Foreign Adoptions to U.S. Hit 15-Year Low

According to David Crary, AP's adoption reporter:

The number of foreign children adopted by Americans fell by 13 percent last year, reaching the lowest level since 1995 due in large part to a virtual halt to adoptions from Guatemala because of corruption problems.

China remained America's No. 1 source of adopted children, accounting for 3,401, according to figures released by the State Department on Monday for the 2010 fiscal year. Ethiopia was second, at 2,513, followed by Russia at 1,082 and South Korea at 863.

Guatemala was the No. 1 source country in 2008, with 4,123 adoptions by Americans. But the number sank to 756 for 2009 and to only 51 last year as the Central American country's fraud-riddled adoption industry was shut down while authorities drafted reforms.

The overall figures for 2010 showed 11,059 adoptions from abroad, down from 12,753 in 2009 and down more than 50 percent from the all-time peak of 22,884 in 2004.

The last time there were fewer foreign adoptions to the U.S. was in 1995, when there were 9,679.

Abandoned, Adopted, Abandoned

From the Times of India:

Manisha (name changed) is 15 and brighteyed . She might be the regular teenager . The adults in contact with her say she is polite and disciplined and is always ready to help anyone in trouble. But Manisha is not a regular teenager and hers is no ordinary story. She lives in a home run by an NGO in Gurgaon for abandoned or abused children or those with special needs. She is the helpless victim of inter-country adoption gone terribly wrong.

Six years ago, Manisha was adopted by an American family from a centre in Mumbai. But soon enough, they were unwilling to keep her, blaming Manisha's newly apparent hyperactivity, mood disorders and depression. Rejected and abandoned all over again, Manisha was sent across the seas and has been in the children's shelter from early 2010.

* * *

If Manisha is indeed fine, she is one of the luckier ones. There are no statistics of the number of Manishas all over India — abandoned children, who were adopted overseas and then turned out like a troublesome puppy.

The American family also adopted Manisha's younger sister, but kept her when they sent Manisha back.  Wonder how they explain that to her. I imagine that can be a difficult issue when there is a sibling group available for adoption, and a family is only interested in adopting one of the children.  But it must be even more difficult to explain when you've adopted two, and sent one back . . . .

Transracial Adoptee on American Idol

Happy Fred Korematsu Day

From Mother Jones, a day honoring an Asian-American hero:

This weekend, American civil rights activists celebrate a new icon: Fred Korematsu, the Japanese-American who resisted placement in a World War II-era internment camp. It's the first holiday in the US commemorating an Asian-American—and it's proof to some judges and civil rights activists that a new generation of Asian-American leaders can't be far behind.

Korematsu's story is an instructive one for civil rights advocates.

During World War II, fear loomed in the lives of Japanese-Americans. The United States government moved more than 100,000 Japanese-Americans and immigrants from the Pacific coast to internment camps inland. Korematsu, who refused to go, was arrested and convicted for his defiance. His conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1944. Although the exclusion order was rescinded in 1945, it wasn't until the 1980s, when Korematsu reopened his case, that the courts overturned his conviction. In 1988, the United States declared Japanese American internment unjust and paid retribution to its victims and their heirs.

The L.A. Times also has a nice story on the new state-wide holiday, A hero gets his day.

Chinese School CNY Celebration

Anonymous Birth & Adoption in France

France takes adoption secrecy and amended birth certificates to the extreme, according to this report:

Under a long-standing arrangement called accouchement sous X, women - usually those whose pregnancies are the result of their being "in trouble" - can deliver babies in absolute anonymity. These babies become wards of the state, which records them as having been "born to" their eventual adoptive parents. But anonymous delivery has lately become controversial. Adults with no prospect of identifying their biological parents have protested, formed pressure groups and lobbied the National Assembly for recognition that their ignorance of their origins constitutes a violation of rights.


