PRAISE THE LORD!!! I am so happy to hear this. Our voices have been heard!

The families without borders letters are unfortunately out of date. The cow is out of the barn. The Ortega amendment has been passed.

There is a new - to me - blog about the current situation. It is at http://www.5000orphans.com
It would be good to add it to the links of Guatadopt.
Susana

I have an idea, but would need some help from people more informed and more savy with words.

Why not send letters to the editor of as many newspapers as we can? It could be a fairly standard letter, personalized with details from our stories. The letter's purpose would be to get the other side of the story out there. Everyone I know has watched CNN's report or heard NPR's report or some other slanted media. Let's get something out there that mentions the DNA, the four sign-offs, the social worker's interview. Make sure that the letter includes mention of the Ortega bill and what is so wrong with it. Finally, the letter would say that UNICEF is funding the passage of this law and for that reason, we are not going to support UNICEF any longer.

What do you think? Worth it? Could it do any harm? It seems to me that now would be an ideal time to educate the masses about UNICEF.

I contacted The NY Times,AP,and Rueters today.
Send the JCICS link to all media outlets about UNICEF "falls seriously short of supporting the best interest of children"

I hope this is okay to post. I took the families without borders letter and updated it to reflect the passing of the Ortega Law.

Jenn in PA

Here it is if anyone wants it:

October 5, 2007

Tina Leoni

Department of State

Office of Children’s issues

SA-29

2201 C Street, NW

U.S. Department of State

Washington , DC 20520

FAX: 202-736-9080

Dear Ms. Leoni,

I am writing to request that the Department of State do everything possible to help the children who will be caught in legal limbo when Guatemala shuts down its international adoption program. Guatemala has declared it will cease all adoption activity for children in the process of being adopted by US citizens on January 1, 2008 , regardless of the stage of processing. The Guatemalan government has effectively stated that many of the thousands of children whose adoptions are now in process will be left without families: they have already been relinquished by their birthfamilies, and now it appears that their prospective US families may not be able to complete their adoptions. Many of these families began their quest to adopt a child from Guatemala months or even years before DOS first voiced reservations about the adoption situation in Guatemala .

The Department of State has declared that the US government is asking the Guatemalan government to allow pending adoption cases to proceed to completion without additional requirements. I applaud this effort by our government to preserve the interests of the US adoptive families and Guatemalan birthmothers who have already entered, in good faith, into the legal process of adoptions in Guatemala , as well as to advocate for the interests of the Guatemalan children whose futures hang in the balance.

In addition to petitioning Guatemala to complete in-process cases:

1) I call upon the DOS to advocate unequivocally for Guatemala to:

(a) set a FUTURE cut-off date after which newly initiated adoptions will be governed by new regulations, and

(b) guarantee that adoptions in process as of that date will be governed by pre-existing regulations and will be completed in a timely manner.

I feel it is imperative that the US and Guatemala jointly agree upon and announce the specific criteria that will determine whether a specific adoption will be considered in-process. This must be announced in advance and it must be unambiguous. I believe that the US government should be at least as diligent in advocating for “in process” adoptions to be completed in Guatemala as they were in working with both Russia and Romania when those countries shut down their intercountry adoption systems.

2) I demand that the DOS honor their frequent promises that they will continue to process Guatemalan adoptions, whether or not Guatemala is Hague-compliant, as long as the I600A is filed prior to the date that The Hague is in force for the US . The latest statement of the DOS suggests that there may be a period of time after Hague implementation wherein the DOS may not be able to approve adoptions from Guatemala if they do not meet Hague-compliant adoption standards. This is unacceptable and contrary to numerous, prior statements as well as the FAQ on Hague transition cases issued September 26, 2007 .

3) I implore the DOS to encourage Guatemala to amend Bill 3217 (the so-called Ortega Bill). This is an unnecessarily restrictive piece of legislation that will likely be unfunded and unworkable. I beseech our government to advocate for adoption reform legislation that will improve the constitutionally protected system of notarial adoptions, rather than one that is likely to lead to a political and legal morass that will leave Guatemalan birthmothers and children with fewer options than they currently have, and will further restrict the options of US families who are eager to provide a loving home to those children. I would point out that there are other adoption law reform bills currently under consideration by the Guatemalan congress (such as bill 3635) which will also meet Hague standards, and which may prove to be more practicable given the legal, social, and political situation in Guatemala.

