Inspired by the fundraiser/adoption thread

[mickeyfan2]

Unfortunately, people in the US do this too I know of two kids kept in limbo for YEARS because their bio parents would make some tiny contact right before the deadline to terminate their rights, then disappear again.

One of them did it to get the SSI check.

Fortunately both of them are now in wonderful adoptive homes.

Laurie

Yes I know that we are not immune here in the US and it is sick no matter what county you live in.

 

[RUDisney]

Now this is just sick. How evil is the person who would do this to an innocent child.

Some of them may do this hoping that they will some day be able to reclaim their child. They may worry that if they visit too often that the govt will make them take the child back, where they can't really afford to raise them.

Remember, they live in a different society, with no social programs to help people who need them.

OTOH, there was a girl here for the 2001 summer program. The hope was that she would find a forever family. She decided that she wanted to go back to Russia because she'd miss her grandmother too much. When she went back, her grandmother was mad at her because they could have written letters and maybe have called every now and then. She wanted a better life for her DGD. She came back for the 2002 summer program and now lives with her forever family in NJ.

 

[cardaway]

Some of them may do this hoping that they will some day be able to reclaim their child. They may worry that if they visit too often that the govt will make them take the child back, where they can't really afford to raise them.

Remember, they live in a different society, with no social programs to help people who need them.

Yup. I imagine it's a very terrible situation to be in. You have no choice and have somebody in another country calling your child "theirs" long before the deal is even complete.

Not all these parents are bad people, sometimes they all but have to give them up to stay alive themselves or provide for the rest of the family.

 

[punkin]

Actually, if you cannot take care of your child, but still want to be a part of their life, why shouldn't you be allowed to visit them as often as possible. Maybe your economic position will change and you can get them back someday.

 

[dcgrumpy]

I know a couple who used to do foster care. They got paid monthly to care for these 2 children. Then they adopted them and I assumed the money stopped because they were now their kids. But I was wrong. They continue to get over $1500 a month for these kids. Why? Why should they get anything once they've made the decision to adopt them?

My two SIL's were foster children that my inlaws adopted my FIL still receives money for them. I always assumed it would stop when they were adopted but I was wrong. maybe it does go by the state, we live in NY.


ETA
neither one is special needs or hard to place. They've lived with my inlaws since birth, one is hispanic one is caucasian.

 

[cardaway]

Actually, if you cannot take care of your child, but still want to be a part of their life, why shouldn't you be allowed to visit them as often as possible. Maybe your economic position will change and you can get them back someday.

Exactly. Seems to be a strange double standard going on. Do we want people to be involved no matter what, at any level, or do we want them to stay away completely?

Maybe it depends on what the goal is (taking away and giving them to somebody else for example), but if that's the goal, where do you stop?

 

[lynetteSC]

this post in itself could cause controversy(since we paid for our birthmoms living fees) , but here goes ... lol!

we adopted domestically a healthy caucasion boy ... our biggest expense was taking care of our birthmom for the 4 months prior to delivery. we had to find her an apt (she was living in her car) pay all fees associated with apt (deposit/rent ... electricity ... groceries ... phone ... clothes ... you get the idea). a big chunk of $$$ went for her counseling after the birth/placement. the birthfather was also in the picture so we chose to pay for his counseling as well

i think our lawyer fees were around $1000 total and the social worker was $2000 (she was the liason between birthmom and us...and made sure bmom got to drs visits, etc)

we were matched 3 days after we mailed our application and ds was born 4 months to the day later, so it is not as long of a wait anymore, just the $$$$ involved. we would adopt again in a heartbeat, should we be able to raise that much $$$$ anytime soon!

 

[ZachnElli]

i'm realy surprised anyone can adopt a u.s. child of native american heritage. generaly if the child is documented as such the tribal rights are exerted and the custody becomes the sole decision of the tribe. we've had some cases in the news in california wherein the birthmom (native american) wanted to put a child up for adoption through a private placement, and the tribal lawyers stopped the process. the children i believe had to be first offered up for adoption and declined by members of the tribe (realy sad too-cuz the tribe might be living in abject poverty but they want to the child to stay within their cultural realm of influance).