France's participation in international children's rights agreements - such as the 1989 Convention of New York (Xetra: A0DKRK - news) , which established a child's right to know his parents - has also put anonymous delivery under a cloud. In 2003 it only narrowly survived (by a vote of 10-7) a suit in the European Court of Human Rights. It was partly by championing the rights of those born "sous X" that Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate in the 2007 presidential elections, rose to national prominence as minister of families earlier in the decade. This month Brigitte Barèges, a member of parliament for the ruling UMP party, submitted a report to the prime minister urging that anonymous delivery be replaced with a system that would allow adoptees to know the identity of their birth mothers once they have attained majority.

* * *

Mme Barèges's means of effecting this change is to replace "anonymity" (in which no record is left of the woman's delivery unless she wishes) with "discretion" (in which the state keeps a dossier of the birth under strictest secrecy).

 And the solution to the problem of secrecy . . . is American-style secrecy.  Sigh.

Maya's Family Tree



Maya's first formal family tree assignment came from Chinese School, not regular school.  So not only does she have to produce a family tree, it has to be in both pinyin and Chinese characters!

Two issues make a family tree difficult in our family.  First is the daddy-less girls thing. We have no branches for the father side of the traditional family tree.  And in Chinese, it really shows, since you have different grandparent names for father's parents and mother's parents.

Second is the adoption issues.  What if you want to include birth parents?  There isn't a spot for them on a traditional family tree.

So Maya wanted to make an actual tree for her family tree assignment, with her as the trunk.  She decided she wanted to include her birth parents, but wasn't sure how or where.  Should they just be other leaves?  Should they be fruit among the leaves?  We finally hit on roots -- so those brown nodules among the roots are her birth parents.  We couldn't find the Chinese for birth parents, so they say Chinese ma-ma and Chinese ba-ba.  The leaves include big sister, four cousins, aunt and uncle, and Mimi, Grandpa & mama. With the leaves kind of randomly placed on the tree, the absence of a father-branch isn't so noticeable.

Maya had a great time making the tree after we came up with a design. If you're facing the same kind of project, here are some links to help with the dreaded family tree assignment:

Tackling Tricky Assignments

A Forest of Family Trees

Adoption Competent School Assignments

Oh, and a great book about the family tree project for an adopted kid:  Lucy's Family Tree.

U.S. State Department Meeting on Ethiopian Adoptions

Ethica (an independent voice for ethical adoption) has very helpfully posted their notes from the Monday, January 24, 2011 meeting of the U.S. Department of State with stakeholders in Ethiopian adoption.  Some really discouraging news about how some agencies operate and about how some adoptive parents behave in-country.  A really unfortunate thing reported: "At one point, it seemed that there was some movement toward Ethiopia becoming a Hague Convention country, but it does not appear to be on the agenda now."

Ethica promises to post the official Department of State minutes of the meeting when they become available.

Poor Daddy-less Girls

I posted last year about the Butterfly Ball, the annual father-daughter dance at the girls' school.  It's a little earlier this year -- next month -- and Zoe took it into her own hands to find a date for the dance.  She emailed my brother who lives out of town (but whose been coming into town more frequently since my dad's death to help out our mom).  Here's the email -- do you think he'll be able to resist?!

Dear Phillip,

The butterfly ball(father daughter dance) is coming up in February 25th. And well, just 1 teeny tiny thing, we dont have a daddy! Do you think you or one of the boys could come and take 2 poor little daddy-less girls to the butterfly ball?

PLEASE!!!!!!!!!(begging you)

Thanks!
Zoe and Maya

Zoe thought her email was really funny and clever, a big joke.  But Uncle Phillip couldn't resist the manipulative drama-queen guilt trip, and is coming to take the girls to the ball! Yahoo!

DNA doesn't make a family

A WONDERUL post, When DNA isn't just DNA, from adult adoptee Anne (who usually posts about her work as a doula) in response to a blogger who wrote, "DNA doesn't make a family."  Anne responds:

Simple statement, yes? But even seeing the title and the opening lines, even before reading the rest of the post itself, my gut was protesting. No, DNA alone - whatever that could possibly mean - does not equal Family.

But DNA is almost always more than just DNA.

