Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, sine children would be adopted domestically if not for theirselves up laws. In Romania, a parent need only visit the hospital or home their child us in once a year to keep their child from being listed as abandoned. They actually don't even need to interact with the child. It's sad as I am sure more could be adopted domestically if the laws were changed. However, domestic adoption is not going to work well for Romani children or special needs children.
The adoption system in Romania was corrupt. I don't argue that. And I don't believe IA is a solution to the problem. But stopping IA has not had a huge effect on improving things in the country. That was my point. So many people against IA believe that it isn't the solution, but they don't have another to provide either. Non profits really can only do so much. It will take decades longer for Romania to change the way they view their orphan/abandoned children crisis, and in the meantime, thousands of children continue to pass through that system. It is easy to argue against IA from here. It is much, much harder to do it sitting at the bedside of a five year old who is the size of a six month old and will likely die in the next few years. Somehow, on an individual level, the argument that IA has it's share if possible issues just seems... so idealistic.
This is why I struggle even while I don't agree with IA.
Yes, sine children would be adopted domestically if not for theirselves up laws. In Romania, a parent need only visit the hospital or home their child us in once a year to keep their child from being listed as abandoned. They actually don't even need to interact with the child. It's sad as I am sure more could be adopted domestically if the laws were changed. However, domestic adoption is not going to work well for Romani children or special needs children.
The adoption system in Romania was corrupt. I don't argue that. And I don't believe IA is a solution to the problem. But stopping IA has not had a huge effect on improving things in the country. That was my point. So many people against IA believe that it isn't the solution, but they don't have another to provide either. Non profits really can only do so much. It will take decades longer for Romania to change the way they view their orphan/abandoned children crisis, and in the meantime, thousands of children continue to pass through that system. It is easy to argue against IA from here. It is much, much harder to do it sitting at the bedside of a five year old who is the size of a six month old and will likely die in the next few years. Somehow, on an individual level, the argument that IA has it's share if possible issues just seems... so idealistic.
This is why I struggle even while I don't agree with IA.
The same could be written about most of the other countries of Eastern Europe and other countries which once were part of the former Soviet Union or Soviet bloc., in addition to Romania.
I have seen far too many pictures of emaciated, skeletal orphaned children with what would be considered very treatable, even correctable disabilities in the western world to agree that stopping international adoption of these children would be helpful in any way. No, of course it is not a complete solution, but each child who joins a loving, caring family through adoption from such horrific situtions becomes an example of just what a positive difference adoption can make - and each of those children is given a chance for life.
One child's successful adoption from such conditions can lead to the adoptions of twenty more - search "Pleven Orphanage" "Bulgaria" for well-docimented, indisputable accounts of this occurring within the last fifteen months (and continuing with additional adoptions from Pleven now in various stages). The pictures and accounts are clear, the examples are many, the need is great (and I should add that the current Pleven director is a very good woman who is trying her best, making much needed changes, but who is dealing with overwhelming problems).
In addition to such "saving adoptions", the mind-sets, lack of adequate financial support, lack of understanding the needs and potential of children with special needs, unrealistic regulations paired with the lack of constructive regulations and oversight which contribute to such atrocities need to be changed, and the atrocious conditions themselves need to be more widely publicized.
Even when children are kindly treated and the neglect is not deliberate, the inadequacies are so overwhelming, and the situation so very, very sad - such a loss of human potential. See Torez (in Ukraine); see the blogs of those families who've adopted beautiful, loving children from such places, if you want to learn more. Life to Orphans has many pictures from Torez on its website.. Torez is better than it used to be, but has such a long way to go still...
It's hard to read the accounts; harder still to look at the photos of crib-bound 15 year olds weighing 25 pounds or ten year olds weighing twelve pounds. It's heartbreaking to see a small, emaciated child with Down syndrome tied to his crib. It's reminiscent of Auschwitz to see the children's shaven heads and ragged clothing...
It's much easier to look away, and to blame those who want to adopt children barely existing in such conditions. It's idealistic to oppose international adoption because it is thought to lead to psychological problems and poor adjustment of those adopted in years to come. Compare attachment disorder or institutional autism in an adopted child with the many deaths due to years of neglect in a bleak institution, and there's no question as to which is the more evil.
