I post this today in my Radical Rant not as an adoption issue. I post it not as something that necessarily belongs here. Admittedly, I post it here because I have the venue and the right to use it.

Today my alma mater, one not known for any sort of rebellious nature, took a hard stand. Notre Dame is a university of tradition. If you’ve ever toured the campus, you know what I mean. And Notre Dame has a tradition of inviting a new president to do the commencement speech. Despite the fact that Obama’s views on abortion and stem cell research are in direct conflict with the church and the university’s official opinion – you don’t even find birth control on campus at Notre Dame – they held this tradition.

Most of why I am so proud has nothing to do with the fact that I am a Obama supporter. It comes from what made me so proud to be a “Domer” prior to this controversy. It comes from how my experience with Notre Dame turned someone who had never even heard of Touchdown Jesus into someone who bleeds blue and gold.

I ended up attending Notre Dame through pure karma, I am convinced of this. Long story short was that I aced the GMAT exams and did very well in my undergraduate studies. I was invited, unsolicited, along with about 20 others to visit the campus as part of a “MBA Scholars Preview Weekend”. At the time, as could be expected from a Jewish person who grew up in California, I knew very little about the school. I ended up deciding to go there for two reasons. One was that as the premier Catholic university in the country, ethics was integrated into virtually all the curriculum. The other quite honestly was the near free-ride they offered me.

Until the day she passed away my grandmother was convinced that had they known I was Jewish, Notre Dame would never have called me. She was completely wrong about that. It wasn’t important. Notre Dame is an institution that strives for diversity and yet holds true to its Catholic foundation.

If there is any place in this country where diversity of thought is essential it is on the university campus. One of the most important aspects of a college education is to escape the confines of our childhood and prepare us for the real world that faces us. We all on a daily basis have to learn how to respect and coexist with people of very differing viewpoints. Notre Dame realized this.

What sickens me was not that there was a vocal uproar about the appropriateness of Obama speaking. I’m the first to admit that I was upset when Bush did the same as Obama, eager to point out how his views on capital punishment differed from the church and about how he embraced the likes of Bob Jones university, where Catholicism is considered a cult. Yet I did not go so far as to turn it into a circus. In this instance, the likes of Randall Terry and Alan Keyes who did so were primarily neither Catholic nor of any affiliation with the university.
Did you know that for days a plane flew above the campus with some statement and a picture of a dead fetus? Did you know that people were parading in front of the campus, which is a residential area, with pictures of the same? I’ve attended countless anti-war protests. I don’t think I have ever seen anything so galling on a sign at one of them.

The year before last I was driving with my kids on my way home from one of our traditional Saturdays. We had gone to the zoo and then out for “football chicken” at Buffalo Wild Wings. Going down the highway just outside of Milwaukee I passed an old van. Billboards were attached to the side of the van, I’m talking poster sized here, with grotesque pictures of what presumably were aborted fetuses. I can’t remember the slogan on the van but I remember having two thoughts.

One thought was how well it made its point. There was no denying the reality of what the procedure involves (even though I suspect these were much later-term than the norm). The other thought was that I wanted to run that bastard off the road for exposing children to that type of imagery when their parents have no viable way to avoid it. Thankfully my kids didn’t notice. I’m sure many others did.

As President Obama stated in his address today, this is an issue where to a large extent the two sides have irreconcilable differences. But there is a common ground in the desire to see fewer women resort to abortion. Those who read this site know how faulty our adoption systems, domestic and intercountry, are. That needs to be changed. And I could go on about healthcare, daycare, tuition assistance, and other areas that could make raising a child more viable for some women.

I guess my point is that history shows us as soon as opposing sides stop talking, there is only one possible outcome. And that comes down to some sort of war or battle. But when they can come together, listen to, and respect one another, progress can be made. I’m very happy that my alma mater realized this. I am sad for those graduates for whom this placed a huge dilemma on a most historic day for them personally. But our university has a tradition and Notre Dame, tradition prevails to make it a place like none other I have ever seen.

Whenever I am back in South Bend and I stand on Notre Dame Avenue looking down at the Dome, precisely where some of these protests were staged, tears come to my eyes. I lived on Notre Dame Avenue when I attended school there. For me it represents something amazing that came to me by the grace of something and forever improved my life and the person I have become. When next I stand there, the tears may roll a little quicker. Because for me, in a way, Notre Dame giving Pres. Obama this opportunity is an affirmation that they still believe in why I ended up at Notre Dame and why I will support the university emotionally, spiritually, and financially as long as possible.

Go Irish!

On to the point of this rant...

Michelle Obama was scrutinized during the campaign for a comment she made about being proud of America for the first time. When the election results were final, I felt something amazing. Not because I drank the Obama kool-aid at all. But because the American people did it, we elected a minority to run our country. We have crossed a huge barrier in our development and I am truly proud of my US brethren for doing this. In short, months after the comment was made, I completely understood what she meant.

I explained to my kids what it meant that someone with beautiful dark sin like theirs was elected for the first time. I explained that this should show them that they can accomplish anything they want. As parents of minorities, we should all understand the significance of this because IMHO it is huge. Yes, it WILL take a constitutional amendment for them to become president, but we’ve got time and I see it could be in reach.

While all we in the ethnic majority like to believe racism is essential defunct, it still rears its ugly head often. It comes in many forms – intentional, accidental and subconscious. This will not change or disappear just because we’ll have a president Obama. For anyone who doesn't believe this, click here for today's proof. But Obama will serve as a symbol to all in different ways that MLK’s dream is coming closer. As the parent of minority children I feel a great joy and pride in this hurdle being cleared.