I understand the importance of the nurture portion of the equation. It's what my parenting decisions are based on, in fact. But the ability to make statements like the above is a luxury that only non-adopted people* can make.

(The asterisk is to Anne's recognition that she is not the "spokesmodel" for all adoptees, and that other adoptees might feel differently.)

Anne's statement really resonated with me; being dismissive of DNA, ancestry, biological connections, is something done almost exclusively by those who are quite aware of their ancestry, who can look at their parents and see a mirror of themselves.  Having my dad's eyes and, heaven help me, the Mississippi-farmwoman physique that was my biological destiny, is something I've always known simply by knowing him and my grandparents and my aunts and uncles.  It's something my children don't have, and it's something they long for, especially Zoe, who so wants to know what her birth parents look like.

Then in talking about a film her birth sister is making, Anne makes this insightful comment:

So, returning to the post that got my own wheels turning. During my own interview process, both on film and in outside discussions, Kate and I spent some time discussing the Standard Public Narrative of adoption, the one where adoption is an inherently virtuous act, where adoptive parents are the shining armor benefactors, the baby is lucky to be rescued from what would surely be a terrible fate, and the birth mother is, if anything, an afterthought - an afterthought who is often commended for her courage and/or thanked for her sacrifice, but ultimately doesn't really count. Because DNA doesn't make a family.

See the power of this simple statement -- DNA doesn't make a family -- in the standard adoption narrative?  Anne notes that that is what allows for this kind of conversation:

Point out that it would be better if babies could remain with their mothers, in an ideal world - and people will seriously say "But what about all the wonderful infertile couples out there who can't have children of their own?"

I've had those conversations, have you?  "DNA doesn't make a family" allows us to forget that the natural order of things -- the thing that happens as God and biology designed it -- is for  babies to be raised by their biological parents.  In saying, "DNA doesn't make a family," we make family a social construct rather than a biological one, where mothers are fungible and it doesn't matter who raises whose baby. 

I don't have a big problem with egg donation, sperm donation, embryo "adoption," gestational surrogacy, adoption, to build a family (so long as all ethical rules are followed and parents are prepared todeal with it, instead of ignore it, with their children).  But when we say "DNA doesn't make a family," we don't need to concern ourselves with the biological beginnings of children. We can ignore birth parents, proclaim that as the "parenting" parent, "I'm the only real parent" in the equation, and ignore our children's loss and grief. Privileging nurture over nature grants permission to ignore what happened in our children's lives before we met them.

"DNA doesn't make a family."  Not such a simple statement after all. . . .

Celebrity Adoption: Jennifer Aniston?

HollyBaby breathlessly reports:

Jennifer Aniston has left the dream of marriage behind and is starting a family as a single mom– she’s adopting a baby from Mexico! Star magazine is reporting that Jen has signed all of the adoption papers and will welcome her first child just in time for her 42nd birthday on Feb. 11. “The long wait is over,” a friend tells Star. “The time has arrived.” We are so excited for Jen!

After several secret trips to Casa Hogar Sion orphanage in Tijuana, Mexico, sources say that Jen came to the realization that she was ready for motherhood. Cofounder of the orphanage Carmen Gonzalez says that during Jen’s visits she “got on with all the children, but spent most of her time with the babies…she loved them. She was in the nursery for a long time, playing with them and cuddling them.” But whether Jen has chosen to adopt from this orphanage is still a closely guarded secret, although friends say she has always wanted to adopt a child from Mexico. “She loves the culture,” a friend explains. “She says that they’re our neighbors, and there are so many children there who need a good home.” We agree, Jen!

HollyBaby reports based on Star Magazine -- the question mark in the title to this post is a reminder to consider the source. . . .

Conflicted . . .

An adoptive father, who is also a human rights activist working to end child trafficking and exploitation, writes about the conflict he feels because he knows international adoption does, in fact, fuel trafficking:

I am the father of 6 children. My 4 youngest are adopted. I am the President & Co-founder of a human rights organization working to end child trafficking and exploitation. I am deeply conflicted. Here is why:

When I was in Cambodia about 8 years ago, the Director of a large human rights agency asked me; “Do you really want to do something practical to stop child trafficking?” I of course answered yes. She said; “Then do something about international adoption.” At the time, I honestly wasn’t sure what she meant. She then went on to explain about how international adoption, if not done well and with vigilance, can fuel child trafficking.