A little girl with Down syndrome died just last week in an institution of this kind in eastern Europe. Her parents gave her up at birth. She did reasonably well in the baby house orphanage where she was originally placed, but once transferred to the mental institition, neglect and lack of care led to her entirely unnecessary and preventable death. She had a American family trying to adopt her - but they could not get there in time. I can only imagine how heartbroken and frustrated and angry they must be...
Adoptive parents are not among the reasons for these tragedies or the conditions which contribute to them. For the children living in these conditions, loving adoptive families of any nationality can literally give life.
Adoptive parents are not among the reasons for these tragedies or the conditions which contribute to them. For the children living in these conditions, loving adoptive families of any nationality can literally give life.
Just to be clear in what I'm saying, I realize there is a lot of corruption. That is one of the sorta reasons Romania closed (publicly. Privately, it had more to do with appearances and getting into the EU. But I don't have a source for that beyond my friend who runs a charity there.)
I still don't really agree necessarily with IA. I think America does a poor job screening APs and preparing them for what to expect. What I'm saying is though that to simply take a stand that IA is wrong because the children adopted may have psychological problems or may be abused is idealistic. Closing a country to IA does not solve the crisis, as many supporting ending IA claim- when the money from IA is gone, domestic adoption will increase and children will be cared for. Domestic adoption in Romania is still hampered by their laws, which haven't changed even with the loss of money from IA.
And in an individual level, idealism is lost. The individual children dying in orphanages really don't care about the greater good or an idealistic belief or an agenda. It's all very tragic. Both the children suffering as well as those trafficked as well as those adopted internationally who suffer abuse or psychological trauma. I suppose I just hate politicizing the whole thing.
Yes, sine children would be adopted domestically if not for theirselves up laws. In Romania, a parent need only visit the hospital or home their child us in once a year to keep their child from being listed as abandoned. They actually don't even need to interact with the child. It's sad as I am sure more could be adopted domestically if the laws were changed. However, domestic adoption is not going to work well for Romani children or special needs children.
The adoption system in Romania was corrupt. I don't argue that. And I don't believe IA is a solution to the problem. But stopping IA has not had a huge effect on improving things in the country. That was my point. So many people against IA believe that it isn't the solution, but they don't have another to provide either. Non profits really can only do so much. It will take decades longer for Romania to change the way they view their orphan/abandoned children crisis, and in the meantime, thousands of children continue to pass through that system. It is easy to argue against IA from here. It is much, much harder to do it sitting at the bedside of a five year old who is the size of a six month old and will likely die in the next few years. Somehow, on an individual level, the argument that IA has it's share if possible issues just seems... so idealistic.
This is why I struggle even while I don't agree with IA.
Tiff, I think you and I are on the same side of the fence. NO ONE has a solution whether they are for IA or not. These situations don't improve whether IA is available or not, this is my point. There is no solution to the problem due to different laws, cultures, economies etc. It can't be solved, it can only possibly be made better. How many people want to solve world hunger and other vast problems?
I think some people get "stuck" between seeing the problems inherent in the system and the one child that needs the help now. I don't mean to sound callous, but unfortunately the system won't change with a bandaid approach of "saving" one child at a time. Plus, in the current system, how do we know if that child is really being "saved" or being trafficked or being sent to an abusive situation? The only way for big changes to happen is through reform, but unfortunately there are many PAPS, APS, agencies, etc that don't want the reform, because it will mean less children to adopt and more stringent requirements.
The only reason I've put the link to the "Voice of Russia" was because at that point I couldn't find anything available in English regarding this developing story and I couldn't post links to the news on Russian sites that I frequent and that are definitely not Putin's mouthpiece such as "Voice of Russia" or RT. I simply wanted to alert people on this thread that new story was developing.
I would however appreciate links to English-speaking sites that have more news and details on this story.
A little update in connection with mentioned above event;
After sensationalism of Russian ombudsman for children's rights Pavel Astakhov, who immediately tried to exploit this tragic death for the political gains of the ruling party, Russians started voting on "Democrator" (political site addressed to the Russian government) for the resignation of Astakhov.
The voting was going with "pro" and "contra," with "pro" gaining overwhelming numbers. Soon after that the site has been subjected to the powerful DDoS attack. At this point the voting has been suspended because of obvious tempering with the numbers.