So matter what your political beliefs and whether or not you’ll agree with Obama’s policies, you can still take pride in what has happened. A majority of voters looked beyond race in a time of great national turmoil and showed that they can follow a vision that challenges many of paradigm of our culture. I think the results showed the people didn’t vote for him despite being a minority. They didn’t vote for him because he was a minority. They looked beyond it because at a minimum, they felt him the lesser of two evils.

Yes, I’m proud of America right now. I’ve always been proud of what America is based on and the fundamental principles of the world’s oldest operating constitution. But now I’m proud of an action taken by our people that shows the true spirit of the Constitution still lives.

God Bless America.

In recent weeks I have been complimented and criticized for the things I have written. And I have discovered that both parties have to a large extent either misunderstood or selectively retained what I've been trying to say. So I'd like to set things straight:

I think it sucks and is a travesty. As I have always said it is a cookie cutter model that has proved a failure for children in every other country that has implemented it. I do not support it and wish that everyone who was involved in pressuring the Guatemalan congress to pass it had shown more long term concern for the children who would be impacted.

2.) What do I think of UNICEF and Casa Alianza?

When it comes to adoption, I think they suck and are a travesty. Sound familiar? They have their agendas and while I do not think the people working for them realize this, their agendas are a complete tunnel vision that largely ignores the practical realities on the ground.

3.) What do I think about what’s happening now in PGN and with the CNA?

I am sad and torn. Ultimately, I don’t know what I think should be done. I believe that the Colom administration inherited a horrible situation. I do feel for them. As for whether I believe they are handling everything perfectly – of course not. Could it be done differently – of course it could. But I also do believe that steps should be taken to ensure that the children who leave were intentionally relinquished and that the birthmom has not desired to reclaim the child.

So here is my solution that hopefully someone with authority will read. As cases get approved by PGN, why not have the birthmom come down then, do her final sign off, and release the file. The Adoption Decree could be done immediately and that final sign off would be done before a government official. That seems more logical to me than having to bring the birthmom in to the city an extra time.

In conclusion, I am in no way happy about what is happening. Nor am I happy of what has caused it. I truly hope that this can all be resolved QUICKLY and that all parties will put aside their agendas and motivations and work towards mutual resolution. I am trying very hard not to take sides because to me sides are not in the best interests of the children at this point.

I once again repeat my call for anyone with the resources to research, quantitatively and qualitatively, the impact that the Hague and laws like Guatemala’s have had on innocent children. And we all must remember that this law was not the work of the Colom administration. Past corruption in PGN was not of their doing. I truly hope and pray with all my being that they have more rational minds than those of the Berger administration and get this done quickly and efficiently. Alvaro Colom is known and campaigned as a pragmatist. For many years I have interjected that pragmatic thought is needed in ICA. We can neither turn our backs to corruption and the rights of children and their biological mothers nor can we sit back idly should this situation turn out to be a witch hunt. For now we wait with fingers and toes crossed.

Let’s look for a moment at what the CNA (Consejo) inherited. They know of children who have been kidnapped for the purpose of adoption. This is a sad fact. I’m not saying how many, but we know there have been multiple such instances in recent times. In addition, they know of instances where judges have been paid off in order to get abandonment decrees for children. In a country with astronomical rates of illiteracy and a largely rural, impoverished population, notices in newspapers are not necessarily of huge efficacy. Remember that one of Colom’s campaign pledged was to clean up the judicial branch.

The Consejo knows of instances where social workers have been paid off to write the social worker reports whether or not they ever actually met the biological mother. They also know of instances where someone posing as the biological mother, with a falsified cedula as back-up, has been used for these interviews. The use of fraudulent cedulas and birth certificates is also not a secret.

It is known that some notaries and attorneys would have birthmothers put their fingerprints on a ton of blank papers to be used at a later date. This could be “harmless” as a way to avoid extra inconveniences on birthmothers for whom Guatemala City is far away and who likely work as migrant laborers, travelling wherever work and the latest harvest is. But it could be done for more nefarious purposes as well.

In Barrios’s PGN it is widely known that bribery and extortion were used in order to get cases processed. Normally we think of this as a way to prevent adoptions from being completed. But it could just as easily have occurred as a way to get them completed.

In short, the Consejo is aware that for a price, almost anything could be accomplished. Within the context of the former, grandfathered system, it has been very hard to verify the origin of the child and circumstances involving how she entered the adoption system.

Yes, the DNA test established true maternal bounds and yes, women should have been informed what was happening. And I am not saying that the birthmoms did not. But what if they didn’t fully understand adoption? What if they changed their minds? What if their fingerprint is already on numerous sheets of paper when they change their mind?

Now for a moment imagine that you are the head of the Consejo. Imagine that you are a parent. For those of you with children, imagine how you would feel if your child was stolen and given to someone else to parent.

What would you do with 2000+ children in the process of leaving Guatemala?

What is the only way to verify that these children’s mothers do in fact intend for them to be adopted?

The answer is to interview the birthmom. At least I can’t think of any other way.

This is not me trying to say it is something I support. It is me saying it is something I understand. The argument that it is a little late to start doing this is a valid one. But on the other hand, the Consejo didn’t exist in the past. And the past months have likely been eye openers I am sure. We as PAPs and Guatadopt are not privy to everything they know. But I do personally know of the pain facing some parents in Guatemala today.

Today, no one can claim to know to what degree these sickening forms of corruption existed. No one knows how many of the in-process cases are legitimate, how many are faulty, and to what degree those faulty ones are problematic.

I am an adoption advocate through and through. I am fortunate to know the circumstances of my children’s adoptions and of their biological mother. And I know that today, all parties involved, my kids and their biological mother, are better off because of what adoption can offer. What sickens me is that this is not the case for all of the adoptions that have occurred. I am truly disheartened by the things that I have come to know over the last couple of years.

