Thank you for attempting rumor control. One always has to consider the source. An independent third party would be a good source--too bad it seems that there is no such thing right now.

Wow, what a shame that they feel the need to distrupt the lives of so many innocent children just to "show" the international community that they are doing "something" about adoptions. I cannot believe she actually admitted that.

Can someone tell me what this "PINA" law is? Thanks!!

Kevin,

With tons of respect and admiration, I think your analysis was overly optimistic because you did not dwell on the following paragraph:

"If it is found by the PGN that she is incapable of
providing support for the child then PGN will investigate the broader
biological family to find if there is a member of the family who can
provide care for the child. If in the PGN's report there are no
family members willing or capable of providing support for the child
the judge will then be able to declare the child adoptable. The
child will then be made eligible to be adopted by a Guatemalan
family, if no family is willing or able to adopt the child then the
child, as a last option; will be made eligible to be adopted
internationally."

You'll note that there are no time-frames on these periods (it could be that the summary as posted did not reflect further aspects of the conversation). I read it, as a CQ alum, as effectively ending all ICA from Guatemala as of January 1. No need to declare a shutdown -- just take long periods of time to track down extended family members and look for a Guatemalan adoptive family.

My view may be alarmist, and I am a concerned CQ alum which also may color my viewpoint, but the conversation reflects the (current) government's commitment to a draconian UNICEF version of "reform" that does not bode well for the future. Maybe after the elections, sanity will return, but the candidates on the stump have not had many good things to say about ICA.

Lee

Yay for the GuatAdopt change requiring accurate email addresses! I further advocate for the need for posters to accurately identify themselves by name. Yes, I know some people are uncomfortable posting their names for fear of repercussions, so perhaps it is an annoyance (to me) w/ no good solution for everyone. I'm just so tired of some of the really off the wall comments by posters with completely bogus monikers, making them completely unaccountable for the information they've shared. Anyway, thanks for the requirement that correct email addresses be used.

Boni

I don't even know how to respond - all this press in the news, paper, etc. just scares the crap out of me. we are in family court now and i just want my baby home -- i hope nothing happens at this point. i would die if anything happened or i lost my baby. my stomach is in knots all the time now, i can't really "enjoy" this time - because i feel like all this bad press just stinks big time. i have no children and can't get pregnant, i just want one child to love with all my heart. I already love him with all my heart - Guatemala can't turn their backs on me now - can they? Please no.

Lee,

You are correct in that I didn't read that part carefully enough. Still, without a new law I don't think PGN can assert that and it would be challenged (plus who knows if it is going to happen). But you are right, that could be scary.

Most of the jitters though seem to come from in process families and it also mentions only cases started after Jan 1 being affected. Plus, I strongly believe that the US DOS will step in if in process cases are jeopardized (exlcuding of course what seems to be relative inaction right now on CQ cases but that is a much smaller scale).

I do believe the future is dim and hope that Guatemala can pass a workable law soon. We shall see what happens. It is a scary time for certain but I don't think in-process folks need to worry too much. Hopefully I'm not wrong!

And Lee, we're friends. So please, the admiration thing makes me feel weird :-)

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Kevin,
Can you please clarify what you mean by cases "started" by January 1, 2008. Does this mean cases with a filed POA, etc or cases entered in PGN by 1/1/08. We just accepted a referral, and will probably just be entering PGN at that time. Will in-process cases (early like us) still be grandfathered in?

Thanks!
JLR

JLR,

It is impossible to answer what hasn't happened yet or been announced officially. Everything at this point is pure conjecture and opinion. And let me say to everyone that my opinion is just an opinion, not to be taken as the gospel. I have no inside info I am not sharing.

In the past, in-process has been defined as having the birthmother's consent for adoption (known as the "first acta") and POA registered. Both happen very early on in the process, prior to DNA authorization (first test). So that's the best guess I have.

We have had several supposed D-Days this year between law proposals and the on-again, off-again protocol of good practices. My main point is that knock-on-wood, the Guatemalam authorities will announce what their plans are officially before they go into effect and if necessary, Guatemalan attorneys will take the appopriate legal actions to ensure that everything is in accordance with the Guatemalan Consitution.

