{Posted on behalf of Susana Luarca, Association Defensores de la Adopcion}
The US embassy invited the adoption lawyers of Guatemala, to attend a seminar at the embassy to explain the way the Hague Convention is being implemented in the United States, on September 26, 2006.
About forty people attended the seminar. It was held at a conference room at the embassy. The consul explained that the process to ratify the Hague Convention by the United States is almost completed and will take place sometime during the next year, after the process of accreditation of the adoption agencies is finalized. The consequences for Guatemala of the United States becoming party to the Hague Convention is that Guatemla has to comply with the provisions of such convention, because if it does not do it, the US will no longer allow its citizens to adopt form Guatemala.
Guatemala never ratified the Hague Convention, because our country is neither member of the Hague Conference of International Private Law nor attended the Seventeenth Conference where the Hague Convention for International adoptions was discussed and subscribed by the attending countries. In November, 2003 Guatemala acceded to the Hague Convention, and the Procuraduría General de la Nacion (PGN) was appointed as Central Authority. During the six months that the Hague Convention was enforced in Guatemala by an arbitrary PGN, not a single adoption was processed by the PGN. The files piled up on top of the desks in the drawers and even on the floor of the PGN, while the families and the children waited and waited . In July 1st., 2003, the US embassy stopped processing authorizations for DNA and the situation got worse. Finally, on August 13, 2003, the Constitutional Court upheld the challenges that the Instituto de Derecho de Familia and a group of lawyers filed against the Congress decree that approved the Hague, based on the fact that since Guatemala never signed the convention, it was not possible to ratify it, it could only accede to the treaty, but the Constitution of Guatemala does not allow the President to accede to a treaty, only to ratify it. As soon as the sentence of the Constitutional Court was published in the official newspaper, the PGN started processing adoptions and the order was restored.
After that painful experience with the Hague Convention, it is very hard for us to believe that such treaty “protects the rights of the children”. In Guatemala, with the lack of social welfare, the unwed and jobless mothers are given the option of placing their children for adoption. But for some people, it would be better if those children “were not born”, as Josefina Arellano, the director of the section of children of the PGN expressed at a press interview, not long ago.
The consul explained the consequences for Guatemala of the US ratification of the Hague Convention, making it very clear, that the US does not care neither what the Guatemalan Constitution says nor what the Constitutional Court ruled. The only fact that they care is that Guatemala has not formally withdraw from the Hague Convention and that is enough. No exception will me made in the case of Guatemala and no especial treatment will be given to our country.
The other speaker was Ms. Lisa Novak , a U:S. attorney sepecializing in International Law. For many years she practices law in Washington D.C. Currently she serces as co-founder and Director of the Global Orphan Supprot and Education Foundation (GOSEF) which supports orphans in countries around the world through education and vocational training. She is also co-founder of Claar Foundation, a US international adoption agency. Ms. Novak made very clear that her opinions were hers only and that she neither works for the embassy nor for the State Department. Step by step, Ms. Novak explained to us the requirements of the Hague Convention and the way it will be implemented in the United States. She told us about the enormous financial resources that the adoption agencies will have to get in order to afford the accreditation fee and the insurance that every agency must have to cover its liability for the actions of all the people involved in the process of adoption, in any given case. That includes also the people that the agency works with in Guatemala.
Ms, Novak also expressed that the United States does not care what the Guatemalan Constitution says or what the Constitutional Court ruled with regard to the Hague Convention. All that matters is that the name of Guatemala is among the list of members of the Hague Convention and that is enough to force Guatemala to implement it or to risk not being able to do adoptions with the United States. Ms. Novak said that Guatemala is wrong if it believes that because of the number of adoptions that we do every year, the United States will reconsider the drastic measure that is taking, because Guatemala is not irreplaceable, since the United States can adopt from about other thirty countries.
The way that Guatemala implements the Hague Convention it is up to Guatemala. The United States will not dictate how that should be done, but it has to be done quickly, because in the United States “the train just left the station “ and it is a matter of time before the doors will close down for our children.
Ms. Novak pointed out the most important parts of the Hague Convention, suggesting different ways to implement it, because as a legal framework, the Hague Convention is very simple and very ample, and allows to each country the way it chooses to comply with the convention.
After listening to the consul and Ms. Lisa Novak, there is little doubt that the Guatemalan system must be changed, if we want to keep offering to our children, the possibility of finding a better future with permanent loving families in the United States.
After the meeting was over we were offered coffee and cookies and little time to exchange our views about the seminar and the information given to us. The question that remained is: Where are those thirty countries that the United States can adopt from?