Some in the adoption community have accused Guatadopt of turning on the community. That is unfair. My disgust of UNICEF, Casa Alianza and others has not changed. But I have also come to see that this is not a question of picking sides, this is a question of human rights, dignity, justice and equality regardless of people’s socio-economic status. Have I become more critical because my kids are home? Did I view things differently when I was in-process? It’s possible. Who knows because the truth is that at those times, I didn’t know all the things I know today.

So what would I do if I was the head of the Consejo? Really that’s irrelevant. But more relevant for all of you struggling right now is to find a way for a moment to separate yourself from your world and ask yourself the question, “What would you do?”

Paz!

I’ve also come across a few different versions of some meeting scheduled between the CA and the attorneys. I’ve seen versions where the CA called this meeting. I’ve seen versions where the attorneys were going to just show up to demand that registration begin. I do not know the truth of this. In addition, Ethica is reporting that they believe registration rules will come out next week.

In short, in-process cases will get completed and that most difficult thing of all – patience – is crucial during this transition period.

But my point in this post is to try to explain the bigger picture to everyone, integrating in the news above as related to it.

I am seeing many wanting to classify everyone (ie the CA BOD) as being either “pro-adoption” or “anti-adoption”, I’ve also seen people jumping to the conclusion that if President Colom and his wife Sandra (SOSEP’s role) removed a member who was classified as “anti-adoption”, then by default they must be “pro-adoption”. I do not believe this is an accurate portrayal and I don’t think it is fair to try classify President Colom as being for or against adoption.

One of the main reasons why I supported Colom for president was because he is an intellectual. In the speeches I’ve read, he seems to truly have his eyes set on improving the lives of the people in Guatemala who have struggled for so long. And he seems to want to do so in very strategic, pragmatic, and well thought out ways.

It is not the job of President Colom to be “pro” or ‘con” adoption. I will try not to interject US politics into this but an intellectual thinks things through and doesn’t come to black and white conclusions on most issues. They don’t go gangbusters in any direction. They realize that they don’t know everything and instead consult with experts in different areas, actually listen to what those experts have to say, and use the combined impact of those opinions to help them to formulate their position. Maybe that is why this was in the papers “Ronaldo Robles, Secretary of Social Communication of the Presidency, argued that the change was because there had been no consultations with the sectors involved in the processes of adoptions. ‘The most prudent was conducting this consultative process, and therefore were issued agreements and was appointed to other people,’ he said.”

It is the job of President Colom to care about adoption only in as much as it is part of improving the lives of those Guatemalan citizens it touches, namely the women who relinquish and their children. My guess is that he does not, and should not, care about PAPs in the U.S. in any manner outside of ensuring that Guatemalan citizens who are adopted and emigrate from his country to the US end up in good, loving families.

In judging or analyzing what is happening, let’s also remember what did occur. President Berger did, IMHO, have an adoption vendetta. I believe that he was too caught up in what the “world community” was pushing. I am hoping that President Colom’s very nature will make him more pragmatic about all of this. In addition, Berger made “midnight appointments” and got them sworn in just before leaving office. Say what you will but I can see why, given that this thing is to be built from scratch, President Colom and SOSEP would want to have people it trusted and appointed in the Central Authority.

So what does this all mean? For the first time in quite some time I have an inkling of optimism that Guatemala may find a way to implement this law and still make it feasible for children to join permanent families through intercountry adoption. While I know that some will disagree, I believe this law can be implemented in a way that ensures ethical processes, follows the Hague (ie gives preference to biological and domestic families), and ensures the human rights of Guatemalan women and children. But it will take time and if the new appointees are the people who can do it, then for the betterment of the future those of you stuck right now may need some patience. I am 99.99% sure your cases will be completed. Registration will occur rationally. And if they need to extend that 30 business day deadline, I am sure they will.

As so many of our readers go out of their way to read the Guatemalan papers, follow what’s happening, etc, I can not encourage you enough to separate yourself from it when you do, digest the info, analyze it and only then try to see what it means to you personally. And always, always remember that no matter hard it is, we must realize that Guatemala and its new president have huge challenges ahead - challenges far more relevant than adoption. Intercountry adoption is the effect of huge amounts of inequality, extreme poverty, lack of education, and more. There are far more children in Guatemala at-risk than could ever be adopted and no woman should ever feel that her only option to ensure her child’s well-being is adoption. Adoption is one avenue that can have positive results for a small percent of the total need. I realize this. President and First Lady Colom realize this. Thus no one should fool themselves into viewing this all otherwise.

Paz y Viva Guatemala!

Rep. Weller can marry whomever he wants. I have no right to tell him otherwise. But he is a public servant and a “representative” of the American people. His constituents do not condone genocide or those that have engaged in or supported it. It was President Bush who said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. So in that regard, Representative Weller has the obligation to leave office if he wishes to marry the daughter of a terrorist. Otherwise, his party and his President are nothing more hypocrites sending a horrible message to the survivors of one the worst tragedies of the last 50 years.

Focus on the Guatemalan side. UNICEF has for a long time had large sums of money on the table for Bienestar if adoptions are halted. But time is running out for Pres. Berger to get his hands on that money as he leaves office in January. If we look at what the last president, Oscar Portillo, did as he left office, stealing oodles of cash, we can see that Central America has not recovered from what years of wars to “fight communism” did. Why should Berger be any different? Doesn’t he have the right to leave office with millions of dollars in his coffers like every other leader?