As stated on the DOS website, the “goal of the (Hague) Convention is to protect the children, birth parents and adoptive parents involved in intercountry adoptions and to prevent abuses.” I believe that recent events such as the raid on the Casa Quivira childrens’ home (and the virtual disappearance of the innocent residents who were in the process of becoming US citizens), and the DOS announcement that thousands of adoptions may be disrupted before being finalized, demonstrate that the manner in which these two countries are implementing The Hague may be causing more abuses and loss of protection for the adoption triad than it is preventing. I call upon the DOS to ensure that the spirit of The Hague is not lost in the political maneuvering that is surrounding its implementation process.

Finally, the DOS should encourage, with the same energy they used to help pass the Ortega law, amendments which include a realistic funding plan, child care plan, prenatal, natal, and postnatal services as well as a realistic way for existing child care facilities to be able to care for the children in their care (funding).

If you would like to discuss this matter with me directly I can be reached at YOUR PHONE YOUR EMAIL

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME

YOUR ADDRESS

The DOS said by e-mail that and the JCICS site states that the bill had is third reading but that the final review and vote will be on or after November 4.

http://www.jcics.org/Guatemala5000.htm

Joan

Jennifer do you have her e-mail. I do not have a fax. Thanks

The Families Without Borders letters are in the process of being revised to reflect the developments of the last few days. We appreciate your patience as we finalize the changes and post them to our website.

Regards,
Theresa Lacey
www.familieswithoutborders.com

I see the fax number but is there an email address available. I'd love to send this to the DOS.

I would also recommend that people consider having their Church leaders write letters. Specifically, because GT is about 95% Catholic, if we could get some Catholic hierarchy interested and writing on this, it might have significant influence. I have contacted (via others) our Archbishop and two Cardinals, one of whom is at the Vatican. I don't know these people personally, but I have friends who do know them. It might be another useful avenue to explore.

I think Julie's idea about contacting the Church leaders is one of the best I've seen. Thank you to everyone who is working so hard for us.

I have read, "The DOS said by e-mail that and the JCICS site states that the bill had is third reading but that the final review and vote will be on or after November 4." http://www.jcics.org/Guatemala5000.htm

Can anyone please share what is supposed to be voted on this Tuesday? Does anyone have a good idea when those of us in process will know if we will be allowed to be grandfathered in or not with the Ortega Law?

Waiting anxiously with my heart on the line like so many others,
Elisa

So if I can convince a significant church leader to write a letter and have it translated, to whom in Guatemala should it be sent?

Hi, Kevin and all:

I hope someone can help me with this question asap as we are preparing for a major press event Oct 9 regarding the Guatemalan adoption situation, in my local area.

I was intending to use the Families witout Borders Unicef letter for some of my main "talking points." Problem is..there are no "footnotes" to that letter that explain where the info came from. I have searched the UNICEF webite, the UN website and the Hague website and I can't find any statements similar to the 6 points attributed to UNICEF in the Families without Borders UNICEF letter.

The 6 points being that UNICEF wants intercountry adoption to occur only after a search for bio relatives and Gautemalan nationals is unsuccesful, that a child should not be adopted into a country with racial discrimination, etc. Where precisely did all these points come from?

Could someone please help explain this to me? I need to be prepared to answer press questions...

thanks,
Connie

PS Beth--glad you got thru to Angelina Jolies' press office. Actually, its you who rock-I haven't called them yet!

Connie,
Families without Borders has a 62 page pdf document that details their concerns about UNICEF's Best Interests of the Child.

Google FWBstudyGuatemala.pdf . It should show up.

Good luck with your interview -- relax, you know 20X as much as the reporter and viewers do.

Connie,
please e-mail Families Without Borders at familieswithoutborders@yahoo.com and we will answer any questions we can. The short answer is that the FWB sponsor letter is a brief summary of the much longer study we did on the role of UNICEF in Guatemalan adoptions. The study, which can be downloaded from our website, has citations and references. However, please note that the content of websites including UNICEF's may have changed since the report was written in 2003, so unfortunately some of the cited websites may have been amended or removed.
HTH
Ellen
Families Without Borders
http://familieswithoutborders.com

Jennifer B,
If you have the letter translated, I would recommend sending it to President Berger. That is what I asked my contacts to do.

Connie,

Do you have a copy of the Aug. 28, 2003 letter written by Sang Nguyen, a UNICEF official?

I think UNICEF's position is outlined in that letter. The letter can be found on Page 5 of the Families Without Borders report, "UNICEF, Guatemalan Adoption, and the Best Interests of the Child: An Informative Study."

When is your press conference? Before you talk to the press, it might be helpful to go over your speaking points with someone from Families Without Borders.

Also, perhaps you should make copies of the letter and the report to hand out to the press. That way, they'll have something to look at when they sit down to write their articles.