Yes, you are correct. Adopting a Native American baby can be very difficult. But the tribe has already signed off on the baby I am talking about (or whatever legal language, lol). That's part of the reason we were contacted, the whole process would be that much easier with my dh being part Native American.

 

[barkley]

Yes, you are correct. Adopting a Native American baby can be very difficult. But the tribe has already signed off on the baby I am talking about (or whatever legal language, lol). That's part of the reason we were contacted, the whole process would be that much easier with my dh being part Native American.

o.k.-now it makes sense. i just recall having to do public assistance paperwork with a mom/child who had native american heritage. i never saw such complicated paperwork as when it came down to explaining her/child's miniscule "designated tribal land rights". the documentation was mind boggleing (it detailed percentage due to blood, due to relatedness, due to treaties dating back to the 1800's....) and then the kicker is everything is still exempt for public assistance property determinations (but "it has to be documented").

some of the california cases had advocates for the birthmom/child who contended the whole reason the tribes would take in the child had nothing to do with the child's well being or cultural education-it came down to the tribe being big into indian gameing and the child's future financial stake in the pay-outs

i'm realy fearful of high cost international or private agency adoptions-i've had a couple of friends get realy financialy burned and emotionaly devastated by them. one used a very well respected church sponsored private agency-paid for the mom's medical care, helped (along with the church) with living expenses. only to find out at the hospital the mom had no intention of relinquishing the child. it was all a huge scam-she and live-in boyfriend figured she could go to the agency, claim unknown dad and get top knotch medical care/not have to work for duration of pregnancy. she specificly chose a california family as adoptive parents so they would pay her travel to a better paying (welfare wise) state (she convinced agency, church, family that she wanted to get to know the family and see what conditions her child would be living in-once she got here she "decided" she wanted to relocate so she stayed in church sponsored housing). the whole thing was planned so that when the baby was born her boyfriend could relocate and they would already be set with housing, furniture and the welfare check to support them

i'm curious (for those familiar with international adoption) since the papers around here are full of stories about the agency nearby that was closed by the fbi, there's been lots of info. on the laws of intl. adoption. so what is the youngest a child can come from say russia? the info. i've read says no contact with the birth family for 6 months and then the child has to be put up for adoption in the home country and not be adopted (but they did'nt give a time frame for how long the child has to be available to that country's nationals-and then the child can be put up for international adoption)? if a person is planning on adopting a child that has not yet been born (mom is pregnant now)-are they looking at the child being a minimum of say 9 months old? it would seem that if they have to wait 6 months intialy and then do the paperwork and have the child up nationaly for say 1 month, then do the paperwork and have the child up internationaly, and then the adopting parents have to reside there for a period of time to do all the paperwork and the like-that a child could'nt get to the u.s. before around 9 months of age).

so out of curiosity-how young could the child come over here?

 

[kdibattista]

i'm curious (for those familiar with international adoption) since the papers around here are full of stories about the agency nearby that was closed by the fbi, there's been lots of info. on the laws of intl. adoption. so what is the youngest a child can come from say russia? the info. i've read says no contact with the birth family for 6 months and then the child has to be put up for adoption in the home country and not be adopted (but they did'nt give a time frame for how long the child has to be available to that country's nationals-and then the child can be put up for international adoption)? if a person is planning on adopting a child that has not yet been born (mom is pregnant now)-are they looking at the child being a minimum of say 9 months old? it would seem that if they have to wait 6 months intialy and then do the paperwork and have the child up nationaly for say 1 month, then do the paperwork and have the child up internationaly, and then the adopting parents have to reside there for a period of time to do all the paperwork and the like-that a child could'nt get to the u.s. before around 9 months of age).

so out of curiosity-how young could the child come over here?

I cannot answer about Russia but I can give you the info for Kazakhstan. Most children are abandoned (either literally abandoned on the streets or left at the hospital with no forwarding info). Kaz law states that the child must be on the registry for 6 months before being available for international adoption (3 months to be available to locals). I guess that is the timeframe for the baby to "legally" be abandoned. We will receive the referral when she is about 4-5 months old (they will know about her much sooner but will not inform us because of the problems with birthfamilies visiting and restarting the clock - as mentioned before). We will travel when she turns 6 months old and are required to visit with her everyday for 2 weeks (bonding period). Once the bonding period is over, we have our court hearing. Once the court hearing is over, we have a mandatory 2 week waiting period and then we can bring her home. She will be 7 - 8 months old when we arrive home.

