Fwd: adoptees who can discuss Hague Convention and UNROC? - 2017
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Arun Dohle
Date: Sun 28. May 2017 at 06:54
Subject: Fwd: adoptees who can discuss Hague Convention and UNROC?
To: Anand Kaper
Dear Anand,
Dear Chamilla,
Dear Lynelle,
the below email is from more than 12 years ago.
Meanwhile the European Commission has ensured, that Poland, Serbia etc. implement the Hague Adoption Convention.
Thus they export to Australia / Sweden i.e.
Recent scandals inclusive.
In 2007 Hilbrand brought me in touch with Roelie Post.
This was the beginning of our work.
Roelie spoke for hours to me on the phone and the same amount of time to Hilbrand.
She explained us both in great depths the difference between the UNCRC and the Hague.
Therefore I fail to understand your / UAI´s lack of clarity.
DCI did set up the trafficking system in Romania.
Nigel Cantwell it was. ..
He also lobbied for continuing the business.
He also drafted the so called UN Guidelines on alternative care. ...a very creepy way of making adoption a child protection measure. - not really, but then in practice.
Termination of parental rights is what comes with it.
The Guidelines are promoted as United Nations Guidelines. They are not.
It´s fraud. Check it out.
A resolution was " adopted" , " welcoming" the guidelines. That s totally different from " adopting" the Guidelines.
The new global system - the so called " Integrated Child Protection System" , is now fully pushed in India.
It started also around 2004.
We can see and watch it unfold in the next few years.
Unstoppable and certainly a catastrophe
There is only a) or b).
Hague or UNCRC.
No mixture. No compromise.
The games the UAI has been playing the last years have been extremely damaging to the whole cause.
On the front of child rights, as well as on the front of searches in India.
" Diplomacy" is exercised by " Diplomats". Neither you all nor me have that status of a " diplomat".
I cannot hide my suspicion, that you play " tactical" strategical games.
The whole adoptee community will be on the long run damaged by it.
I m fully fine with the fact, that the UAI goes and plays along with ISS / DCI.
But then kindly stick clearly to the position and spell it out.
Currently the only thing which differentiates the UAI from the SIG, is critical talk.
The SIG , Hilbrand and the UAI support(ed ?) the Hague Adoption Convention.
Anand, i ve been over all those years an open book to everyone, including my enemies.
I can allow myself to do that, because i m clear on our position.
I m seriously dissappointed to learn from other sources that the UAI applied for funding together with DCI.
I would of course appreciate if the UAI get´s funding, but only if you stick to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Would you mind sharing the funding request you handed in together with DCI with me for the matter of transparency ?
Where was DCI in Romania ? They set up the trafficking system.
Where was DCI in India ? Nigel travelled a bit around...
Who completly messed up child rights in 2004 ? Nigel Cantwell by writing the Unicef position on ICA.
The game UNICEF and DCI now played at the debate is utterly evil.
If you take the time and analyze it clearly they push simply for the " integrated child protection system" everywhere.
Lynelle, adoptions from Vietnam continue due to Nigels weak report.
Let´s all get very clear positions soon. Ours can be read at our websites.
Despite my above and public criticism, i seriously believe that the UAI should lead especially the dutch / european adoptees.
I do understand that i had far more time to dig, research, learn, travel in the field than all of you.
Nothing of the above is meant to " belittle you".
The opposite is the case.
I wish that you guys lead the adoptees. With all of you i have always openly and freely shared my knowledge.
The only thing on the adoptee front i ll do is to set up CRIB, with the clear goal to extinguish CRIB as soon as possible.
Our fight is for adoptee rights, once that is achieved we will fold up CRIB.
An adoptee organisation has however to exist beyond CRIB.
Kindly let me know till latest mid July your plans and position.
Clarity is the need of the hour.
As for searches in India, I m of course aware that ISS wants to enter the roots search business field.
However I m convinced that many cases they will not solve.
One reason is, that ICSW - their indian correspondent, has scrutinised all our adoptions.
ICSW gave it´s okay.
Therefore there is a clear cut conflict of interest and cover up is likely.
Further apart from the " third party" clause, there is nothing which can substitute my and Anjali´s spirit.
We simply don´t give up, where others would give up during a search.
The recent suicide of a young Australian Preet Mandir Adoptee, saddens me.
It was a case on which we worked. We came very far.
However the communication broke with his adoptive parents. In hindsight i understand of course.
The family was counselled by Sandi Peterson and ISS AUS. They took the search case from us.
ISS US is along with ISS AUS now in bed with Ian Anand Forber Pratt.
He runs the Centre for Excellence on alternative care.
Implementing the UN Guidelines on alternative care in India.
Financed 100 % by UK / US adoption and foster care agencies.
CORE ASSETS. / BFAS.
This is big big business.
There is no doubt, they are on the wrong side. As much as they try to maintain their agenda is supporting families.
You guys need to choose the sides clearly please.
Be open and clear.
.