Zoe's mom

Connie,

The link to the family without borders study that several posts referred to is as follows:

http://www.familieswithoutborders.com/FWBstudyGuatemala.pdf

Good luck :)

My husband (a big race fan) just informed me that UNICEF is sponsoring a car in today's NASCAR race in Alabama.

I will be letting NASCAR know how I feel about this. An anti-family organization such as UNICEF should not be permitted to participate in a family-oriented sporting event.

Zoe's mom

One piece of advice I have to everyone in writing to or calling others about UNICEF. I base this on the countless interviews I have given and the reactions of reporters.

Do not attack UNICEF the organization or their intent. UNICEF does many great things around the world for children. At issue here is their position on intercountry adooption its immediate impact in Guatemala. People can accept that easily.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Hi Kevin,
I have a question about Tuesday. Is anything happening on Tuesday now, or is final vote on 3217 not taking place now until sometime in November. I have read conflicting reports and was just curious if we are to expect any news next week.

Regards,
Sarah

Just received a very encouraging letter from my Congressman Jo Bonner and in it he states that he has contacted the US State Department regarding the situation in Guatemala and will stay on top of this until relief is achieved.

Interesting facts can be gleaned from reading the Guatemalan press as it pertains to "THE ORTEGA LAW", it seems that if more than 35% of the articles in it are changed than the law will have to go back into committee. I believe that there is a real chance that this can happen if enough Guatemalan Congressman are educated on the detriments this law will have on the children of Guatemala as well as the country as a whole. The contact info for Guatemala can be found at www.5000orphans.com The real change lies within the heart of each Congressman in Guatemala who is willing to do what is right for the humanity of his or her fellow citizen with respect to allowing in-process families to complete their respective adoptions and also designing a law that will allow adoptions to continue. May Dios protect the children, change the hearts of many, and hear the prayers of His people.

Trusting in Him,

Paul

Kevin,

Your point with regard to UNICEF is well-taken.

Let me just ask you a question, though, while we're on the topic:

I keep hearing over and over that UNICEF offered money to Berger to shut down adoptions. Is this truth or a rumor? Where does that information come from? Is the money supposed to go into his pocket, or into the government's coffers?

If it is true, why aren't more people aren't squawking about it? Please help me separate fact from fiction.

Zoe's mom

Paul,

Just to clarify:

There are 60+ amendments to the law, but a large number have been "pre-approved" and will not be included as part of the 35%. That means that the 35% has to come from the remaining amendments, which would make it a lot harder to reach the required amount. That means, if there were 65 amendments total, there would need to be at least 23 left to vote on, and all of them would have to pass.

This is from the JCICS site. They do a better job of explaining it than I have, but it seems the possibility of it happening is a pretty tall order.

I am confused about this new petition on the 5000orphans.com site and adoptions.com.
Where did this come from?

http://www.petitiononline.com/guatpos/petition.html

What has DOS been up to?

September 25 the U.S. Department of State puts out a warning detailing how in process Guatemalan adoptions are going to be disrupted.

September 25-27 PAPs, People who support PAPS, adoption advocates, and child advocates get organized and start campaigning against this. The U.S. Dept. of State (DOS) tells callers off-the-wall, unsubstantiated stories about CQ birth moms being beaten to death (even though these same birth moms showed up at U.S. Embassy offices, after they were supposedly beaten to death, to do DNA tests).

September 28 U.S. Dept of State softens their warning, they add this line “The U.S. government is asking the Government of Guatemala to allow such cases, now pending, to proceed to completion without additional requirements.” PAPs breathe a sigh of relief.

Sept. 28-Oct 2 It is unclear what the DOS is doing at this time to help in process cases. It seems like they are only saying they are helping. According to FOA “DOS and the Hague are strongly promoting the Ortega Law, # 3217 and the Guatemalan congress is reporting on great international pressure to pass a law which includes no funding plan or possibility of practical implementation. Yet, DOS fails to so state” And the Ortega Law has NO grandfather clause. Ummm, DOS, that sort of sounds like the opposite of helping.

October 3rd We all know what happens on Oct. 3rd, bill 3217 (the Ortega law) passes. There is NO grandfather clause. Did DOS ever really ask the Guatemalan government to allow pending cases to proceed to completion without additional requirements? Do we have any proof that they actually spoke to anyone?

October 3-5 Another wave of PAPs, PAP supporters, adoption advocates, and child advocates start campaigning. Phones are ringing, emails and faxes are sent. I imagine this wave of the campaign is even louder then the first.

