A river of black dollars flows under the adoption paradise

Publication date: 6 January 2000

January 6, 2000, 12:00 by CAPITALLast modified on January 6, 2000, 2:00 p.m

The crisis of child protection institutions, consummated only two months ago, has called into question, more acutely than ever, the status of Romania as a European country. Our government was ashamed, agitated, accepted the EU's emergency aid, took note of the resignation of the head of the Department for the Protection of Children's Rights (DPDC) and outlined on paper a reorganization of the field. With this, the syncope with the cause was checked and the following crises on the list were moved on: the railway one,

The crisis of child protection institutions, consummated only two months ago, has called into question, more acutely than ever, the status of Romania as a European country. Our government was ashamed, agitated, accepted the EU's emergency aid, took note of the resignation of the head of the Department for the Protection of Children's Rights (DPDC) and outlined on paper a reorganization of the field. With this, the syncope with the reason was checked and we moved on to the following crises on the list: the railway crisis, the government crisis and Moneydoes not bring happiness.

Perhaps, the survival ofSaracia lucie in which the protection of the child is struggling is still in its place. The causes, almost intact: little money and often poorly managed. From the private foundations that make adoptions - conditioned to declare their incomes and finance programs in the field - came a breath of oxygen. Its value, according to the Romanian Adoption Committee (CRA), significantly exceeded 70 billion lei towards the end of 1999. So, four million dollars, the equivalent of the budget of two county directorates for the protection of children's rights (DJPDC).

Compared to the hope with which the contribution of the 70 private foundations was expected and compared to the needs of the system, 70 billion is not much at all. And if we consider that a handful of foundations do the heavy lifting: Irene - 15.5 billion lei donated in one year, the Happy Children - 8.5 billion, Stuart - 8.4 billion, Sperante - over 6 billion, covering more than half of the amount total, without having anywhere near a similar weight in the number of adoptions, the phenomenon becomes really bizarre.

Theoretically, there is the necessary information to unravel this mystery. Practically, however, we discover that the equation has more unknowns than it can contain: the CRA database is shaken by a relentless virus, the memory of the CRA managers does not feel too good either, from the county departments we receive a lot of confusing and hilarious answers ( including: "They are secret data"!?) and, in general, a kind of modesty, discretion and complicit stuttering reigns.
The truth - the secret that the whole village knows, but not the state - is that the net incomes obtained by foundations from international adoptions (because national ones are done free of charge) are much higher than those declared.

The accounting transparency to which the Romanian adoption agencies are obliged has a subreddit: there are only sometimes clear and credible data regarding the receipts. In the agreements concluded with foreign agencies, fees of 3,000, 2,000 and even 1,000 dollars are currently mentioned, in the conditions that the expenses incurred by the Romanian foundation cannot fall below 3-4,000 USD for an adoption. In other conventions, the mentioned amounts are calculated, honestly and realistically, at 8-10-12,000 USD.
Beyond what one foundation or another is willing to declare, there are some market prices, below which the Romanian agencies have no reason to go too low, given the high demand from abroad. Europeans negotiate adoptions in Romania between 10-15,000 USD, as a rule, and North Americans between 15-23,000 USD.
On November 4, 1999, the CRA had issued 3,707 decisions confirming adoptions, of which 2,599 were international. For the whole of last year, the number of the latter can be estimated at 2,920, which would result in total receipts of the Romanian foundations between 29.2 and 43.8 million USD.
Subtracting an average expenditure per adoption of USD 4,000, respectively total expenses of USD 11.6 million, it turns out that the net income of the Romanian agencies was between USD 17.6 and USD 32.2 million. The real amount is much closer to the last figure, especially since the total expenses per adoption can be significantly lowered below 4,000 USD, if we assume that most foundations do not hesitate to discount the standards.

Anyway, the difference up to the four million dollars declared as net income and invested in programs is huge. We can talk about an amount of around 25 million dollars (reference figure), representing the black money that is flying around the international adoptions concluded in Romania.
Half of the envelope Rugby is said to be a game played by gentlemen. Or vice versa. The world of adoptions, observes one of its actors, is open to any paradoxical definitions. This is where professionalism and amateurism meet, generosity and greed, the spirit of solidarity and the blackest envy. Adoptions are handled by lawyers, doctors, sociologists, but also former hairdressers, telephone operators or tailors. From what they were in 1991-1992, a business offered to anyone and anyway, adoptions tend to become today what it should be: a humanitarian mission, rigorously managed on clear legal, moral and financial principles.