In addition, with thousands of children in process and thousands of PAPs committed to a legal process that they entered into in good faith, I do not believe that the US DOS would sit by and allow that to happen or that the Guatemalan authorities would attempt to end those adoptions (which is not to say they might not put "safeguards" in that make things take longer).

Even in the Hague fiasco of 2003 which showed exactly how things should not be done, they announced that referals would be honored or grandfathered in - even though there was no new system in place.

For anyone coming directly to the comments, I did add a paragraph to my original, main topic post dealing with what it COULD mean come Jan 1. I thank Lee for pointing out what I had missed in the midst of internet issues and a hectic day at work.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Does anyone know how many current in-process cases there currently are? Do you really think that Guatemala would want to deal with the backlash that would most certainly come if, well ok, we were to be interrupted? I'm guessing this number is in the thousands and if you think the press is covering this story now...And if this were to happen, you better belirve our government will get an earful. I could be wrong, but I believe, really hope, that cases will push through a little faster these next couple months. It would just be less for them to deal with. By saying that, I don't mean illegally pushing through...Erik

I am only one of many but our experience has been positive. We received our referral on 3/21 (he was 2 days old), and we were approved by the PGN on August 20th (4 weeks in PGN) and our attorney believes we will have our pink slip next week (our agency is suggesting travel for final pickup 9/24). We've been to Guatemala twice (June and August) and were there during the "rumored lockdowns at the Marriott" and none of it was actually happening. To all of you going through the process....keep the faith.

My fears - as I voiced in my email to you, which I don't know if you got - are twofold.

1) As Lee said, that the process will not be officially suspended - just dragged on indefinitely as the Guatemalan Gov't puts all its resources (sarcasm alert) to work finding domestic adoptive families for these babies. This can only be harmful to the children - where will they stay? Who will pay for and provide care for them?

2) I am also concerned about this regulation's impact on women. This would make it impossible for a woman to place her child for adoption without the knowledge of her community and extended family. While some might argue that this shouldn't be an option in the first place, I think that there are enough cases where the stigma of being an unwed mother, the perils of an abusive relationship etc. make it imperative for a woman to do this to protect herself and her family. The end result, I fear, will not only be a deterioration of care at orphanages, but children simply being abandoned outright.

-Mari

One additional thing I feel compelled to point out, as the proud mama of a CQ alum who has seen a lot of IMHO unsubstantiated CQ bashing on some of these threads...

"JA stated that the only irregularity that she sees with current CQ cases is that the children are not relinquished to the home under a
judicial order as stated in the PINA law. According to her a judge needs to grant an order allowing a child"

"JA stated that Casa Quivira cases have not contained any irregularities"

According to the interview with Josaphina there are currently about 5000 cases inprogress in Guatemala. Every one of these families should be concerned and voicing objections to the senators and congressmen in their area. The 42 of us with children through CQ are having a hard time waging any type of battle and getting our voices heard. We need some action from the Department of State or the Embassy. Several of you voice your concerns about your process and you well should have fears. Today it is our children, tomorrow it could very well be yours. SPEAK OUT and get this heard!!!!!! 42 families can very easily be ignored. 5000 make it a little harder to hide under the rug.

Annie

Mari is right. If PGN is going to hold things up by attempting to find family members to take on the responsibility of another relatives child, or other Guatemalan families who can barely take care of their own, where will that child go in the meantime? Who is going to be caring for him/her and what happens if the mother who wanted to keep her pregnancy private is found out? This is a country that still hands out primative justice for wrong doings. Is she even going to be willing to follow through with the pregnancy or attempt a dangerous abortion that will threaten her and her child's life because of fear of punishment?

This whole thing sounds like PGN and the Guatemalan government are attempting to pick parts out of the Hague to implement before they are prepared with a central authority just so they can appease other's watching from the sidelines. CQ happened to be the unlucky test case that is being used to see how far and for how long they can get away with "upsetting the apple cart" by changing the current program.

My granddaughter has been home for more than three years but, my heart goes out to those of you who are trying to complete your families. Also, I cry for those babies waiting and the unborn ones who may never see the light of day because of adults who seem to have lost sight of where their future lies, it's with the children!!!