October 5 – Friday afternoon JCICS reports “that the Hague Permanent Bureau (HPB) has now joined with Joint Council, the U.S. Department of State and others in agreeing that transition cases should be allowed to proceed to completion without interruption.” PAPs breathe another sigh of relief.

But should we? Why should we believe DOS this time? Isn’t it a little inexplicable how DOS was taking 60 days to do pre-approvals and now people are reporting getting them in two days? Why was it taking 60 days just a few weeks ago? Why couldn’t they do it sooner? How many of us might not be in this mess if DOS had given us pre-approval in a timely fashion? Remember DOS was supporting bill 3217 all along so they must have known we would get caught in this mess. Why didn’t they fix the pre-approval problem sooner?

Now – PAPs don’t take DOS at their word. PAPs don’t stop bothering their congress people until we have a grandfather clause or, even better, a whole new law like 3635.

I saw contact information for President Berger. But what about getting information to members of the Guatemalan congress?

DON'T STOP!! We have to keep up with the Action Plan this week. In Sunday's Prensa libre (Guatemalan paper) the VP of Guatemala wrote a most scary editorial. Please read translation below.
**********
In an anti-adoption guest editorial in today's (Sunday's) Prensa Libre, the Vice President of Guatemala, Eduardo Stein, claimed that children are being sold (and adopted) for their organs.

http://www.prensali bre.com/pl/ 2007/octubre/ 07/184389. html

*****************
COLLABORATIONS
Adoption Law
After 61 amendments to the original proposal of the Adoption Law, the
Congress is analyzing more changes, while the Government fears that with
so many modifications it will lose its original spirit.

LAWLESS ADOPTIONS

Easy adoption cases have converted the country into one of the primary
exporters of children to the United States.

By Eduardo Stein

Guatemala exports children, apart from other things. And as up until
now it has been so easy, it’s become a market of more than $400
million per year, between what adoptive parents pay over there and what they
pay here.

In Guatemala, an adoption process, handled legally, ends up costing
between US $30,000 and $40,000, from which they give US $3,000 to the
adoptive mother (translator note – I’m sure he meant to say
birthmother). The rest stays with intermediaries (lawyers, solicitors, crib
houses etc)…

With so much money involved, it was to be hoped that in turning the
legal cases, considering how easy they are – or perhaps precisely
because they are – a sordid and sinister field of baby business, where
mothers are deceived, children are stolen to be commercialized (or even
worse, to sell organs), and the stomachs of young women are contracted to
have a diversified product year-round…

This administration intended to improve the regulatory framework to
impede abuses and favor better oversight, in order to protect the rights
of the boys and girls, as well as those of the biological parents. It
is completely false that there was any plan to put the breaks on or
suspend adoptions. It has always been an effort to achieve better
guarantees and greater transparency.

The very tough resistance to better legislation with more controls was
quite surprising. With arguments such as it would be depriving
children in extreme poverty of a better life opportunity, or that more
controls would generate more corruption (more bribes in the process), the very
idea of an adoption law was attacked, and there have been objections
to Guatemala joining the International Hague Convention on Adoptions.

This long and obtuse battle aquired another dynamic when finally
Congress regularized such international membership, although it won’t even
take effect until December 31.

The law proposal has taken up much time in Congress. Sordid and
habitual resistance and maneuvers have delayed its discussion and approval.
A group of Hague experts came in August to improve the text, with
various adjustments and amendments wo that the new law would conform better
to the Convention.

If the honorable Congress considers adding more modifications and
amendments that strenthen these protections for children and their parents,
as well as transparency, congratulations. It is not the number of
amendments, but their quality and sentiment that matter.

Legislating in the best manner possible, for the good of all of
society, is its principal responsibility. We are certain that this will be
the case.

My wife brought up a good point over the weekend. On Jan 1st, 2008 Guatemala states taht they can no longer allow adoptions with the US because at that point the US is not Hague compliant. Why can't the US become Hague compliant at the same time or before that date instead of waiting till April or May of 2008??? If we can't change or affect what happens in Guatemala why can't we affect things in our own country? Does anyone know exactly when these amendments are going to be voted on? The JCICS site states the following, "It is Joint Council's understanding that a grandfather clause has been drafted by the Children’s Committee and will be added to the bill as an amendment." This statement says "will" not "might", is this true? Does anyone know???

I have a crazy idea. I wonder if it would be a good idea to send the links to so many blogs out there that are documenting adoptions (some still in process, some already complete). With approval from folks, I'd be willing to send all the links in an e-mail to media outlets, congress, unicef, Pres. Berger, DOS, Pres. Bush, etc.