The fight between what was once and what will become the world of adoptions is dramatic, hard and sometimes dirty. With few exceptions, older foundations are extremely resistant to change. They don't easily give up neither the privileges, nor the relationships, nor the markets, nor the gains of another time.
In one of the last meetings of the CRA, which he presided over, ex-minister Tabacaru estimated that only 15-20% of the foundations honestly declare their income, the most suspicious situations being reported on relations with the USA, Italy and Greece.

According to another algorithm, most foundations proceed as follows: under the word that they are obliged to pay all kinds of "unofficial commissions", they ask the foreign partner to pay them at least 50% of the agreed price in cash. The rest is transferred through the bank, being declared income, from which expenses are deducted.
Foreign agencies lend themselves to this game because they are not obliged to present settlement documents to their clients (adoptive families), because their interest is focused on completing adoptions and because the payment procedure is probably perfectly compatible with Romania's current reputation .
The best proof that adoptions are contracted around the same market prices, only the declared incomes being different, is that foreign agencies do not bypass Romanian foundations that prefer to work transparently, cleanly, running the money exclusively on banking circuits. On the contrary, the vice-president of the Irene Foundation, lawyer Petre Patrascu, testifies: "We are literally bombarded with requests. Our Spanish partner keeps open a waiting list of about 1,000 requests, and recently we had to decline the proposal of an agency in Israel to conclude a convention, because we could not honor it".

A simple choice

The artisans from CRA, and not only them, consider that the system is good and works. Open in every way and elastic as it is, it can be easily manipulated to the benefit of foundations that do not respect the rules of the game, thus becoming a hostile environment for those who strive to work cleanly and honestly.
Normally, the scoring system should sideline operators who hide money or inflate their salaries up to 5-10,000 USD, not honoring their obligation to pay funds for child protection.
In fact, the selection based on merit does not occur, and those tempted to withdraw from the conspiracy of the old in evil are precisely the representatives of the foundations with massive contributions to the financing of the DJPDC.

"If we invest one billion in the county and I see the effects, I will bring two more. If not, I'd rather withdraw", warns Dr. Ivanescu, perhaps thinking that for a program of one billion, half of which he has already spent, in Satu Mare, he received 742 points, while a local foundation, Concordia has 2,450 points for a monthly contribution of 36 million plus a series of benefits from the "importable" category and services offered to DJPDC in stand-by mode. The director of DJPDC Satu Mare, Vicentia Malaescu, otherwise a respected person, claims that these scores have perfect legal coverage. All the worse!

A summary calculation shows that annually, about 10,000 children can be identified and placed in foster care, for their benefit and those remaining in protective institutions. If the 70% proportion of international adoptions is maintained, and the foundations are required to work strictly legally, between 42 and 77 million USD (800-1,400 billion lei) can be returned to DPDC annually. Sufficient for a civilized system for the protection of minors. And there is room for everyone in this field. R
The competition is really not for "a market", but to promote a healthy system or to perpetuate a malicious mechanism. tr

Histories and legends

International adoptions have given rise to many speculations, which the press cultivates with pleasure. In the attached photo, Daniela Elena Carratala y Carregui-Gouinot (born Stoian), five years old, adopted by a Spanish family. Her case made waves in the press in the past years, there were voices that even claimed that she was seized and secretly taken out of Romania to be sacrificed in an "organ bank".

Today, at least, the illegal removal of children from the country (which cannot be called "adoption") is very unlikely. The only case recorded by the IGP in recent years is that of the Dutchman Leonard Coenen, who tried to get on the plane, in Otopeni, with an infant in his arms. Otherwise, the crimes are most frequently frauds, whose victims are foreign citizens. A family from Cyprus gave USD 7,000 and a two-room apartment for a child they couldn't even receive. There are also frequent attempts to get children out of the country on the duplicate documents of already adopted brothers. Last year, for example, the Passport Service found that a child had been adopted by the Spix family from the USA, fictitiously, on the duplicate documents of the minor Mustafa Pita, who had left the country since 1995. The ingenious col. Stanciu did not miss the opportunity to turn the story upside down like a sock, to use it in the "war of the foundations", claiming that the real Mustafa is the one who is still in Romania. The declared working principle of the colonel: I can't incriminate you?! But I can make a file for you!

“Tabacaru Reform”

The resigned Secretary of State, Cristian Tabacaru, having to administer a system of over 250 protection institutions, in which are distributed about 135,000 children who require special protection (orphans , disabled, etc.), turned to the only source that could cover the permanent financial deficit of DPDC: international adoptions.