To be truthful, my immediate reaction was defensiveness. I was even a little offended. Mostly because I am an adoptive father and I believe that adoption can be a viable and compassionate response to the global orphan crisis. But also offended, or more aptly put… mad as hell that traffickers would prey on the most vulnerable; turning orphans into commodities.

Since that conversation I’ve learned a lot and continue to learn, from my daily fight to end child trafficking and exploitation, as well as from our family’s own journey of international and domestic adoptions.

I’ve discovered she was right. Intercountry adoption, if not regulated and monitored can contribute to the trafficking of children.

Go read the whole thing, then tell us what you think.  As an adoptive parent who has adopted internationally -- twice -- I often feel conflicted about international adoption.  Do you?

A Tale of Two Expats

The Economist compares and contrasts the lives of Western expats living in China and Chinese expats living in the West:

Western expatriates in China have a far easier time than they did a generation ago. They no longer huddle in drab hotels and endure Maoist standards of food and service. These days they can have almost anything, for a price: soufflés and sushi, Western-style villas with gardens, private schools with famous names for their children. (Harrow and Dulwich College, two posh British schools, both have offshoots in Beijing.)

The air in China may be gritty and the censorship irksome. Conference calls with head offices in America at 4am are tedious. But life is otherwise comfortable. And business in China is more exciting than perhaps anywhere else on Earth.

* * *

China’s spectacular growth over the past three decades has prompted hordes of businesspeople to jump onto aeroplanes and move house. Western multinationals have sent many of their most ambitious executives to the country, to find new suppliers, set up factories or sell jet engines and whisky to the Chinese.

In recent years a swelling number of expatriates have also moved the other way. Chinese firms are increasingly global. They scramble for oil and copper in Africa. They scout for investment opportunities in America and Europe. They are starting to set up offices throughout the world. Naturally, they are sending out Chinese executives to run them.

* * *

Their situation is in many ways like that of a Western expatriate, but there are glaring differences. Western expats in China have typically moved from a liberal democracy with a sluggish economy to an authoritarian state with a fast-growing one. Chinese expats in the West have done the opposite. Each journey presents its own challenges. This article seeks to illustrate them, unscientifically, by contrasting the life of a Western expat in China with that of a Chinese expat in Europe.

You know why I post this stuff about expats in China, right?  My kids and I did the expat thing in China for a short time (5 months) in 2007 (you can read about our experience here).  I know increasing numbers of China adoptive parents who are interested in giving their children the experience of living in their home country.  So there you go.

Partial Victory for Immigrant Mom Who Lost Her Parental Rights

Remember Encarnacion Bail Romero, whose parental rights were terminated after she was swept up in an immigration raid and her son was adopted without her consent? She wins a partial victory in the Missouri Supreme Court:

The Missouri Supreme Court has sided with a Guatemalan immigrant in a child custody case, ruling that the state failed to follow its laws in terminating her parental rights and allowing her son to be adopted by someone else.

Why only a partial victory?

Tuesday’s decision does not automatically return the child to the mother. Instead, the court ordered the state to follow proper procedures and hold a new trial on whether the mother’s parental rights should be terminated.

So it is still possible that the mother will lose her parental rights. You can read the 92-page Missouri Supreme Court opinion, which includes concurring and dissenting opinions as well, by clicking here. I'll write more about it when I have a chance to read it all!

Commentary About Oprah's Big Secret

As I'm sure you've heard by now, Oprah's big family secret was a whopper -- her mother relinquished a child for adoption when Oprah was 9, and she and her half-sister have now been reunited. 

Here are some links to interesting commentary around the blogosphere about the revelation:

Oprah’s Secret, Mother Vernita Lee Gave Away Sister Patricia: A Lesson In Shared Shame, at Babble

At First Mother, Birth Mother Forum, Oprah reveals she has half-sister; her mother was afraid to admit the secret

I Quit Oprah, from Chronicles of Munchinland, a birth mother's blog.
 