According to the list of the top twenty countries that the US has extended orphan visas during the last year,( http://travel.state.gov/family/adoption/stats/stats_451.html)only seven ofthem are Hague Convention members (China, Indian, Colombia, Philippines, Mexico, Poland and Brazil) The four major countries where the Americans adopted from last year are China, Russia, Guatemala and South Korea. The future of the four of them as sending countries is very somber. China has a serious gender unbalance among its population, due to the policy of only one child for each family, that makes the abortion of girls a common practice, but that after twenty five years is leaving a large percentage of the Chinese young man, with not enough women of their age group to get married. Russia and South Korea are facing a decline in their population growth, that threatens to close down adoptions permanently. Last week, South Korea suspended admitting new adoptions and even though they say that it is temporarily, it could become something permanent. Russia is encouraging its women to stay at home and care for their children, offering them pensions that make it very attractive. The response has been less than enthusiastic by the women, who are more interested in pursuing a career than in being stay-at home-mothers. That only leaves Guatemala, a country that made last year, as many adoptions as the remaining sixteen countries combined. The following country is Ukraine. On July 3, 2006 Ukrainian authorities announced that “Ukraine will accept NO NEW adoption dossiers from non-Ukrainian adoptive parents before January 1, 2007. This applies to ALL intercountry adoptions, including applications for biological siblings of previously adopted children”. They also give preference to married couples, allowing singles to adopt only in default of married couples.
According to Ms. Novak, a great success of the Hague Convention is to promote local adoptions in the countries of origin. She mentioned that before becoming Hague, Brazil “made thousands of intercountry adoptions”. According to the “Top Twenty List”, Brazil who became Hague until 1999, during the last fifteen years made less than 150 adoptions a year to the US, with the exception of the year of 1990, when it did 228 adoptions. That year was the lowest of Guatemala, with 257 adoptions. Ms. Novak stated that 30,000 domestic adoptions were made in Brazil last year. We hope, for the sake of the Brazilian children, that those numbers are right, but seriously doubt it.
If the United States closes down adoptions in Guatemala, the cases already started will be allowed to finish according to the old system. The catch is what is understood by “started”, pointed out the consul. Anyway, between the ratification and the time it becomes effective, there are three months, and that will give time to take a decision.
The adoption professionals of Guatemala are working to implement changes to comply with the Hague, because even if the US citizens can switch to another country, our children do not have that choice, and at this time, the alternative to adoption for a Guatemalan child whose parents cannot provide for him, is abandonment, mistreatment or being used for all sorts of illegal purposes. We cannot allow that. It is for them that we will do our best effort to keep adoptions as an option for the needy children of Guatemala.
Susana Luarca, Attorney at Law, Association Defensores de la Adopcion
Do you know when this ratification will take place? Kelley
Posted by: Kelley Jones at September 27, 2006 11:35 AMI know that our adoption attorney in the states flew down to Guatemala last night.
Posted by: Melodie at September 27, 2006 12:17 PMI would be honored to start this thread off with a prayer:
Gracious Father, we acknowledge you as our creator and for that we offer our praise. We lift up to You all who are involved in the adoption of children, we realize that we have been adopted by you through Jesus, Your Son. Eph.1:5 Please be the defender of those who have no protection right now, Holy Spirit. Be with the governments as they try to decide what is best for their people, including those who have no voice. Be with the parents who are awaiting their chosen child, grant them peace through a process that is wrought with emotion.
Lord, you know all and I am confident that if we all open our hearts and let our prayers be heard, you will be glorified, not because of us but because of your abounding grace! In the name of Jesus Christ and all that He has done for us, Amen.
Are there any clear details on what is meant by adoptions that are already "started" can continue? Like after Embassy pre-approval or what?
Thanks, Jen
Posted by: Jen Campbell at September 27, 2006 12:41 PMWhy can't Guatemala just formally withdraw from the Hague? If the political power in Guatemala recognizes that they do not have the infrastructure to implement Hague requirements, why can't they take the obvious steps to find a way to deal with them, i.e. withdraw from the Hague and allow adoptions into the United States. The onus should not be solely on the US. Guatemala has a responsibility here too.
Posted by: Stephanie at September 27, 2006 12:46 PMStephanie -
Unfortunately, it is not so easy as withdrawing if the US is pushing for Hague Compliance. They can easily refuse to do adoptions with Guatemala for not complying even if they have withdrawn. Frankly, it makes more sense that the US recognize that Guatemala is not a Hague country. But they have refused to do that and therefore, their intent is clear...pressure Guatemala to be Hague compliant. Think of it this way: If you were looking at a house and started writing a contract on it...but you never made it through all the conditions, never signed it and never presented it....are you under contract? Absolutely not. Would it make sense for you to be asked to withdraw the contract? NO, because there is no contract to withdraw. Doing so weakens the interpretation of a "contract". So, for Guatemala to withdraw from something they are not legally (constitutionally) a party to...would weaken their constitution.