Through two emergency ordinances from June 1997, private adoption operators were obliged to establish themselves in non-profit organizations, to be accredited annually according to rigorous standards, in addition to the central authority in the matter (the Romanian Adoption Committee - CRA), to submit accounting balance sheets and finance programs from net income. Thus, the procedures were regulated, operations became transparent and professional, relations with foreign adoption agencies (also subject to CRA accreditation) are governed by written conventions, and the allocation of adoptable children to the foundations is made perfectly fair: absolutely random, through a computer program.

And in order for the foundations to be motivated to invest in child protection, each foundation receives for adoption, from the current list of orphaned and abandoned children, a number proportional to the score obtained for donations, sponsorships, deinstitutionalization of minors and their transfer to foster care, etc. . r
The system is not necessarily original, it is used in many Western countries.

=============================================================================

6 ianuarie 2000, 12:00 de CAPITAL

Un fluviu de dolari negri curge pe sub paradisul adoptiilor

Ultima modificare în 6 ianuarie 2000, 14:00

Criza institutiilor de ocrotire a copiilor, consumata cu doar doua luni in urma, a pus in discutie, mai acut decat oricand, statutul de tara europeana al Romaniei. Guvernul nostru s-a rusinat, s-a agitat, a acceptat ajutorul de urgenta al UE, a luat nota de demisia titularului Departamentului pentru Protectia Drepturilor Copilului (DPDC) si a schitat pe hartie o reorganizare a domeniului. Cu aceasta, sincopa cu pricina a fost bifata si s-a trecut la urmatoarele crize de pe lista: cea feroviara, cea guvernamentala s.a.m.d.
Banii n-aduc fericirea.
Poate, supravietuirea
Saracia lucie in care se zbate protectia copilului e tot la locul ei. Cauzele, aproape intacte: bani putini si adesea prost gestionati. De la fundatiile private care fac adoptii – conditionate sa-si declare veniturile si sa finanteze programe in domeniu – a venit o gura de oxigen. Valoarea ei, potrivit Comitetului Roman de Adoptii (CRA), depasise sensibil, catre finele lui 1999, 70 miliarde lei. Deci, patru milioane dolari, echivalentul bugetului a doua directii judetene de protectie a drepturilor copilului (DJPDC).
Fata de nadejdea cu care a fost asteptat aportul celor 70 de fundatii private si fata de nevoile sistemului, 70 de miliarde nu-s deloc prea multe. Iar daca socotim ca o mana de fundatii duc greul: Irene – 15,5 miliarde lei donati intr-un an, Copiii Fericiti – 8,5 miliarde, Stuart – 8,4 miliarde, Sperante – peste 6 miliarde, acoperind peste jumatate din suma totala, fara a avea nici pe departe o pondere similara in numarul de adoptii, fenomenul devine chiar bizar.
Teoretic, exista informatiile necesare pentru a dezlega acest mister. Practic insa, descoperim ca ecuatia are mai multe necunoscute decat poate cuprinde: baza de date a CRA e zguduita de un virus necrutator, memoria responsabililor CRA nu se simte nici ea prea bine, de la directiile judetene primim o multime de raspunsuri confuze si hilare (inclusiv: „Sunt date secrete!?) si, in general, domneste un soi de pudoare, de discretie si de balbaiala complice.
Adevarul – secretul pe care-l stie tot satul, dar nu si statul – este ca veniturile nete obtinute de fundatii din adoptii internationale (pentru ca cele nationale se fac gratutit) sunt mult mai mari decat cele declarate.
Transparenta contabila la care sunt obligate agentiile romane de adoptii are un capat subred: nu exista decat uneori date clare si credibile privind incasarile. In conventiile incheiate cu agentiile straine sunt mentionate in mod curent onorarii de 3.000, 2.000 si chiar 1.000 dolari, in conditiile in care cheltuielile facute de fundatia romana nu pot cobori sub 3-4.000 USD pentru o adoptie. In alte conventii, sumele mentionate se cifreaza, onest si realist, la 8-10-12.000 USD.
Dincolo de ceea ce e dispusa o fundatie sau alta sa declare, exista niste preturi ale pietei, sub care agentiile romane n-au motiv sa coboare prea mult, data fiind cererea mare de peste hotare. Europenii negociaza adoptiile in Romania intre 10 – 15.000 USD, de regula, iar nord-americanii intre 15 – 23.000 USD.