Annie makes an extremely valid point and I couldn't agree more. I have a dear friend going through this process with CQ right now. Her soon to be son is in an undisclosed facility or in a hospital. I have been helping her write emails and letters to everyone and anyone who will hear the story. It's a tragedy and an injustice to pick just one organization to "go after." It's easier to watch what happens than to get involved with the process. These PAP's who are only blogging need to be screaming about this injustice NOW and not waiting until it may happen to them. If they, the Guatemalan government, can test the waters with CQ and get away with jeopardizing the health and welfare of these babies, what will keep them from doing it again? ANYONE who has a connection to an adoption in Guatemala needs to be working diligently NOW in getting this travesty out to the press, the Embassy and our elected officials. Instead of just blogging, please write and fax letters.

Thanks for the forum, Kevin....I just needed to spout off. Annie....we're pulling for you too!

well said Annie. The department of state and the embassy have taken a hands off attitude regarding CQ babies and their American PAPS. The fact that these adoptions are in process means nothing. Make your voices heard in solidarity with the 42 babies unjustly treated at CQ. Contact your reps and senators and let them know how you feel.

When the Hague takes effect, and when people in Guatemala understand that there are no longer payments for relinquishing a child for adoption, do you really think that 5000+ babies a year will be relinquished? Yes, I know that poverty and extreme poverty are the primary reasons for relinquishment but Guatemala's economy and standard of living is no better today than it was 15 or 25 or 35 years ago. Formal adoptions were never the norm in Guatemala. Why now? Because now is when the market exists. We cannot simply blame the criminals in this equation; we all share the "blame" -- the attorneys who charge upwards of 20K, the adoptive parents who pay it, the governments which allow it -- the distribution of consequences, however, is decidedly unbalanced.

As an adoptee, I believe, with few exceptions, that it is best for children to be raised by their bio families, 2nd choice by bio relatives, 3rd choice within their country of origin, and 4th choice, ICA. Maybe, just maybe once the $$ is taken out of the equation, thousands of children a year will not "need" to be placed for adoption. I hope that their original families will find the means to care for them, just like they did 15 and 25 and 35 years ago. Honestly, although my heart truly breaks for the turmoil and pain the current state of affairs is causing adoptive parents, it breaks more for the children who will learn that corruption and baby stealing was far, far more common than most of us could have ever imagined. I'm exceedingly worried for the children who learn that there mothers had no true choice in the relinquishment decision. I wonder how familiar people are with the Baby Scoop Era in our own country+ (over one million babies were placed for adoption during the 40's through 60's before adequate access to birth control). The majority of the women/girls had literally no choice, no decision to make. My first mother did not relinquish me for adoption because she felt ill equipped to raise me. She relinquished me because she was made to do so. Coming to terms with these sorts of issues is, at best, challenging -- for all members of the adoptive triad, but especially for the adoptees and the first mothers. Yes, adoption can be a wonderful thing. It can also cause a life time of pain.

I respect Guate adopt for issuing their "don't start now warning" and only wish the US government had forthcoming about their concerns in a more timely fashion.

Hi Elizabeth, I appreciate your post and honor your very personal perspective. I continue to read references to 'corruption/baby stealing' in Guatemalan adoption (ie you said "...that corruption and baby stealing was far, far more common than most of us could have ever imagined."). I'm not being argumentative, I just would like to finally see data, or facts backing up the amount of corruption, the cases of 'baby stealing'. I don't negate your opinion, I'm just burned out on opinions being presented as fact. If you have data, research documented I would love to see it. Quotes from say the NY Times, by biased sources either way, don't count. Personally, I know of graft/bribery required in Russian adoptions, 2 friends were instructed to bring $10,000 in specific denominations to be 'handed over' with no receipt and no accounting as to what for or where it went, as well as itemized excessive 'gifts' for various bureaucrats involved in their child's adoption. Yet there are no screaming headlines about that. China basically forces families to place girls (typically) for adoption. My colleague is from China and says that in her city, neighbors inform if you try to keep the 'extra' child, unless the family pays a 'fine' to the government. THese I know as facts. I would really like to know as facts the negative headlines about Guatemala. And I'd really like to see people all upset about these other countries as well (ie Mali where children having living relatives but 2 are still going to be adopted by Madonna). Finally, do you know what happened 15,20 years ago in Guatemala specifically when there was no IA? Did the children all survive? What was the infant mortality rate then compared to now? Also can you tease out the impact of the civil war during some of those years, and the misappropriation of much of the sustainable land by the governemnt from the poor, pushing them into abject poverty? Sincerely, Kit.