Oprah Reunited with Sis Her Mother Relinquished in 1963, including a letter to Oprah asking her to get involved in adoptee rights, at Family Preservation Advocate blog.
 
From the Grio, Oprah's sibling surprise is all too familiar to black families.
 
Oh Oprah…What Will You Do With This?, from a birth mother's blog.
 
Adoption in the news, musings on the Oprah story from an adoptive mom.




And last but not least, links to lots others talking about Oprah from Amanda at the Declassified Adoptee.

Oprah's "Family Secret"

It's supposed to be revealed on today's show, but the media got the jump on it:

TV superstar Oprah Winfrey has a half-sister named Patricia who was given up for adoption by Winfrey’s mother, Vernita Lee, shortly after her birth in 1963.

That’s the big secret.

USA Today’s Judy Keen reports from Chicago that Patricia — whose last name was not revealed — lived in foster homes until she was 7, including some that were “not so good,” Oprah says on today’s Oprah Winfrey Show.

Patricia said she always hoped her birth mother would return for her. By 17, she was a single mother. She has two grown children, a daughter and son.

“Oh my God, I have a family” was her reaction when she found out she had three siblings, Patricia said. One of those siblings, the only one still alive, was Winfrey.

Just before Thanksgiving, Winfrey said, she was told “a bombshell family secret.”

Do You Know Who's Talking to Your Pregnant Teen?

Here's a thought-provoking article:

When you sent your teen to off to school today, you worried that she would fail her test, bomb her audition for the school play, or cut out of gym class to see her boyfriend. You never thought that while in the hallowed

halls of academia, she would be convinced to take her baby and run away from your loving home on the advice of her guidance counselor. Yet that's exactly what happened to Judy Bennett.

Stephanie Bennett was a 17 year old mother and student, living at home in Ohio with her supportive mom and step-dad when she revealed concerns about motherhood to guidance counselor Thomas Saltsman. Instead of bolstering her confidence and encouraging her in her role as a parent, he immediately arranged for her to meet with A Child's Waiting adoption agency on school grounds, during school hours.

Days after their first meeting and feeling pressured to "do the right thing" by her daughter, Stephanie took baby Evelyn and ran away from home. Hours later, she signed the paperwork allowing the agency to take her daughter away.

I've long been concerned about the fact that minors are allowed to relinquish their parental rights without their parents knowing.  A child can go through labor and delivery without her parents knowing.  That's very different from how we treat the abortion decision by minors.  In most states, a minor cannot have an abortion without her parents being notified unless she goes to court first to get judicial approval.

One frequent argument for parental notification in teen abortions is that parents ought to know about medical procedures performed on their children.  What about childbirth by their minor children?  Shouldn't parents know about that?  The risk of death and medical complications is greater with childbirth than with abortion, after all.

The other popular argument rests on the significance of the decision -- deciding whether to have an abortion is such an important thing that minors ought to have the advice of grown-ups in making the decision.  Parents can serve in that role, and if there is some reason why they should not be notified, then a judge can evaluate whether a minor is sufficiently mature to make the decision on her own.  Why don't we do the same for another extremely important and significant decision, whether to terminate parental rights and place a child for adoption?

So engage in a little thought experiment if you have girl children.  Imagine that your 15-year-old is pregnant.  She is considering her options.  Who do you want to be talking to her about her choices?  A set of prospective adoptive parents who answer her "what should I do" question on Yahoo Answers?  An adoption agency whose pamphlet she found in the guidance counselor's office?  Or YOU?

Artyom Update: Mom Won't Pay Child Support

Reported by a Nashville TV station:

According to documents obtained by the Shelbyville Times-Gazette, Hansen's attorney filed a motion to dismiss child support claims made by Hansen's adoption agency, World Association for Children and Parents, in juvenile court in Shelbyville.

The newspaper reported Thursday that Russian authorities want Hansen to pay about $2,500 a month to care for the child, who is living in an orphanage.