La data de 4 noiembrie 1999, CRA eliberase 3.707 decizii de confirmare a adoptiilor, dintre care 2.599 erau internationale. Pentru intreg anul trecut, numarul acestora din urma poate fi estimat la 2.920, din care ar rezulta incasari totale ale fundatiilor romane intre 29,2 si 43,8 milioane USD.
Scazand o cheltuiala medie per adoptie de 4.000 USD, respectiv cheltuieli per total de 11,6 milioane USD, rezulta ca veniturile nete ale agentiilor romane s-au cifrat intre 17,6 si 32,2 milioane USD. Suma reala este mult mai aproape de ultima cifra, mai ales ca totalul cheltuielilor per adoptie poate fi sensibil coborat sub 4.000 USD, daca presupunem ca majoritatea fundatiilor nu ezita sa faca rabat la standarde.
Oricum, diferenta pana la cele patru milioane dolari declarate ca venit net si investite in programe este uriasa. Putem vorbi despre o suma de circa 25 milioane dolari (cifra de referinta), reprezentand banii negri care se vantura in jurul adoptiilor internationale incheiate in Romania.
Jumatatea plina a plicului
Despre rugby se spune ca este un joc de derbedei practicat de gentlemeni. Sau viceversa. Lumea adoptiilor, observa un actor al acesteia, este deschisa oricaror definitii paradoxale. Aici se intalnesc profesionalismul si amatorismul, generozitatea si lacomia, spiritul de solidaritate si invidia cea mai neagra. De adoptii se ocupa avocati, medici, sociologi, dar si foste coafeze, telefoniste sau croitori. De la ceea ce erau prin 1991-1992, o afacere oferita oricui si oricum, adoptiile tind sa devina azi ceea ce trebuie sa fie: o misiune umanitara, gestionata riguros pe principii juridice, morale si financiare clare.
Lupta dintre ceea ce era candva si ce urmeaza sa devina lumea adoptiilor este dramatica, dura si uneori murdara. Cu exceptiile de rigoare, fundatiile mai vechi sunt extrem de rezistente la schimbare. Nu cedeaza lesne nici privilegiile, nici relatiile, nici pietele, nici castigurile de alta data.
Intr-una din ultimele sedinte ale CRA, pe care le-a prezidat, ex-ministrul Tabacaru aprecia ca doar 15 – 20% dintre fundatii declara in mod onest veniturile, situatiile cele mai suspecte fiind semnalate pe relatiile cu SUA, Italia si Grecia.
Potrivit unui alt algoritm, majoritatea fundatiilor procedeaza astfel: sub cuvant ca sunt obligate sa plateasca tot felul de „comisioane neoficiale, cer partenerului strain sa le achite cel putin 50% din pretul convenit in numerar. Restul se vireaza prin banca, fiind venit declarat, din care se deduc cheltuielile.
Agentiile straine se preteaza la acest joc pentru ca nu sunt obligate sa prezinte clientilor lor (familiile adoptive) documente de decontare, pentru ca interesul lor e focalizat pe finalizarea adoptiilor si pentru ca procedura de plata este, probabil, perfect compatibila cu reputatia curenta a Romaniei.
Cea mai buna dovada ca adoptiile se contracteaza in jurul acelorasi preturi ale pietei, doar veniturile declarate fiind diferite, este ca agentiile straine nu ocolesc fundatiile romane care prefera sa lucreze transparent, curat, ruland banii exclusiv pe circuite bancare. Dimpotriva, marturiseste viceperesedintele Fundatiei Irene, avocatul Petre Patrascu: „Suntem literalmente asaltati de cereri. Partenerul nostru spaniol tine deschisa o lista de asteptare cuprinzand circa 1.000 de solicitari, iar recent am fost nevoiti sa declinam propunerea unei agentii din Israel de a incheia o conventie, pentru ca n-am putea-o onora.
O alegere simpla
Artizanii de la CRA, si nu numai ei, considera ca sistemul e bun si functioneaza. Neincheiat la toti nasturii si elastic cum este, el poate fi manevrat cu usurinta in beneficiul fundatiilor care nu respecta regulile jocului, devenind astfel un mediu ostil celor care se straduiesc sa lucreze curat si onest.
In mod normal, sistemul de punctare ar trebui sa scoata pe margine operatorii care ascund banii sau isi umfla salariile pana la 5-10.000 USD, neonorandu-si obligatia de a varsa fonduri pentru protectia copilului.
De fapt, selectia dupa merite nu se produce, iar cei tentati sa se retraga din fata conspiratiei celor invechiti in rele sunt tocmai reprezentantii fundatiilor cu contributii masive la finantarea DJPDC.