Please keep in mind that the US cannot intervene in adoption cases overseas as stated in the DOS site:

What the State Department Cannot Do:
Become directly involved in the adoption process in another country

So contacting your senator or representative would prove unsuccessful. One can contact them after your child exits PGN and you are having a delay in processing your pink appointment at the USE. Please remember if you have not exited PGN the child is not legally yours, so hence the state dept., senators or representatives cannot act on your behalf. Also, there were alot of PAPs left with no recourse or child when other countries closed its doors. They too were in-process families.

I would like to respectfully disagree with Elizabeth. I am also an adoptee, given up in the 1960s essentially because my birth mother was young, had few resources, and faced the stigma of a "child out of wedlock." I met her in my 20s and was happy to have the contact and meet my biological relatives. In one sense, it's obvious that I can't imagine not having grown up with my real parents -- my adoptive parents -- since that's the only world I knew. But I also think adoption made sense for my birthmom at the time. And despite the usual turmoil of growing up and adolescence had a wonderful childhood and always a sense that I was with *my* intended family.

Of course, bio-moms should never be coerced and we should work to construct systems, and let Guatemala construct, systems to let adoptions be as transparent a choice as possible. At the same time, I believe that there is way too much focus on bio-families as the only legitimate family. As if biology could really dictate the love given on a daily basis, the structure provided by parents, and so on. In the grand sense, we are all one big bio-family with DNA so marginally different from person to person that the obsesssion with familial genetics seems well absurd to me.

For these reasons, I think it's incumbent on us as adoptive parents to make a concerted effort to meet our children's birthmoms, when possible, especially because we know the system is broken. Some adoptive parents seem to think that their child was born in some fertile Guatemalan peapod not of a particular women at a particular time with particularly usually harsh life circumstances. One distrubing image I saw on a blog that someone thinks is funny is an ultrasound of Guatemala as "the first picture of my child." This is a dangerous form of erasure of the particularities of how our children came into the world and came to us.

For all these reasons, I met my daugther's birthmom when I was done in Guatemala for a month to be w/her before pick-up time. Luckily I worked with an agency there that was amenable to this but I was shocked that according to my facilitator I was the FIRST adopting parent to ever ask to meet the birthmom!! I speak Spanish and now I know that her bio-mom chose of her own violition and of course with bittersweetness to relinquish her baby. She was 26 at the time, had 3 kids already (oldest 12, youngest 2), an absconded common law husband, and a crappy night job at a factory. Now we communicate occasionally on email and I plan to help her and her kids when I can with some resources, whether money or clothes. Yes this is a risky move but I believe it's the most ethical and humane way to begin the parenthood process through adoption (wherever it takes place), with a life narrative that can be explained clearly and with as little murkiness and unknowns as possible to my child (I know this in not an option for everyone, esp. with abandonment cases).

I really think the problems that arise with kids around adoption are not so much about adoption per se but because parents don't talk openly and clearly about the circumstances. Some on this list and posters I have read elsewhere (and here I'm sure I'll piss some peopel off) want to think that their children are Mayan princesses with Guatemala heritage. Well, my view is that they are Latina/o Americans living in the United States, born in Guatemala, and should feel a part of the vibrant Latina/o cultures and communities that exist here and be shielded and then given tools to deal with the ugly xenophobia the U.S. can't get rid of.

Thanks for reading,

Minna

I have a serious call to action---

A few of you have said you are worried about Guatemala closing while you are in process.

A sure fire way for it NOT to close or stop while you are in process is to stand up and help Casa Quivira babies NOW!