IA is a huge political issue in Russia, even for this reason it's beneficial, because it brings the disastrous situation with families and children, the whole controversy of it as a pressing matter in the society, and points the finger at the government that bears the full responsibility for this dire situation.
Tiff, I think you and I are on the same side of the fence. NO ONE has a solution whether they are for IA or not. These situations don't improve whether IA is available or not, this is my point. There is no solution to the problem due to different laws, cultures, economies etc. It can't be solved, it can only possibly be made better. How many people want to solve world hunger and other vast problems?
I think some people get "stuck" between seeing the problems inherent in the system and the one child that needs the help now. I don't mean to sound callous, but unfortunately the system won't change with a bandaid approach of "saving" one child at a time. Plus, in the current system, how do we know if that child is really being "saved" or being trafficked or being sent to an abusive situation? The only way for big changes to happen is through reform, but unfortunately there are many PAPS, APS, agencies, etc that don't want the reform, because it will mean less children to adopt and more stringent requirements.
Perhaps all who are considering internationally adopting children (with or without special needs) would benefit by studying a list of what to expect just posted on the blog of an experienced and successful adoptive family of a little boy with special needs from eastern Europe. Actually, Julia's list is addressed to far more than just PAPS...it's also for agencies, for parents newly home who are now questioning their decision, for extended family members, for teachers, therapists, churches, doctors...anyone who is involved with a child from this background.
You can find the list at Julia's February 25 entry in her blog at Micah Six Eight - look for Micah Six Eight. This is not a commercial site so I hope I can post the URL here without any problem. "The List" is lengthy and very, very informative. I hope it will see wide distribution, as knowledge and understanding of the issues it lists would go a very long way towards eliminating those unsuited to parenting children with these issues and needs. It should also be pointed out that children develop these issues and behaviors in response to very dysfunctional environments, and in those environments, the behaviors may make perfect sense. Many are survival techniques.
one article surmised that the children were so further traumatized by being surrounded by strangers, unfamiliar food, smells and a language they couldn't understand caused them to behave in such a way as to push their adoptive parents over the edge.
I think there is a lot of truth to that and I suspect that is what happened with the little boy who was put on a plane back to Russia. The adoptive family claimed that the orphanage had lied to them about his problems while the orphanage swore that he had no such problems when he were with them. I think it's quite likely that that was the case. That the problems the boy was displaying were caused by the trauma of the adoption and his inability to express himself and be understood. I was 13 when I was put in foster care and it wasn't in a strange country but it still rocks your world to be dumped off with complete strangers. I couldn't imagine being 8 and sent to a new country and everybody expecting you to be fine and adjust. They even changed his name which is to most a big part of your identity. No wonder he freaked out.
I'm not against international adoption. I'm under no illusion that adopting out individual children will solve a societal problem. It won't and it can't. But each individual child still matters and there are many children in the world who truly do need good homes and if those homes need to be found in another country then so be it. I just wish it was done differently with much more focus on and understanding of the child's experience. The way it's done right now where the adoptive parents goes and picks up the kid, spends a few days with them in a hotel room and takes them home isn't sufficient preparation.
There is a PBS documentary called Wo Ai Ni (I Love You) Mommy about the adoption of an 8-year old Chinese girl and if that's any example of how it's normally done it's clear that major changes are needed. I'm hoping that most adoptive parents don't lack as much awareness and compassion as the ones in the documentary but even if they're not it's not reasonable to treat children the way we are even though the adoption may be best in the long run. There are things that can be done to make it less traumatic but as seems to be too common in the world of adoption the perspective of the child isn't considered. As Dogluver mentioned the kids are supposed to be grateful for the generous act of their adoptive parents.
Even though adoption can't save all the kids suffering in horrible orphanages I don't believe that that fact is a reason not to save any. Neither is the risk of corruption and trafficking a reason to stop adoptions of children who truly do need it. The answer to the problems with IA is addressing those problems, not stopping international adoptions. Improvements and reform is possible and should be implemented to truly create a system where the kids come first. IA isn't the best option for all parentless kids but for those that it is it should be an option. We can't leave kids in the misery they are in out of principle. Action has to be taken to permanently mend the situations in third world countries but that's going to take time and in the meantime adoption, domestic and international, should remain an option. Once reformed it will be a better option as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