While most of us would like to think that we *could* improve adoptions using the Hague, I don't think that the US is so concerned with the process as they are with "FEEL GOOD" compliance. I agree that Guatemala and the US both must come to some sort of agreement. But the US is pushing for a system that Guatemala cannot provide without serious consequences to the children.
Posted by: Kelly (webmaster) at September 27, 2006 01:43 PMKelly,
I must respectfully (of course) disagree with you. The fact is that Guatemala did everything that the Hague requires to acceed. they submitted all necessary documentation. They just never implemented a system. So I can understand why they are considered a part of the treaty and not compliant.
The fact is that ther President of Guatemala, and his wife, have been trying to end adoptions for some time. so there is no incentive for him to withdraw. By ot withdrawing, the USA is doing for him what he has always wanted but has been unable to do through legislation.
I also learned something interesting yesterday and haven't yet formulated how it could relate. But I know from the last Hague crisis in 2003 that the US was not helping parents or doing anything with Guatemala until they agreed to pass CAFTA. yes, economic s in hte US caused our government to not show mercy on families and children. In nay case, the US has been in an all out war to block Venezuela from gaining a seat on the UN security council. Instead, the US is supporting that Guatemala be elected so that latin america is still represented. As I said, I don't know how this plays into adoption politics or if it does at all. But I do know we can't look at adoption in isolation.
The good news to me is the attorneys realize the necessity tobecome Hague compliant. While I do not wish for Guatemala to follow the Hague model in other contries, I am cautiously optimistic that this could lead to positive adoption reform that removes some of the improprieities that unfortunately exist while also maintaining the private system that provides excellent care and a history for our children.
Kevin
Guatadopt.com Writer
No wonder the whole world hates us! I apologize for the arrogance of my country!
Posted by: JC at September 27, 2006 03:21 PMI too agree that implementing this will remove questions about money changing hands, birthmoms being paid,etc.
Posted by: Al at September 27, 2006 05:20 PMI guess you don't understand politics if you feel that you have to apologize for our country. This issue has nothing to do with arrogance. It has to do with compliances. By the US not following through and making Guatemala comply or withdrawl, the other countries who are involved with the Hague Treaty are now getting upset at the US for dealing with and protecting a country that has not complied. Rules are rules and what is arrogant about that? If you bend the rules one country you will have to bend them for another and that would defeat the entire purpose of the Hague Treaty.
Posted by: Kelly Ann at September 27, 2006 05:27 PMAs I read thru Susana's comments my heart just broke and tears fell......
To think of the future of of the 4,000 or so children a year from here on out who will not receive a loving and safe home thru the miracle of adoption is so very painful and sad.......
I don't believe our govt is thinking about the "children" or the "families".....
Kevin's remarks about "other factors" coming to play here makes so much sense..... things are not always as we "think" they are as our world moves towards globilization.......
My heart really does break for the children........ those who will be left behind... they will ultimately pay the price.......
Gloria
mom to 5 Guatemalan blessings
Folks,
If you look historically at countries that have "signed" or "implemented" the hague in Latin America ..... well, those countries no longer place children and if they do, it's very precious few......not too mention that Guatemalan culture does not embrace nationals in adopting and therefore how will the children find loving homes?
I know that reform or changes to help improve ethics is good, but really I think the cultural issues revolving around creating a central authority , for example is complex......
We are talking about a society that does not value it's poor, or it's illeterate or as susana commented that women like Ms. Arrellano said that these women should not be having children.......if the present Guatemalan govt does not value it's indegenous population or it's poor, what is going to change with the Hague?
I do not see a central authority being created in Guatemala..... I don't believe the present President and First Lady really have enough vested interest in the poor, and the orphaned to spend that kind of $$ on the children, the most vulnerable......
My greatest fear and a real reality is that Guatemala will follow the fate of other Latin American countries that eventually signed this treaty that is "supposed" to "protect" the child's interest......
That fate is that the country will be closed to intercountry adoption and very few children will actually be adopted......
That is exactly what happened in El Salvador, Brazil, Bolivia,
Honduras, Peru, etc.
What makes us all think it will be any different with Guatemala?