Hansen's attorney, Trisha Henegar, filed the response Dec. 28. Hansen has since retained a different attorney, Jennifer Thompson, who declined to discuss details of the case when reached by The Associated Press on Thursday.

Henegar argued that the juvenile court lacks jurisdiction to order child support because Tennessee is not the boy's "home state" and said the termination of Hansen's parental rights is currently being handled by a Russian court.

Henegar said in the documents that Tennessee state law defines the "home state" as where a child lived with a parent for at least six months. She said the boy, who was named Justin Hansen, lived with the family in Bedford County less than six months before he was sent back.

Makes me proud to be an attorney -- argue that the court lacks jurisdiction because the adoptive mom decides after less than six months that she prefers to send the child back to Russia with a note of rejection than parent him.  Sigh.

Gay Parenting More Common in the South

Interesting, and for me, counterintuitive, phenomenon reported in the New York Times:

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Being gay in this Southern city was once a lonely existence. Most people kept their sexuality to themselves, and they were reminded of the dangers of being openly gay when a gay church was bombed in the 1980s. These days, there are eight churches that openly welcome gay worshipers. One even caters to couples with children.


The changes may seem surprising for a city where churches that have long condemned homosexuality remain a powerful force. But as demographers sift through recent data releases from the Census Bureau, they have found that Jacksonville is home to one of the biggest populations of gay parents in the country.

In addition, the data show, child rearing among same-sex couples is more common in the South than in any other region of the country, according to Gary Gates, a demographer at the University of California, Los Angeles. Gay couples in Southern states like Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas are more likely to be raising children than their counterparts on the West Coast, in New York and in New England.

It makes more sense to me after reading the article -- it isn't that the South has suddenly liberalized on gay and lesbian issues, it's that many of the gay people parenting in the South had their children while in a straight relationship that they entered because of the social pressure NOT to be gay.  Now that's the South I know!

Questions Adopted Kids Ask

This article offers a quick primer on the kinds of questions adopted kids might ask their adoptive parents.  I don't disagree with any of the advice, but I think this part is subject to misinterpretation:

It is completely normal for adopted kids to have questions about their birth family. Since the child has a life before adoption, adoptive parents need to respect that history and the easiest way to do that is to provide age-appropriate, honest information in response to questions. [very good so far]

•Who is my real mom/dad?
•Why didn’t my birth parents want me?
•Do you know what my birth parents look like?
•What should I call my birth parents?
•Do my birth parents love me?
•Can I learn about my birth country?
[yep, very typical questions, I've gotten most of them from my kids]

Depending on the circumstances, adopted kids may wonder if their birth parents will come back to claim them and that is the underlying issue to these questions. [whoa, nelly, we're veering off the cliff!] Adoptive parents can use any question to reassure their child’s permanency in the family and by doing so, build parent-child trust.

I agree SOMETIMES questions about birth parents are concerns about permanency of the adoptive family -- but sometimes questions about birth parents are questions about birth parents!  I don't see how it would "build parent-child trust" to turn questions about birth parents into questions about the adoptive family.  I can just imagine the conversation that this part of the article gives adoptive parents permission to have:

Kid:  Did my birth mother love me?

AP:  Oh yes, but not enough to come back and get you.  You're mine forever!

[Trust built -- NOT!]

I've said before that Maya often asks questions about permanency.  I've blogged before about a question she asked -- "If I ran off to look for my birth parents, what would you do?" -- as a mixed birth-parent/permanency question based on Maya's history of asking "if I ran off what would you do" questions generally.  So I agree that sometimes a birth parent question can be a permanency question. But then there's Zoe, whose birth parent questions are just about birth parents.  She doesn't have any doubts about permanency, completely sure that she's stuck with me forever! 

So while such a question might be about permanency, I don't think we can assume that that's "the underlying issue" of birth parent questions. The danger in doing that is to make your child think that you're not open to birth parent questions, because you seem to deflect each one.  So, sure, address permanency, but make that a separate issue from birth parents.