Under the old laws, an orphan was defined as a child who has suffered from the death or disappearance of both parents, or for whom the sole surviving parent is unable to provide proper care. Additionally, the traditional rules only allowed single mothers to be considered the sole surviving parent. Unmarried fathers would not be allowed to release the child for adoption.
The Convention definition of an adoptable child is much broader. Both parents or the sole surviving parent may consent to terminate their parental rights and allow the child to emigrate. The child’s birth parents may still be alive, but they must be incapable of providing care for their child. In considering whether the birth parents were “incapable of providing proper care,” all relevant circumstances would be examined based on local standards. This will include financial concerns, poverty, medical, mental, or emotional difficulties, or long term incarceration.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Immigrant Visas for Children to be Adopted
FYI, this article talks about U.S. visa rules for immigrating adopted children, as affected by the Hague Convention. It's on an attorney website, so consider the source -- they're trolling for clients! One interesting aspect of the Hague Convention, according to the article, is an expansion of the definition of "orphan" for visa purposes:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I see this as a double-edged sword. On the one hand, if their our birthparents that wish to allow legal adoption and the US is willing to allow the child in, okay. However, how many coersions are going to come from this, how many more programs are going to come into play in areas where families are suffering from extreme poverty, how many families will be lured to send their children to "America" and not really understand the full implications of adoption? I may be cynical, but history shows us that we should be.
Oops--that should be there.
Post a Comment