My point in all of this is that while there may be some justified reasons to clamp down on Guatemalan adoptions, there are definitely some other political, and possibly capitalistic, motives in play.

With all this said as background, what is it that is happening right now? Basically, the executive branch of the Guatemalan government is attempting to dominate control over the adoption process. This is apparently being done at the expense of the rule of the law, the Guatemalan Constitution, and the separation of powers between the branches of government.

Guatemala’s government very much mirrors that of the United States. In fact, the only difference I know of is that they have a unicameral, rather than bicameral, congress. But there is an executive branch with a president. That branch sets policy, signs off on laws, and sets regulation in accordance with the law. The legislative branch writes laws and approves them and has the ability to override a presidential veto (as Guatemala did recently on a family planning bill). And then there is a judicial branch to determine what those laws actually say.

In our US government and Guatemala’s, the judicial branch is really the end all. Just as the US Supreme Court got the final say in the Bush-Gore election debacle, the judicial branch of Guatemala’s government should be the most powerful. What is happening right now is that the Executive branch, headed by the President, which includes the PGN, is attempting to break the balance of powers in order to reinterpret the law to its desires.

Before I go into this, let me point out that this happens in the US as well. All of the recent court cases regarding wiretapping, the Patriot Act, Guantanamo, and more point to this being a pattern. In some cases, the courts have sided with the executive branch. In others they have not. My point is that ultimately the usurping of authority ends up in the courts who make a decision, but it can take time to right wrongs when the executive branch has overreached its authority.

In Guatemala right now, the executive branch is attempting to apply the PINA law to adoptions. Most every legal expert I have spoken to agrees that this is not an appropriate application of PINA. I have my ideas on how the executive branch might try to defend this, but what is clear is that their case is without doubt against the spirit and intent of PINA. Thus far, the courts have ruled that PINA does not apply to adoptions. Nonetheless, actions taken by the executive branch in regard to adoption are based on PINA.

The issue of notaries taking the judicial adoption route is an interesting one. Under Guatemalan law, as has been posted on this site, if PGN is overstepping its bounds notaries have the right to go before a judge and override PGN. This is no different than the prisoners at Guantanamo fighting the US executive branch for their rights to legal representation and to know the charges brought against them. I am not trying to be political, just trying to use a US case example to make a point. As I stated earlier, the judicial branch is usually the end all in legal debates. That is its role. In Guatemala, the courts can decide that PGN was overstepping its edicts, override PGN’s determinations, and approve the adoption. This is what has been happening and it is completely legal. With that said, judges are appointed by the executive branch. And just as we have seen in the political nature of US Supreme Court nominees, even judges can be political.

What is fascinating about this latest attack on adoptions if that for years Guatemala’s system has been criticized because judges are not involved in approving adoptions. Now that some judges have been brought into the equation, rather than just the executive branch/PGN, that is no longer a positive thing.

So where is the US government in all of this? Well folks, in my opinion they are sitting by and watching with a certain amount of satisfaction. My view is that the DOS wants adoptions ended because they are a pain in the neck. The US Embassy has had to become more involved in adoptions from Guatemala than in other countries due to the pathetic incompetence of Guatemala’s infrastructure to manage itself (blame which lies largely on its executive branch though that can not be blamed on Pres. Berger solely). The US government issued its warnings and now they are doing a bit of “I told you so”. They have supported any move by the Guatemalans to restrict adoptions. They have publicly thrown their support behind law proposals like Ortega that would end adoptions and the Protocol of Good Practices. So now they are letting people feel the pain.

For the record, officially the US has no say in what Guatemala does with its adoption system. Guatemala is a sovereign nation. And to their credit, the US has gone to bat for families with adoptions completed. But, it is ridiculous to believe that the diplomatic channels available to the DOS could not be more involved because the fact is that the US has a tremendous amount of influence over the actions of the Guatemalan executive branch. To imply otherwise is what my daughter would call “poopie”.

So this is where we find ourselves - in the midst of a multifaceted political struggle. What is truly sad is that innocent children are caught in the middle of it and these bureaucrats don’t seem to give a damn about it. So I will be the voice of reason.

Stop the bullshit attacks on legitimate hogars that provide excellent care. Stop the ridiculous, impossible to satisfy requests of PGN. If there is any evidence of children being placed for adoption that were kidnapped or not intentionally relinquished by their biological mothers than give those kids back to their biofamilies and throw the people who perpetrated the crimes in jail. Why is Blanca Martinez not behind bars? If Guatemala wants to adapt its system then that is its right. But to do so it must pass a new law and implement it in an organized manner that does not leave children stuck in the middle.

The government of the United States needs to defend its citizens who entered into a legal system in good faith. If they believe the system is so bad then they have the right to shut it down as they did in Cambodia. Instead they are choosing to make innocent American citizens and Guatemalan citizens victims in a game of emotional terrorism.

I am not here defending the current system. It needs reform. But I am here saying it is the law of Guatemala. So far, I have not seen that any of these media sensationalized attacks involve any illegal activity. Instead, they are centering on interpretation and stretches of the law that do not really involve the thing of fundamental importance – whether the children were intentionally relinquished.

I am an advocate for children and adoptive parents and what I see happening is a horrible injustice to both. This is wrong and needs to stop. So I end this tirade, this radical rant coming from someone who has tried to be calm and balanced and now finds himself pretty pissed off with a final thought. Whether it is a good, bad, or indifferent thing there are thousands of adoptions in process. There are real, living children who have no families and there are real, living parents who want nothing more than to provide them with a loving family environment. The line in the sand has been drawn by the US DOS. If Guatemala does not pass and implement Hague compliant legislation before the US ratifies The Hague early in 2008 then adoptions to the US, which make up over 90% of all Guatemalan adoptions, will end. Tens of thousands of families have been created through Guatemalan adoption. So don’t penalize children and good, honest adults wishing to give them families. Look for true breaches of ethical behavior and throw the perpetrators in jail. But let the rest continue even if they don’t exactly mirror the world community’s vision of what ICA should be just as they have for years. Stop this witch-hunt and if that means Pres. Berger leaves office with only his huge cattle farming operation to support him, so be it. Because this has all become ridiculous! Children should not be pawns in politics!