Hope that helps!!

 

[CEDmom]

i'm curious (for those familiar with international adoption) since the papers around here are full of stories about the agency nearby that was closed by the fbi, there's been lots of info. on the laws of intl. adoption. so what is the youngest a child can come from say russia? the info. i've read says no contact with the birth family for 6 months and then the child has to be put up for adoption in the home country and not be adopted (but they did'nt give a time frame for how long the child has to be available to that country's nationals-and then the child can be put up for international adoption)? if a person is planning on adopting a child that has not yet been born (mom is pregnant now)-are they looking at the child being a minimum of say 9 months old? it would seem that if they have to wait 6 months intialy and then do the paperwork and have the child up nationaly for say 1 month, then do the paperwork and have the child up internationaly, and then the adopting parents have to reside there for a period of time to do all the paperwork and the like-that a child could'nt get to the u.s. before around 9 months of age).

so out of curiosity-how young could the child come over here?

In China there isn't any specific time period that I know of. When a baby is found an ad has to be taken out in the newspaper giving specific information on when/where etc. and asking anyone with information to come forward. I think this has to be done several times. When no one comes forward the baby is classified as available for adoption. Paperwork is forwarded to Bejing for international adoption but in the meantime a Chinese family may come forward to adopt. Generally in China babies are over 6 months when adopted internationally. Our DD was 9 mo.

In Korea babies as young as 3 or 4 months are adopted internationally.

 

[barkley]

thank you for the info.-the local paper sez one of the issues with the local agency is that some of the babies had siblings in the same facility and the family would visit the sibs and while there observe and interact with the baby, or the baby would have sibs in the same facility who had occasional family contact, but while the facility knew the baby was a sib to these older kids-they did'nt inform the contacting family members (they did whatever newspaper requirement was in place but the relatives did'nt know of the existance of the child so it never occured to them to be looking for it).

apparantly this agency basicly operated a child marketing ring. the only way it came to light was because a local family that was financial and emotionaly ripped apart by their experience went to the local d.a. (who then found more families too embarrased to come forward on their own, lots of wholy illegal adoptions dating back years, and the tie-ins with the families who got little ones and never should have-they had extensive cps records including removal of their own natural children). just a sick, sick tragedy for everyone involved.

 

[RUDisney]

i'm curious (for those familiar with international adoption) since the papers around here are full of stories about the agency nearby that was closed by the fbi, there's been lots of info. on the laws of intl. adoption. so what is the youngest a child can come from say russia? the info. i've read says no contact with the birth family for 6 months and then the child has to be put up for adoption in the home country and not be adopted (but they did'nt give a time frame for how long the child has to be available to that country's nationals-and then the child can be put up for international adoption)? if a person is planning on adopting a child that has not yet been born (mom is pregnant now)-are they looking at the child being a minimum of say 9 months old? it would seem that if they have to wait 6 months intialy and then do the paperwork and have the child up nationaly for say 1 month, then do the paperwork and have the child up internationaly, and then the adopting parents have to reside there for a period of time to do all the paperwork and the like-that a child could'nt get to the u.s. before around 9 months of age).

so out of curiosity-how young could the child come over here?

One thing about Russia, that we learned is that there are several ways of obtaining a child/baby. Most of them have to do with money. The birth parents often have their parental rights stripped from them when the children are removed from their home. Officially, the child is to be available to Russian citizens for adoption for 6 months after parental rights are terminated. This would mean that an infant, given up at birth, would be available for international adoption at 6-months... officially.

Now, as we know, in many sets, money talks. We were told that younger infants can be had if you have $$$ for the appropriate bribes. This wasn't something that our agency was interested in pursuing, but as you talk to different people, you find out what is possible.