So very sad,
Gloria
mom to 5 Guatemalan blessings
I sorta don't understand why very little energy seems to be spent on brainstorming and strategizing HOW Guatemala can become compliant in their own, workable manner. I know they are not China, but China did it in its own way and it works pretty well. It seems like many children could be given the gift of adoption if there would only be more focus on HOW to implement a cohesive and efficient central authority system that is affordable, rather than digging in and just trying to stop a "train that has already left the station." Many see the U.S. government as not caring about the children, but I suspect many in our government DO care, and are trying to get Guatemalans to focus on a solution, and take control of their own destiny within the Hague legal framework. I am cautiously optimistic that this will now be the focus, though I realize it seems scary to those involved in the notararial system - i.e. what happens to their livlihood?.
Posted by: B at September 27, 2006 07:10 PMWith all due respect B, Guatemala is not China. You are right about that. China is an emerging world superpower and Guatemala is a desperately poor third world country. The China model cannot be compared to Guatemala. But if you want to look at China for even a second, most of those children are in orphanages and do have more delays and issues related to institutionalization as opposed to children adopted from Guatemala. The current system is riddled with inequities, but the *children* are the ultimate benefactors under it.
Posted by: Stephanie at September 28, 2006 08:50 AMI agree... I don't understand why they aren't brainstorming and strategizing in Guatemala. They have had plenty of time to become compliant. My worst fear was described earlier by Kevin; 'The fact is that there President of Guatemala, and his wife, have been trying to end adoptions for some time. so there is no incentive for him to withdraw. By not withdrawing, the USA is doing for him what he has always wanted but has been unable to do through legislation'. I'm afraid this is the ending that the President of Guatemala wants. He wants to end adoptions and the US will do it for him by stopping the adoptions due to them not complying. Then I'm sure he will blame the US and use us as a scapegoat. Only the children will lose and I want people to understand that is not our government's fault. If you don't understand the situation, please read Kevin's comment posted September 27th at 3:05pm.
I am so saddened by this event. My heart just breaks for what could have been my daughters fate and what will be the fate of the children when/if this occurs.
Posted by: Sharon at September 28, 2006 09:38 AMI just have to weigh in for a moment. The U.S. government is not in the business of "helping" Guatemala do anything that doesn't serve the U.S. interest. There are MUCH bigger issues at play within the political framework of Guatemala and the plight of children, especially those of Mayan descent, are not a big priority. For those not acquainted with U.S. / Guatemalan history, it was the CIA who in 1954 helped to overthrow the only democratically elected government in the history of Guatemala. 36 years of bloody civil was ensued. 200,000 Mayans were slaughtered and many more are still “disappeared.” None of us should be fooled into thinking that U.S. wants to help them “take control of their own destiny.” Our government has NEVER been in that business. The Guatemalan government has never been in the business of helping the plight of the poor and/or indigenous. The Hague Convention isn't going to change that policy, either. Instead, thousands of innocents will continue to suffer.
Posted by: km at September 28, 2006 10:33 AMI think the comment about our country being arrogant was related to forcing Guatemala to join CAFTA in order to process adoptions of Guatemalan children to US families. It's like making Guatemala dance in a circle to solve its problems. The US can't help you with your poor until you join this treaty that will make it hard for your poor to sell its goods to the US.
Posted by: Rachel at September 28, 2006 01:07 PMI don't think the vitriolic political comments about each country are helping the discussion here. We need to know all of the facts about what is going on and what the legal effect of it all is. I am waiting for a son down there right now, we have pictures, we've named him, and we will be decorating his nursery any day, and that's really all I care about right now. Will we be able to raise him?
Posted by: AP at September 28, 2006 02:00 PMWhen do you think that this Hague will take place. we are in the process of our DNA,
Karen
Posted by: Karen at September 28, 2006 03:28 PMIf someone has a good source such as "guatadopt" to get an thorough understanding of the Guatemala adoption saga and the Hague Treaty, then I will read and communicate. My wife Andrea and I are new to the scene and our case is at this point at the tail end of the Family Court in Guatemala City. Many more have been waiting for their cases which are further along in the process than ours, and then some. I am willing to voice my opinion more than once on these issues. I feel that is my gift and God's calling, even if I make mistakes here and there trying to do it. I have already been in contact with our Congressman's office and his staffer dealing in immigration. She is to take the letter I'm writing and attach her own with it to her contact at the State Dept. I understand that there are holdups also with our own Embassy with how they have treated the GT lawyers and the adoption agencies, with these individuals waiting in lines for a long time, sometimes waiting the night before to submit DNA's and so forth.
Posted by: Brian Whitaker at September 29, 2006 01:19 AM