The US CAN ABSOLUTELY stop what is happening to these 42 CQ babies caught in the political mess and set a precedent that they will NOT tolerate a stoppage of ANY family who is in process before January 1, 2008. After Jan 1...that is a different story.

Action Plan:
Our government likes to move when it HURTS. They must hear from all of us this week (first week back in session--starts Sept 4) and they must hear from us in their Washington DC offices ONLY--do not call your reps local offices.

Let them know you are concerned about the health and well-being of the 42 remaining Casa Quivira children, and that you request that they call the State Department to ensure that ALL cases of families in process be allowed to finish. Casa Quivira babies are in limbo and that is a deprivation of their basic human rights.

The reason I believe this will help all families in process is that no government official---US Embassy, State Dept officials especially--want a repeat of the Cambodian closures. It was very messy for them. They need all in process cases to be able to finish.

As a waiting parent, it hurts me so much to see that people won't stand up for the innocent. Please stand up for all of our babies NOW!

Ann

Elizabeth, you make some very good points in your post and I agree with much of what you say. However, I don't believe that changing the process of adoption in Guatemala to a government run system will end the corruption. The corruption will only move to a new sector and the children (and first mothers) will continue to suffer.

Will placing adoption in the hands of the Guatemalan government make them care more about the children? I doubt it.

Will the Guatemalan government be willing to pour the necessary funds into orphanages to give the children placed in them the quality of care that private orphanages like Casa Quivira now provide? I doubt it. And where will these funds come from? A never ending flow of $$$ from UNICEF? I doubt it.

Will the Guatemalan government begin providing social welfare programs to help support impoverished families (over 50 percent of the country’s population) so that unwed, under-educated, and over-burdened mothers can keep and raise their babies? I doubt it. What is the answer? I don't know. There are no easy answers.

I only hope that International adoption continues to be an option for the children of the world, and that Guatemala is willing and able to keep the true best interest of the children at the heart of their adoption reform.

Right now, it seems to me that the children’s best interests are somewhere near the very BOTTOM of the government’s list. Hiding 42 infants and toddlers from their first families (who chose to place their children in the care of Casa Quivira), from their prospective adoptive parents (who chose Casa Quivira for its high standards and excellent reputation) and from the caregivers at CQ that once lovingly tended to them, is not a shining example of adoption reform.

Marie,

While what you posted is correct from a legal and "official" perspective, the US does have the ability to pursue diplomatic pressure on behalf of its citizens.

Historically, US involvement in the affiars of Guatemala has been nothing short of tragic. But in this case, I do believe the DOS could do more to "pressure" the Guatemalan authorities to have the status of these innocent children determined expeditiously so that all legitimate cases can be completed without unecessary delays. That's the best thing for all parties involved. And of course, it is possible they could be doing this already, just not publically for obvious reasons.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Cathy or Ann

Please let me know how I can help, I will be happy to write letters etc to my Senators, I find it hard to believe that the US is letting this go on. I believe you are correct when you say that the more people who get involved i.e. the squeakier the wheel, maybe something can be done. I am here to help w/ whatever I can.

Blessings and Prayers to all CQ families

My husband and I adopted two children from CQ a few years ago. We're currently in the process of adopting two little girls from a different Guatemalan source.

When I first read the news about CQ, and especially after the babies were removed from the home, my heart just broke for the children, the families in process, and the CQ staff. I wrote to Congressman Dingell and Senators Levin and Stabenow. Senator Stabenow's office wrote back that they had heard from MANY Michigan families about this issue.

My husband, my two children, and I visited the girls in July. Of course it doesn't take long to get attached, and my boys keep talking about their "sisters" and showing pictures to everyone. If ultimately we aren't allowed to complete this adoption, it will be a terrible blow to my family. I only pray that all involved - their birth family, their extended family, their wonderful foster family, and of course, my own family, can eventually find peace with whatever resolution.

Someone mentioned that in the past, families in process have not been allowed to complete their adoptions when countries have closed. What country was that? Thank you for the clarification.

Also, I would respectfully ask that we be gentle with one another. Many of us ARE working on behalf of the CQ parents in process.