We also had a friend, who knows people, who knows people (mafia) who could have gone to the orphanage our kids were in and gotten them out immediately and into the US. WOW! How we didn't want to do that! Didn't know if our kids would be considered illegal aliens, for one... didn't want to owe "those" people a favor, if you get my drift, and we didn't know if our adoption would have been legal, in the first place.

So, there are ways around the system, if you want to circumvent it, but I've stated the official position above. If someone is willing to risk that an infant might be selected by a Russian family, their baby can be there's "officially" at 6-months.

As for residing in Russia for a period of time, it depends on the region. We had a 10-day waiting period that the judge wouldn't waive, so we were there for almost 3-weeks. We could have come home and went back, but we had already spent time with our kids in the summer, in our home, and we were given immediate custody of them. Our kids were old enough to know that we were there for them, but too young to understand why we'd leave them and come back again later.... let alone the fact that neither of us could have considered leaving them, even if it meant going to the orphanage every day for visits. There was one couple with us, whose maternal grandmother had cancer (it was in remission, but was documented in their homestudy.) The judge waived their waiting period and they were home within the week. Even though GM was ok, they played up the fact that she only had a limited amount of time to spend with her new GD. Can't say that I blame them for that. They were there and home in 7-8 days.

 

[RUDisney]

Exactly. Seems to be a strange double standard going on. Do we want people to be involved no matter what, at any level, or do we want them to stay away completely?

Maybe it depends on what the goal is (taking away and giving them to somebody else for example), but if that's the goal, where do you stop?

Sounds like you're "Americanizing" this situation. We have social programs and help for those who truly need it... and for those who know how to work the system, but that's another story.

People, in general, are so poor in Russia. It is really sad. Some people realize that they can visit their children, but some are afraid that if they do, they'll have to take them back into a household that they're already going out into the streets to beg for money just to eat. While the govt is swift to get kids out of a bad/alcoholic household, it doesn't do anything to reunite families who need assistance. We can't possibly know how we'd react in that type of situation.

My DH said to our translator, while we were in Bryansk, "boy, I could make a killing over here if I brought brooms to sell." The translator said, "why would someone buy a broom, when they can make one themselves?" (Brooms were made out of smaller tree limbs with twigs tied to the bottom.) That's how they live.

 

[cardaway]

Sounds like you're "Americanizing" this situation. We have social programs and help for those who truly need it... and for those who know how to work the system, but that's another story.

Actually I was responding to what I have read, both here and elsewhere, about the attitudes towards the kids being adopted from other countries. Attitudes that include the idea that these people are bad parents, parents they know nothing about and feel free to make assumptions about. I can't imgine what they must be going through, but at least it's really likely they don't see these things I'm reading.

 

[julirina]

Some of them may do this hoping that they will some day be able to reclaim their child. They may worry that if they visit too often that the govt will make them take the child back, where they can't really afford to raise them.

Remember, they live in a different society, with no social programs to help people who need them.

Good point. In China, a child cannot be adopted if s/he has any living relatives. That's why many Chinese families are forced to abandon their infants and never come forward to claim them (thus rendering the child a true "orphan" in the Chinese govt's eyes, with no living relatives to claim him or her) in order to ensure that they'll have a chance at being adopted, rather than raised in an institution and turned out with no education at age 14. Our adoption agency (Living Hope) also runs privately-funded orphanages in China specifically for those kids who are "unadoptable" due to having living relatives. These relatives may not have the financial means to care for their children (or grandchildren, nieces, nephews, whatever) but it doesn't mean they want to give up all contact with them. Their kids are raised in the LH orphanage, given an education, fed well and treated for medical concerns, and still get to spend holidays and vacations with loved ones. They're more like boarding schools for disenfranchised kids.

Of course, there are millions of orphans and only a handful are in these particular facilities, but at least it's a step in a good direction. In a perfect world there would be no orphans at all, but in this imperfect world, there's nothing wrong with doing everything to help them maintain a connection to their birth families. In a case like our daughter's, she has no record of a birth family at all, and it makes me sad to think she has no connection to the land/people/culture of her birth other than an orphanage.

 

[RUDisney]

Actually I was responding to what I have read, both here and elsewhere, about the attitudes towards the kids being adopted from other countries. Attitudes that include the idea that these people are bad parents, parents they know nothing about and feel free to make assumptions about. I can't imgine what they must be going through, but at least it's really likely they don't see these things I'm reading.