„Daca investim un miliard in judet si vad ca apar efectele, mai aduc inca doua. Daca nu, mai degraba ma retrag, avertizeaza dr. Ivanescu, gandindu-se poate ca pentru un program de un miliard, din care jumatate a varsat deja, la Satu Mare, a primit 742 de puncte, in vreme ce o fundatie locala, Concordia, are 2.450 de puncte pentru o contributie de 36 milioane lunar plus o serie de prestatii din categoria „imponderabile si servicii oferite DJPDC in regim stand-by. Directorul DJPDC Satu Mare, Vicentia Malaescu, altfel o persoana stimata, sustine ca punctajele acestea au perfecta acoperire legala. Cu atat mai rau!
Un calcul sumar arata ca anual pot fi identificati si plasati in adoptii, spre binele lor si al celor ramasi in institutiile de ocrotire, circa 10.000 de copii. Daca proportia de 70% a adoptiilor internationale se pastreaza, iar fundatiile sunt tinute sa lucreze strict legal, in DPDC se pot intoarce anual intre 42 si 77 milioane USD (800 – 1.400 miliarde lei). Arhisuficient pentru un sistem civilizat de protectie a minorilor. Iar loc este pentru toata lumea in acest domeniu. r
Competitia se duce in mod real nu pentru „o piata, ci pentru a promova un sistem sanatos ori a perpetua un mecanism gaunos.tr
r
Istorii si legender
Adoptiile internationale au dat prilej multor speculatii, pe care presa le cultiva cu voluptate. In fotografia alaturata, Daniela Elena Carratala y Carregui-Gouinot (nascuta Stoian), in varsta de cinci ani, adoptata de o familie de spanioli. Cazul ei a facut valuri in presa anilor trecuti, gasindu-se voci care sa afirme inclusiv ca a fost sechestrata si scoasa pe furis din Romania pentru a fi sacrificata intr-o „banca de organe.r
Azi, cel putin, scoaterea ilegala a copiilor din tara (ceea ce nicicum nu se poate chema „adoptie) este foarte putin probabila. Singurul caz inregistrat de IGP in ultimii ani este cel al olandezului Leonard Coenen, care incerca sa urce in avion, la Otopeni, cu un sugar in brate. Altminteri, infractiunile sunt cel mai frecvent inselaciuni carora le cad victime cetateni straini. O familie din Cipru a dat 7.000 USD si un apartament de doua camere pentru un copil pe care nici nu avea cum sa-l primeasca. Frecvente sunt si incercarile de a scoate din tara copii pe actele-duplicat ale unor frati deja infiati. Anul trecut, de pilda, Serviciul Pasapoarte a constatat ca un copil fusese adoptat de familia Spix din SUA, in mod fictiv, pe actele-duplicat ale minorului Mustafa Pita, care plecase din tara inca din 1995. Ingeniosul col. Stanciu n-a scapat ocazia de a intoarce povestea pe dos ca pe un ciorap, pentru a o folosi in „razboiul fundatiilor, pretinzand ca adevaratul Mustafa este cel care se afla inca in Romania. Principiul de lucru declarat al dlui colonel: Nu pot sa te incriminez?! Dar dosar pot sa-ti fac!r
r
„Reforma Tabacaru”r
Secretarul de stat demisionar, Cristian Tabacaru, trebuind sa administreze un sistem de peste 250 de institutii de ocrotire, in care sunt distribuiti circa 135.000 de copii care necesita protectie speciala (orfani, handicapati etc.), s-a indreptat catre singura sursa care putea acoperi deficitul financiar permanent al DPDC: adoptiile internationale.r
Prin doua ordonante de urgenta din iunie 1997, operatorii privati de adoptii au fost obligati sa se constituie in organizatii nonprofit, sa se acrediteze anual dupa standarde riguroase pe langa autoritatea centrala in materie (Comitetul Roman de Adoptii – CRA), sa depuna bilanturi contabile si sa finanteze programe din veniturile nete. Astfel, procedurile au fost reglementate, operatiunile au devenit transparente si profesionale, relatiile cu agentiile straine de adoptii (si ele supuse acreditarii CRA) sunt guvernate de conventii scrise, iar repartizarea copiilor adoptabili catre fundatii se face perfect echitabil: absolut aleator, printr-un program informatic. r
Iar pentru ca fundatiile sa fie motivate sa investeasca in protectia copilului, fiecare fundatie primeste spre plasare in adoptie, din lista curenta de copii orfani si abandonati, un numar proportional cu punctajul obtinut pentru donatii, sponsorizari, dezinstitutionalizarea minorilor si trecerea lor in asistenta maternala etc. r
Sistemul nu e neaparat original, el este folosit in multe tari occidentale.r

Countries: Romania

Persons: Cristian Tabacaru M.D.