There was a recent, well publicized case that occurred in Guatemala. From the press reports I have seen, it is not certain that this innocent little girl had organs removed her body. I read one from a questionable source which said so, but really it is irrelevant.

I am knowledgeable enough on the subject to say whether children have been abducted and killed for their organs. Since there seem to be people in this world capable of all sorts of horrendous activities, I’m sure it has happened. And I can only hope that the people involved in it get justice – either now from law enforcement or later from our maker. But this has nothing to do with adoption.

Recent press stories link this tragic event to issues of human trafficking including “illegal adoption”. There is only one inference to be made from this and it is a horrible one. The way I see it, there are only two definitions of illegal adoption. One would be an instance of visa fraud. For the purpose of example, let’s just say fraudulent documents being used to make a married woman appear single. The other would an instance where a child joins a family without ever really getting a legal adoption.

One could not logically call a case where a child is used for their bodily organs an illegal adoption. So are they saying that people have legally gone through the adoption process for this nefarious purpose? Find me one case! True, some would argue that this is one more reason to require post-placement reports. And I support post-placement requirements. But then in this case you are essentially saying that someone went through the whole adoption process, brought the child home, and somehow managed to get a doctor to do this. Very hard to believe

The fact that there could be people out there who would knowingly kill an innocent child to sell their organs is beyond explanation. And the fact that too much corruption exists in intercountry adoption is a travesty. But these two things are not related and it is time for them to stop being grouped together.

On a final note it is sad to have to be writing this. And in no way do I mean to detract from the severity of what occurred to this child and other children. I hope that it does not appear as though I have lessened the relevance and sickening nature of this tragedy. But this is a site devoted to adoption and it is within that context that I wrote this. I say bust all the bastards who harm children. Punish them severely. But let’s not fall prey to combining two unrelated things because they both involve the world’s most innocent population, the country of Guatemala, and the fact that there are too many slimebags of various forms in our world.

A few weeks ago I remarked to Kelly how amazing it was what her innocent adoption blog experiment had become. Guatadopt has become larger than she ever intended and has placed both of us in positions, and in the middle of controversies, neither of us ever fathomed.

One of the hardest experiences I had was on a Saturday shortly after Mary Bonn was arrested. I was busy talking to families impacted by it when my four year old daughter, my precious little angel, sadly said “Daddy come play with me”. And I really couldn’t because these families needed some support. I sat her down later that day and explained, as best I could, what was happening. So yes, some will hate this but she now knows of the accused as being “the Wicked Witch” and I have since a few times had to assure that I would always protect her from the wicked witch. Isabel is smart and once when I explained to her that I had helped a little girl from Guatemala like her get home to her mommy and daddy, she told me that it was very nice of me, smiled, and gave me a big hug. A “squeeze tight with both arms hug” as we call it.

When I took up Kelly’s offer, I never imagined I’d be involved in things of that nature. But life is funny that way. Just like the adoption process, you have take things as they happen and do the best you can.

Another of the challenges has been being the bearer of bad news. It is horrible to at times have to tell parents that their adoption is bogus and that they were scammed. For some time, I let it get to me. I lost sleep, couldn’t eat, and was almost on the verge of a breakdown. I realized that I had to separate myself from it and have since had to apologize to some people if I sound cold but that I need to have that defense mechanism to protect myself.

On the other side of the coin was that once I had the pleasure of telling a family they were out of PGN. I know their foster mom and got the news before their agency did. That really rocked!

In college I wrote a political opinion column in the heart of “Reagan Country” during the first Clinton campaign. Given that my politics differed from the norm, I got used to being criticized for my views in letters to the editor and became thick skinned about it. Besides, I love a good debate and never take offense at opposing views. That is what is that the heart of free speech and it has proven quite valuable in my tenure at Guatadopt.

There is one thing that never becomes comfortable and that is personal attacks. I’ve had a few over the years. The worst was when one reader, JK, implied that because of a view I held on the legalization of marijuana that I could not possibly be a good father. That hit below the belt. I really wish JK would have preferred to engage a discussion on the topic rather than make such a statement. I know I am an excellent father and role model for my kids. I’m far from perfect as we all are, but my kids are well adjusted, kind, sincere, loving, bright, and confident.

Today, two comments were posted on one of the entries in my writer’s corner – both by the same person. One called me a jerk, the other called me an asshole. Had the person said that about anyone but myself, I would not have approved the comments. But I’ve got thick skin so I went ahead and approved them. The person asked “who do I think I am?” My first thought was to reply “I am the walrus. Koo koo kachoo” but that would have been lost on anyone who’s not a Beatles fan. In all honesty, I’m just a guy who fell into this role, who made connections, and who has a devotion to honest, frank, and direct writing. Then the post goes on to imply that I am one of the people giving adoptions a bad name. Well, I think our readers know that is total b.s. I hate when I have “had” to post about the negative side of adoptions. But not posting about it only creates an air of ignorance that allows more families to be victimized by a few bad adoption service providers.

I’d like to call upon all the critics of me, Guatadopt, and anyone else to always remember that adults have critical thinking skills. Nothing is accomplished by name calling. If you take issue with something I’ve posted, don’t call me an asshole, state what your issue is. Open the debate and state your well thought out views.