Laurie

To see the latest adoption news issued by the US Department of State
go to their website:
http://travel.state.gov/family/adoption/intercountry/intercountry_482.htmlS
Sadly adoptions were suspended in the countries of Nepal and Lesotho.
Ireland suspended accepting any new requests this past August(after the CQ story hit) On anoter note:
I remember we did a Call to Action back in Feb./March and flooded the White House with letters, and who can forget my memorable appearance on CNN. It showed the human side of adoptive families. Maybe we can do the same again? Any ideas?
Marie, Guatadopt.com

Someone asked about the countries that were suspended. You can read about the suspension of processing orphan petitions in Cambodia at:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=63e0159cd1d3e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=063807b03d92b010Vg
But please don't think that this can happen to us. Let's stay positive and together in this. GT is talking about Hague implementation and this is not what occurred in Cambodia. I was only showing that at times, the role that the US govt plays maybe be limited.
Marie, Guatadopt.com

Hang in there families who are in process. All reputable sources seem to indicate that the overall snese is that in process Guatemalan adoptions through 12/07 will be allowed to continue. Even though there is no assurance of this, families are continuing to complete adoptions currently. It seems the bigger picture may be that the times will be prolonged. I truly believe one key is keeping the lines of communication wide open with our representatives. As was previously pointed out in an earlier post, the US DOS may not be directly involved in these cases prior to finishing PGN but rest assured the US Embassy and State Department are aware of and influential in the entire process.
As an FYI for those folks utilizing an escort for final departure of their child leaving Guatemala, the final cable 39 now goes through The National Visa Center instead of the local CIS office. This policy changed as of 7/5/07 following an order from the Assistant Secretary of State.
My thoughts and prayers are with the children and families involved, especially for CQ children.

Mari said,
"While some might argue that this shouldn't be an option in the first place, I think that there are enough cases where the stigma of being an unwed mother, the perils of an abusive relationship etc. make it imperative for a woman to do this to protect herself and her family. The end result, I fear, will not only be a deterioration of care at orphanages, but children simply being abandoned outright."

I agree with you 100%. I wonder what mechanism will be set (something has to be set) for cases of women who need protection from abusive situations, or who want to protect themselves from stigma. This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

Yes the issuance of the visa has changed from being cabled from your district USCIS office to now the National Visa Center. This has caused alot of problems for parent as of late.
As stated by many parents on the guatadopt.com forum, the USE is issuing I-72s for not receiving updated fingerprints.
What would happen before is that a parent would contact their local USCIS and they would resend the Cable Visa. This now cannot occur, because the Visa is now coming from the National Visa Center and they are not resending it. We have advised parents to contact their Senator's office for assistance. The Senator's offfice just gets an email response, so a Congressional Inquiry then has to be issued. The result.... more time is wasted in trying to get a pink issued and trying to get your child home.
Marie, Guatadopt.com

Some facts collected from sites of World Bank, Unicef and World Census and Wikipedia.....
The population of Guatemala has gone from 1 million in 1900 to greater than 12 million today. This has occurred at a rate of growth of approx 1.5 million people/decade. This is the fastest rate of growth in the Western hemisphere.

The birth rate in Guatemala has decreased to about 3% from as high as 8% in the last 20 years. Compared to a birth rate of 1% in the United States.

Guatemalans make on average about 1/9 th of the income of Americans and approx. 56% of Guatemalans live below extreme poverty line (defined as not being able to afford a basic basket of food).

Reportedly, 67% of indigenous children suffer from malnutrition even today.

In 1960 the infant mortality rate was reported as 140 deaths/1000 live births. This is before Americans were adopting thousands of babies/year. Today(whether a result of adoptions, better orphanages or modern medicine) the infant mortality rate is reported as 40-80/1000 (4-8%) compared with the less than 1% US infant mortality rate.

Just some numbers to chew on.

Sadly: Somalia, Guatemala, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Rwanda and Malawi are within the countries with the highest birth rates (top 20). Sad that they have the least resources to support this population.

Without IA, what future will these millions of children face?

