this control would have avoided many drifts !

11-/ Concerning the intervention of Interpol in the “Swiss dossier”

Interpol will certainly not handle the Swiss affair you raise, since that was, in its time, within the Swiss authorities’ province : let us pay tribute to their promptness !

We also insist on informing you that Interpol never had to deal with any affair of children traffic for paedophilia, pornography and body parts in connection with international adoption files.

As an Interpol spokesperson said it so well in 2003, “for who really wants it, there are faster, less expensive and less severely controlled means than international adoptions to organize a children traffic” … aiming at the vile goals you detail.

12-/ Concerning the children traffic for paedophilia, pornography and body parts

Even if you do not talk about it in your answer addressed recently to Mrs. Gibault, you uttered this charge in your call against the declaration n°23/2006.

Therefore we recall here the declaration of Mrs. Helga Konrad, special OSCE representative for the fight against human being trade on 18/03/2005 : “In South-Eastern Europe alone, the number of victims doubled during the last three years”.

HOWEVER, LEGAL INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION was almost non-existent in South-Eastern Europe during the last three years.

Which logical conclusions do you draw from this fact ?

Here is the analysis of the Council of Europe on the increase in the trade of human beings :

“The fall of the communist regimes, the Balkan wars, the impoverishment of the populations subjected to the “therapies of shock” from the market economy, the major evolutions in the last fifteen years in Central and Eastern Europe widely contributed to boost the human trade.

“78% of the women victims of the trade are originally from these areas”, underlines Lydie Err in her report in front of the parliamentary Assembly.

“The opening of the borders, the unemployment increase and the upheaval of the state structures favoured the progression of the human being trade”.

We highly encourage you to fight against this odious traffic, whether it takes place in origin, transit or arrival countries.

And we pay tribute to all NGOs already involved in this fight !

Illegal adoption could of course be one of the ways of the human trade market.

THIS IS WHY WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN INSISTING ON THE NEED FOR INTERNATIONAL ADOPTIONS TO BE STRICTLY CONTROLLED BY FOLLOWING THE HAGUE CONVENTION (ratified by Romania well before France)!

Let us note that, moreover, this Convention is the guarantee that our children adopted abroad will receive the necessary entry visa delivered by our national authorities, and then required by all the administrative organizations of the host countries.

(We put the official texts of the international adoption procedures enacted according to the Convention of The Hague at your disposal, if you are unaware of them, and inform you that the French Government never hesitated to suspend procedures in case of doubt: recent examples of Vietnam - temporarily, since adoptions were possible again from 2004 -, then of Cambodia – suspension for the last 2 years).

13-/ Concerning the Romanian law dated January 1, 2005

We first insist on rectifying the scornful terms of the allegation you uttered in the following way : “the trade consisting in children export … is estimated at 30 000 children”.

We would rather replace it by another expression more respectful for the children as follows :
“30 000 children born in Romania were adopted by foreign parents”.

You probably remember, just like us, the immense impulse of many European citizens towards the Romanian people at the time of dictator Ceausescu’s fall, when the assessment of thirty years long dictatorship was produced!

Do not free yourself from history so easily, Madam !

You maintain, according to the declarations of the local UNICEF representative and of the European Commission delegate in Bucharest, that the number of adoptable children in Romania hardly meets the national “demand”.

But Madam, nothing is more normal !

The law dated June 2004 that became effective on 01/01/2005 indeed requires that the adoptability procedure of the abandoned children includes the active search of the child’s biological parents until the 4th degree, in order to confirm they do not want to look after the child.

If this does not succeed (which often happens as consequences of lack of staff able to lead this search or lack of interest in this task…), this search cycle must start again every year, and this until the child is 18.

And we do not even speak about the case of certain children, in particular of Rom origin, who are not even recorded in birth registers!

ROMANIA IS THE ONLY EUROPEAN STATE TO PROCEED LIKE THIS.

NO SOVEREIGN STATE COULD PRIDE ITSELF ON HAVING THE ADMINITRATIVE MEANS, HUMAN AND FINANCIAL, TO MANAGE SUCH A PROCEDURE WITH EFFECTIVENESS, SO AS TO CARRY OUT SUCH A RESEARCH TASK FOR 110 000 CHILDREN EACH YEAR.

However it is exact that, by considering certain children individually, the implementation of the procedure must be feasible in order to “make the child available” for national adoption.

Does this mean that the adoptability process will be all the faster as the child meets the criteria often set by Romanian adopters : young fair-haired child in good health ? We would not be excessively surprised !

Let us note that Romania also adopted an original clause : international adoption is only authorised for the child grandparents residing abroad.

Mr. Verheugen, Commissioner for Enlargement till June 2004, has indeed become famous for being at the origin of this insane clause : obviously it was just a way, by this clause, to prevent Romania from being accused through a trial in any International Court of Justice of having terminated The Hague Convention which it signed and ratified a few years before …

BUT RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS JUSTICE !

14-/ CONCERNING WHAT IS LEFT WIDELY UNSAID : THE ROM ISSUE

We wonder, Madam, about the silence which strikes an essential data of the problem.

Neither the European Commission, in particular Mr. Rehn but especially Mr. Verheugen, nor Mrs. Nicholson, nor even you, talked about it !

AND YET :

60%, IF NOT MORE, OF THE ABANDONED CHILDREN IN ROMANIA ARE OF ROM ORIGIN : we remind you that the Rom population makes up only 10% of the whole Romanian population.

Since you use an ONU friend’s name, he certainly advised you to read the PNUD report published on 02/02/2005 about the Rom living conditions in 10 countries of Eastern and Central Europe just before the “decade for the integration of Rom people”.

We wonder about your silence, Madam, because we, adoptive parents of children born in Romania, have known for a long time that a majority of the children adopted abroad are of Rom origin …

That aspect of the issue was clearly tackled during the Conference on 04 and 05/04/2006 in Monaco, entitled “Europe for and with the children”.

We know very well that a long way will still be necessary in Eastern and Western Europe to integrate the largest European minority: that of Roms.

We hope that the enterprise will be crowned with success, but we do not ignore that one will need a strong will of the governmental policies and of European institutions.

The Rom children are not only in great danger because of their abandonment, but also in great danger because of their ethnic origin: they face major risks of violence, exclusion, inappropriate curriculum counselling (special schools for handicapped people)…

HAVE YOU AT LEAST, MADAM, THE INTENTION TO ASK FOR AN EVALUATION OF THESE CHILDREN’S FUTURE IN THE ROMANIAN CHILDHOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM?

Countries: Switzerland, Romania

Organizations: Lobby to Re-open Romanian Adoptions (2001- ), AFAENER, European Parliament, RomAdopt

Persons: Ana Gomes aka Ana Maria Rosa Martins Gomes

Attachments

Sylvie Gillet Letter sent to Ms_Gomes.doc (53248 Bytes)