I’ll end this little piece by praising Guatadopt a bit. We have successfully managed to impress and upset every constituent group in the adoption process – families, agencies, attorneys, and government representatives. That says to me that we are accurate and devoted to the truth. We’ll allow the chips to fall where they may in our mission to provide a resource with good information and analysis. And while we have at times upset all these groups, they still read the site and come back for more. Just as I am sure my latest critic will.

Peace!

There are two "possible shutdowns: occurring. One on the US side, one on the Guat side. They are independent of one another:

2.) The Guat side: There is this protocolo looming and no one knows exactly when it will be implemented or exactly what it will mean. Though the ADA has clearly offered their take on it. There is a RUMOR that it will be implemented April 1 and that if you do not have a POA registered in Guatemala (which takes about a week after they receive your authenticated POA) that you will not be able to complete the adoption. Or rather that the new protocol will apply to it which may very well mean you will never get that child home. But that is a rumor that we have not been able to verify. The protocolo, if instituted, will be challenged in the courts and the ADA seems confident they can beat it as they did with the Hague in 2003. But the political landscape is quite different now compared to 2003. Not being a Guatemalan legal scholar or political expert, I cannot offer up any opinion on whether the ADA is being overly optimistic. I do have no reason not to trust their knowledge of the Guatemalan constitution.

In addition, as we have posted on Guatadopt, new legislation is slated to be introduced to the Guatemalan congress this week. Some changes were made to its original form to satisfy the folks at the Hague. It has received tacit approval from the DOS months ago. This legislation, though I do not have the specifics of it, SHOULD keep adoptions open as a viable option and introduce some improvements or safety mechanisms. BUT, the DOS has been less than transparent and their recent FAQ (also posted on Guatadopt) was a huge surprise to everyone "in the know" and there is some concern that even if Guatemala passes this legislation, there is no guarantee that the US will accept it as being Hague compliant. Ultimately, what the folks at the actual Hague think is irrelevant. The way the convention works, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And by that I mean that each country decides for itself whether to accept the system of another country. I hope that makes sense.

3.) Agencies: Many good agencies have formal contractual policies about what happens financially in the event of a shutdown. And by that I don't mean the "you are sh*t out of luck” clause, rather that you receive back some of what you have paid. These agencies have worked these out with their attorneys. Some times these are agencies where you do not directly pay the attorney, rather all the foreign fees are paid directly to the agency, making them contractually obliged to live up to it. If it were me considering starting an adoption right now, I would only use an agency like this. It does not mean others are bad or crooked, but it is an insurance policy in the event that the worst comes to fruition.

Guatadopt will be updating the site as we get new info. The hard part for us right now is that we do not like to offer up our opinions too much because we are not psychic and even though we will write things like "MY OPINION", people often times take it as the gospel and that is too much responsibility for us.

With that said, here is MY OPINION: The DOS FAQ is scary. They seem to be trying to strongly dissuade people from taking referrals at this time. The timing of it is interesting as well because they issued it right after Bush and Berger met. My OPINION is that the two presidents reached some deal that did this POA registered cutoff thing and agreed on when the protocolo would be instituted. The April 1 rumor (which I have had confirmed by some reliable sources and denied by others) also started right after they met. However, I don't know what impact the new legislation might have on whatever was agreed to. I don't know if the impending protocolo and Bush-Berger apparent agreement got the legislation put on the fast track. I would personally be very hesitant to start an adoption at this point. But I think we're all adults, know our personal and financial situations, and know how much risk we can accept. There are innocent children who deserve families and despite DOS's ominous statements that do raise valid issues and problems in the current situation, most adoptions are not full of problems. The bad stuff has gotten worse recently, I am seeing that personally. But the good agencies and attorneys have not recently sold their souls and they are still doing things the right way.

This was the family involved in the infamous Mary Bonn case.

I’m writing this piece for a few reasons. First of all, so many of our readers have privately e-mailed me through all of the controversy asking the only relevant question – how is the child. I am extremely happy to report she is fine and seemingly happy. She is adjusting well and based on the one night I spent with them, she has already attached and bonded with her parents. Never before have I been so happy and relieved to have a darling child completely reject my charms and playfulness that usually make me an instant hit with kids. Why? Because she only wanted to be with mommy and daddy! Even those folks who became so enraged about previous posts on the Bonn situation should be as happy as I am to know that she is doing well!

Secondly I write this because, despite the fact that I hope this will not lead to more heated comments, I can now say that I’ve seen the parents in action. They clearly love their child as I love mine. And if anyone questions what I mean by that, you will get lambasted by me for any inference that my children are anything less than the meaning of life to me. Their story is not one of winning; it is one of a family growing, of nurturing, of determination, and true concern.

Lastly I write this because as I left our meeting I had a huge smile on my face and it wasn’t from the two beers I had enjoyed at dinner. It was from finally feeling relieved from the stress that this whole drama had caused me and of course the family. Our voices tell so much about what is going on in our hearts and emotions. I was finally able to speak to these wonderful people in a normal setting, under normal conditions, as normal adults. Their voices sounded different and it was clear that while they will have their challenges ahead of them, they are ready for them and eager to succeed.

I really wish that I could post the pictures I have of this sweet, beautiful, innocent child wearing the awesome tie-dye my wife made for her. We have a tradition of giving tie-dyes to friends’ kids when they are born or come home in the cases of adoption. But this is a family who has never wanted attention and I am not about to provide the media with a picture to exploit against the family’s wishes, unlike some others who disgustingly have done otherwise to support their own sad agendas and throw one last punch at people who have already been so horribly victimized.