Hah! The power of the written word... how easily it can be misinterpreted! I see your point now.

I agree about what others think about us adopting their children. There are still many stories of Americans that adopt only so they can have a kidney for their bio child, or a liver, or heart, etc. While I'm sure that a parent would consider many things to cure their sick child, adoption isn't one of the ways that they'd do it. How would they judge compatibilty of organs, for instance? These third world nations (I'm including Russia in this) don't realize how organ transplants really work, they just know the urban legends that are perpetuated. It's a legitimate fear for them, but not the reality.

 

[barkley]

in one of the articles i read it said that one of the big issues in the u.s. and russia considering a moritorium on u.s. adoptions was around the whole issue of homestudies. reputable russian authorities nor u.s. want the children going into inappropriate/unsafe homes, but they are struggling with how to improve homestudy procedures (and to ensure that they are as complete and detailed as possible). one of the areas that is problematic in the u.s. has to deal with the confidentiality of child welfare records. while a person doing a homestudy for a public u.s. adoption would (if they are employed within a child welfare agency)may have some access to child welfare records on the prospective parents, private u.s. and international homestudy personnel are not afforded the same access (and have to rely only on public record or heresay). so you could have a situation where there have been issues of abuse or neglect by a person but because there was never media coverage or a conviction putting it into public record, it could go undetected. while i'm sure those that conduct homestudies for private agencies gather as much information as possible-without access to all pertinant information about a prosepective parent there is no way to get "the whole picture" about someone (and i don't see how anyone will manage to figure out a way to deal with this-working inside social services you learn quickly that the confidentiality laws go so far as to prevent sharing of information between 2 workers who share the same case/same adults/children. if one worker has valid information about a situation they can't automaticly disclose it to their co-worker who is working on the case as well ).

i'm going to be interested to see how the situation with the pedophile who managed to adopt the 2 girls and has recently been arrested will impact this whole issue. court tv has done alot of coverage on the case-apparantly he had advertised widely on child porongraphic sites his desire to "buy" a young female child, but ultimatly ended up managing to adopt 2 from another country. u.s officials are saying that "anyone" can skirt the offical channels and use the blackmarket adoption process to escape detection-but child advocacy groups are arguing that the u.s. has a responsibility when a citizen enters u.s. soil to ensure (for child safety) that the adoption is on the "up and up" and that the appropriate homestudy/background checks have been done. one of the things suggested by a child advocacy rep. was that for any u.s. citizen returning to the u.s. with an "adopted child" some type of system be put in place wherein the adoptive parent/child be referred to a public child welfare agency which would be charged with verifying the validity of the adoption and the quality/existence of a valid homestudy.

it could be a major beauracratic pain for good adoptive parents but if it prevented even one child from being subjected to what these 2 little girls have gone through i think it would be well worth it.

 

[cardaway]

Hah! The power of the written word... how easily it can be misinterpreted! I see your point now.

I agree about what others think about us adopting their children. There are still many stories of Americans that adopt only so they can have a kidney for their bio child, or a liver, or heart, etc. While I'm sure that a parent would consider many things to cure their sick child, adoption isn't one of the ways that they'd do it. How would they judge compatibilty of organs, for instance? These third world nations (I'm including Russia in this) don't realize how organ transplants really work, they just know the urban legends that are perpetuated. It's a legitimate fear for them, but not the reality.

Except that kind of radical example is nothing like what I had in mind.

 

[barkley]

i think the u.s. needs to make sure that it affords children coming into this country to live are afforded the same protections that natural born u.s. children have.

i cannot leave or enter the u.s. with my children unless i have legal proof of relatedness/legal authority. i can't seek medical attention for them without the same. yet somehow, there is even a small percentage of people who manage to bring children into this country (be it by virtue of forged documents or by virtue of buying their way around the homestudy protections). it seems there should be some mechanism in place to protect the innocents from the moment they attempt to enter u.s. soil.

so many protections were put in place for u.s. children to guard against international kidnappings, it seems it should work in the reverse to protect incoming children as well.