Ellen
Waiting for Baby Girl removed from CQ

Ann:
The US Embassy may not WANT to deal with the mess of a closure. However in Cambodia it was the State Department that closed the nation with a suspension. That was their decision--knowing the mess that would result. There was SO MUCH CORRUPTION and the Federal Marshalls had people RED HANDED. I know that case very well and the US was right to suspend as the abuses were grave. Now, the impending moratorium in Guate is based on international agreements/ impending ratification. So, you may say that the embassy is not interested in dealing with the mess BUT I ASSERT THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE A MESS AND IT IS GONNA GET WORSE as we progress towards the end of the year and the almost certain moratorium. The fact that the State Department has promised to process all cases submitted within a timeframe is a good thing. However, they FULLY know that there will be messes--that is a foregone conclusion. As for CQ, the State Department has NO authority to push itself upon Guatemalan legal proceedings like the one going on with CQ. They may send an observer to court hearings and inquire. However, it is imperative that the Embassy recognize the soverign state of Guatemala (and as the post above, these children are not yet US citizens nor are they yet officially children of US citizens). We most certainly would not stand for any nation pushing themselves in upon an an ongoing child rights/child theft investigation. The CQ dilemma is PRECISELY why the State Department urged US Citizens to consider their options carefully. Unfortunately, as the moratorium nears, there will likely be more problems. I say that with 99% certainty. These are difficult times.

karenms1,
You are incoorect. According to the US Department of State website they will "ensure that US citizen's are not dicriminated against" in regards to foriegn law as related to adoptions. Casa Quivira is in fact being discriminated against and by their own admission DOS is obligated to intervene.

Karenms1,

Please can you be a little more sensitive with your comments? You anger me almost every day--not because of your content, but your delivery of your message.

First of all, can you stop shouting at us?

Second, can you be sensitive to the fact that many of us are in process and having quite a lot of anxiety right now? And we are reading what you write.

Third, can you make your responses sound less like "I told you so" and "nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah".

Fourth, most of us in process, have been in process a very long time and have begun a very long time before the State Department put out their warning. So, stop shoving all of this crap in our faces daily, eh? Give it a rest already with the, "I know better than all of you attitude".

Don't you know we are hurting?

Lizzie

Sharon and Lizzie:
I should let you know that I don't take these things personally and I am focused on the macro. I know your heart hurts and these are difficult times. I hope for you and all the children involved get what you hope from the US embassy. One thing that is unknown is JUST HOW MUCH they will involve themselves in ICA issues over the next few months. Now that they have been named the "central authority" for the US in terms of the Hague, they may well be more engaged than I have predicted. I am sorry if I have offended you or you feel abused by my statements--that is not my intention.

We adopted our son six years ago from Casa Quivira, and even though we're not in process now, this entire episode has been unsettling for my family as for many of you. For what it's worth, I've posted my thoughts on my blog:
http://richardlsmith.blogspot.com/

I hope everyone reading and wondering is also faxing, emailing and phoning their state reps to request involvement.

Minna-

Thanks for your comment. You have summed-up my sentiments exactly how I wish I could! I believe being open and clear is the only way. I hope to meet my son's bio mom. It probably will not happen but I will continue to try.
I speak spanish fairly well but unfortunately our son's bio mom does not speak Spanish, she speaks quiche (pardon my spelling). Our son is now 2 1/2. He understands spanish and speaks it as well because he has learned from his foster family.
If the process was entirely clear and open so that everyone could be connected, if possible, and that was the rule of thumb, the children would benefit whole-heartedly. If only!
Our case has been approved by a judge in the tribunal court as well and we are waiting on his B.C. Although I am extremely nervous I also appreciate the opinions that are frank and honest that I read on this website and in the forums (thank-you karenms1) I want to know everything. All opinions. It teaches me so I can better understand the process in which my family and I are living through in order to have our gorgeous and amazing latino american at home with us. And I will probably tell him the entire story of what we endured one day. If he wants to hear it.

And I will write letters to my senators, the US embassy, etc...

Maybe we could come up with a list of who would be the best to write? A list with contact info so that is easier for all of us very busy parents to get those letters out?

Thanks for reading,
Sally