No matter what one may think about what happened in this case, no matter your opinion and judgment may be about each individual detail that transpired, I leave you with one thought that I stake all of the credibility I’ve built during my Guatadopt tenure on. This child is home and with the parents that she deserves to be with and who will act, as they always have tried to, in her best interests. She will grow up in a proper environment and learn proper morals in a loving family environment despite all the perils she faced to get to that point. I suppose in the end it is that fact that caused the big smile to encompass me as I drove back to my hotel. And isn’t it what adoption is all about?!

As I often read through magazines like Adoptive Families, I am amazed to read many of articles about how to handle sensitive issues related to adoption, a child’s history, and the like. Maybe amazed is the wrong word and relieved is a better choice. I do not mean relieved that we are not alone in these concerns, I mean relieved that we don’t have them. So many of these things have inherently been removed because of the manner in which we adopted.

Guatemalan adoptions are a topic for much heated debate. To many parents who have chosen to adopt elsewhere, Guatemala is the country with all the baby-buying going on. Yes, some of us parents know what others say. On the other hand, I know many adoption professionals who have told me horror stories about the goings-on in other countries. As the chief writer for this website, I have come across families experiencing all kinds of adoptions from Guatemala. So for the record, yes there are issues with Guatemalan adoptions. Yes, there is a huge need for reform. No, there does not seem to be enough people keeping children first in the reform discussions. And that is the topic of this column.

For all of the horrible stories about Guatemalan adoptions, the adoptive community must also see the positive side. In my mind, there are many ways that Guatemala’s system should serve as a global benchmark. My story about Abuela Betty set the stage for what many don’t realize – adoptions from Guatemala offer many future benefits to the children.

A recent article about birth country visits made me giggle when I read some of the topics. What is the right age to visit? How it’s important for a child to use the trip as a way to be proud of his heritage. And the list goes on. All these are valid topics; but not for us. Isabel’s first trip back to Guatemala was when she 20 months old, one year after she had come home. This was for Tio Alberto’s (Tio means uncle) wedding. Her second trip was just four months later, when we went to visit her biological and future adoptive brother, Samuel, who was three months old at the time. Her third trip was three months after that when we brought Sammy home. This last time was the largest gap, it was 15 months since she visited. Nonetheless, in the three years she had been legally a Kreutner, Isabel would visited Guatemala no less than four times.

Another issue we don’t face involves knowing about her and her brother’s history. We know all about their family history. We have pictures of her biological family, whom we’ve met. We have pictures of Isabel with them when we met them during our first return trip. And from that trip, we even have a copy of Samuel’s ultrasound. We know what their biological mother does for a living, where she lives, why she relinquished, her parents’ names, her other children’s names, and just about anything else we’d like to know. That won’t need to be something we dig for or make a big deal about when the kids are older, it will be a fact they grow up knowing all about. In fact, we keep a picture of their biological family framed in our house. And whenever Isabel passes by it, she tells us who they are.

Because of how Guatemala’s system works, we were able to establish these types of ties. My kids have huge extended families now. There is their biological family whom we send pictures to and get updates from. Culturally, it is very difficult to have much more of a relationship. From Isabel’s adoption, both kids have people they know as grandparents, aunts and uncles, and cousins – all people who truly love them as members of their family. We also have one point of confusion because we are also very close to Samuel’s former foster mom, Ana. She says she is too young to be a grandmother so she is called Tia Ana. But I’m sure we can deal with that one.

If asked, Isabel will tell you about how she and Sammy were born in Guatemala, as was Abuela Betty and Tia Ana. She recognizes the Guatemalan flag, the shape of the country, and even the Gallo beer logo as being “daddy’s beer from Guatemala”. At three years old she also knows daddy was born in New York and mommy in Kansas. She knows she used to live in Guatemala with Betty before she came home and she loves to watch the video we have of those times. “I want to watch Isa on TV” has become a near nightly request – one that brings back the fondest of memories for my wife Sheila and I.

As I stated at the beginning of this article, Guatemala’s system does need reform. However, as we think about the issues and challenges facing children adopted internationally, there are certainly some positive aspects to how Guatemala’s system operates. Not to be confused, most families adopting from Guatemala don’t make the kind of contacts we have. For some, it isn’t possible. For others, they, wrongly in my opinion, don’t believe it’s important. But for those of us who believe that keeping ties strong between our children and their birth country is very important and are willing to push a little, it is at least possible.

Guatemala offered us the chance to adopt in our hemisphere from a country whose landscape is every bit as beautiful and precious as its children. We are able to make the quest their every year or two and will continue to do so. It’s become our favorite vacation spot, a place we think of as a second home. Our children will always be Guatemalans and our connections to the country seem to be making that a given.

So to all the people who are debating the merits of Guatemalan adoption, to all the humanitarian groups and government bureaucracies, please give some thought to the upsides of Guatemala’s system and do your best to maintain them while making proposals for reforms. There is a way to keep the good stuff while putting an end to the issues involving the minority of adoptions that put a black mark on the system as a whole.

In the three plus years I have been involved with Guatadopt I have been a resource for hundreds of families. No one contacts us when they are having a smooth adoption process, so this is hundreds of families who have lost faith, trust, and in many cases hope in their adoption process. While I do not keep formal statistics, I can honestly state without question that more of these cases involved Mary than any other adoption service provider. With these cases, I have noticed many patterns and consistencies. Lost referrals are not uncommon. Cases languishing without movement for months (and I mean over 6 months) occur. Families have been told inaccurate info on where their cases stood with regularity. Attorneys, foster moms, and buscadoras not being paid. Basically, I’m just echoing what some have posted in Guatadopt comments. Granted, while this is my personal experience it is all based on second hand facts. I can't always verify what people e-mail to me. But people over the course of a number of years have no reason to be dishonest with me. And when one hears the same stories consistently, there is either truth to it or an unlikely, pretty well developed conspiracy.

Mary undoubtedly has happy, satisfied clients. And she has undoubtedly been a major force in creating hundreds of families. I do not claim anyone posting that experience is being disingenuous. But what I’ll say is that the other side of the experience is also not being disingenuous and that based on my experience, that experience is more common in cases involving Mary than other adoption service providers.

I have received many private e-mails in defense of Mary since we broke this story. Some are very sincere testaments. Others, however, have shown what I will deem an ignorance and sad acceptance. As an example is someone justifying the fact that a child was starved in foster care as being normal and to-be-expected. Here is an except from one such e-mail:

Also, to suggest that a child's lack of health in foster care is the fault of the facilitator just shows your lack of knowledge about orphans in general and especially in Guatemala. Children cannot thrive there in temporary care! That is WHY they need to be adopted.

This is nothing short of disgusting and is an insult to all of the wonderful people providing care in Guatemala! My family remains very close to the people that cared for our kids. They are now part of our family. While there is no substitute for permanency, my children received/learned love, nutrition, trust, bonding and family before they came home to us. This kind of care is one thing that attracted us, and many other families, to Guatemala. When I described the statement above to one my kids’ former foster mom, she became enraged because there is no excuse for a child to ever not receive proper care and nutrition. I hate to bring money into this discussion, but the fact is that we adoptive families pay a lot of money to adopt and one reason why that should be money well spent is because the private foster care system can and generally does provide excellent care.

Is it the role of the agency/facilitator to ensure proper care? In my opinion, and in the opinion of the US Congress based on Hague legislation, yes it is. It is the role of the facilitator (or agency in the more traditional arrangement) to visit the child during the process. It is their role to make sure the child is going to the doctor regularly. That is the person who is supposed to be “watching out” for the adoptive parents and thus by default the child.

Think of this as a human being. If you are the only person seeing a child and you see a child is being starved -- an innocent, defenseless child being starved -- isn’t it your job or moral obligation to do something about it? Isn’t it your job to notice if there is a problem? I am not claiming facilitators should be doctors and able to make a medical diagnosis. But a child being starved? Yes, it’s their job to prevent that – especially when the parents are telling you they are concerned.

I could go on and on here but at five pages right now, I think it’s enough of a dissertation. I look forward to more of this story, the whole story, being able to be made public, but that may have to wait for the courts to do their work. For the time being, I am confident in placing my trust in what occurred to common sense, pragmatism, and the words of a couple who went through hell to find their child over what may be coming from the accused who based on my experience has a propensity not to accept blame and communicate things in a less than honest light.

The family in this case is amazingly calm and non-vengeful. In the midst of all of this they expressed concern to me for Mary’s other in-process families, the Guatemala adoption system in general, and especially for Mary’s children. They are religious, honest, law-abiding citizens who found themselves in the midst of something they never fathomed when they decided to grow their family though Guatemalan adoption. Based on the statements of the DOS, there seems to be no doubt that the investigation into Mary has moved beyond this one case. Based on the experiences of families I’ve spoken with that went through problem adoptions with Mary, it scares me what the DOS may uncover. Should Mary’s actions and fallout from them lead to a disruption in the ability of families to grow like mine, I hope that everyone realizes the blame lies in those that abused the system no matter what arguably delusional arguments led to it.

I once had an adoption service provider tell me “At its best there is no system as good as Guatemala’s. At it’s worst, there is none worse”. So now we have removed one of the worst from the equation, I pray that there is still the opportunity for other families, like mine to experience the best.

Bonn was charged with Harboring an Illegal Alien in the United States after federal authorities discovered a child living in Bonn's home who had been legally adopted in Guatemala by a U.S. family. The family had been searching for their child and had no knowledge that she was living with Bonn.

FOA deplores child trafficking and any illegal and unethical practices that threaten the rights of children to a legal, ethical and humane process in determining a chiild's future. Intercountry Adoption (ICA) is one component of the broad range of social services that should be available to children in every country. ICA is legislated and closely monitored by American and foreign officials to ensure that the best interest of the child is paramount and that the laws of each country are honored. This includes careful preparation and documentation of prospective parents within a legal framework and scrutiny by American and foreign officials to ensure that these families have the desire and means to love and nurture a child to adulthood.

Unfortunately, the distinction between legal intercountry adoption and child trafficking gets blurred when adoption service providers do not adhere to the laws, or the principles of "best practices". Unfortunately, in this case, an unlicensed child placement facilitator is alleged to have circumvented the law for the sole purpose of bringing this child into the United States under another child's name and on a non-orphan visitor's visa, which clearly is illegal as well as reflecting a gross disregard for good practices.

Our hearts go out to the child and family who appear to have been victimized. FOA is working with others to develop support resources to assist other families who may be impacted by Mary Bonn's arrest.

FOA supports the impending implementation by the United States of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, which should curtail the ability of unregulated facilitators such as Bonn to provide intercountry child placement services, as well as regulate licensed agencies to assure good practices. As this case plays out in the courts, FOA will keep the adoption community updated and informed on the website: www.guatadopt.com , with whom we are coordinating support resources.

Hannah Wallace, President, and Board of Directors,
Focus On Adoption: An Intercountry Adoption Advocacy Organization

Today's DesMoines Register has an opinion column published on this topic that impressed me greatly. It gives a good way of looking at the issue in human terms, rather than based on quick news soundbites. You can read the story by clicking here. .

I look forward to you sharing your comments...