It puts real faces, real stories, behind our cause to do what is right by all these children.

Any thoughts?

I do urge you to read this editorial opinion carefully. The editorial opinion is not anti-adoption, yes he does say about organ selling, but that is not what the editorial is about. It is about coming to fruition a transparent system that protects biofamilies and mostly children. Vice-President Stein does express concern that attempts to curtail illegal adoptions and ensure legal adoptions has come under attack of sorts. He is expressing his opinions as an insider in GT politics and the perplexities involved in the ammendment system and who the primary concern should be focused on.
Marie, guatadopt.com

I noted that the amendment did not define an adoption "in effect at the moment the present law goes into effect." That seems pretty key to how the amendment will affect people in process. Also, if it was left to some governmental body, such the PGN, to determine what "in effect" means, then it would create a huge amount of legal trouble, as lawyers fought to define it favorably for any clients determined to not be "in effect".

I would say it is a pretty vague law, and needs to clearly define what "in effect" means. Or, maybe, there is another amendment not shown on the JCICS site that does that.

I have emailed and called UNICEF, but I just called and got the executive director's personal email address, its:

aveneman@unicef.org

All the UNICEF employees have the same email. Its first initial followed by full last name @unicef.org

Go get em!~Melissa

Marie,

Respectfully, as the person who originally wrote the translation, Stein is about as anti-adoption as you can get. Anyone who starts talking about children being sold for their organs, or portraying as the norm the "contracting of young women to ensure a diversified product year-round" is not in favor of adoptions. All of us are concerned about "illegal adoptions" but the VP's approach is going to be disastrous for the children he claims to be protecting.

Lee

i am law student from guatemala almost finish the law school, first i want say to you congratulations!!!! you are wonderful and strong people, Really you have to give support together. please try to found all the information to what´s happened here. i think you dont have all news; you can do so many things, but you have do it together, my brother is adoptive son and i know by experience the adoption is a noble institution and i want clear this to MARIE, yes the vice president don´t want the adoption continue, he join with Oscar Berger want finish this, do you need more facts to prove they hate the adoptions, really i am a person live in Guatemala and i can tell you, the childs are foster caring by some institution from goverment this is worst one child can happend, by this i told you, really you are the only hope the guatemalan babies have, you are the only people can do understand at congress what really need the children, i am not agree with stole babies the people do this is a trash, but i know the proceedings adoption have so many steps to safe don´t make ilegal adoptions, the only way one ilegal adoption finish is by corruption from the same goverment authorities let this happend. You really can´t imagine how many babies die or are abandoned in the streets if this law continue, please i repeat only you can help at the babies.......... God bless you and please help guatemalan childrens.

Chapinstudent

thank you so much for your words!@!!!!

a big thanks tO Meilisa in getting Veneman's email

Folks- you are preaching to the choir...Maybe the JCICS latest update can shed some light on what was said yesterday in the editorial. Direct your hatred and anger towards the person who said it, I was just observaing that in the translation, the VP was listing the GT concerns and the rest of the editorial has more important things in it and I wanted people to focus on that, insted of getting hung up on one word. Alot of PAPs are on edge waiting for any news as to what is to come, this seemed hopeful. Like always, keeping you all in my prayers.
Marie, Guatadopt.com

Dear Chapinstudent,

Thanks for sharing that with us. It means a lot to us to hear this from Guatemala. Best of luck to your in all your pursuits.

When I sent a package to my little girl in Guatemala, I wrote a letter to the foster mother thanking her and telling her that what she is doing is sacred. I feel moved to tears with love for my babies foster mother.

God bless you too, Cheryl

Chapin student,

Thank you for your words. With all of the bad news about adoptions, I often feel sad that Guatemalan's feel such distaste for American's. I can't say I'm proud of every American, but I can tell you the ones I have met since beginning this adoption have renewed my faith in people. The people I have met are some of the kindest, most generous, most dedicated people I have been blessed to meet. I think I speak for many families when I say that I take raising a Guatemalan child with great responsibility...I promise to do the best job I can for my daughter, for her mother who gave me the gift of raising her, and for her country that will someday be proud of the amazing woman she is to become. I promise to continue fighting for the children of Guatemala if you continue to spread the news that we aren't all horrible people in the US like the media would have you believe. Bless you and the people of Guatemala...Kim

VP Stein's comments are inflammatory and legitimately dangerous towards Americans adopting from Guatemala. By substantiating a folklore that children are taken by Americans for "organ harvesting" he is putting all families with future plans to travel to Guatemala to process adoptions, as well as any American tourists, in danger of potential reprisals from people who may believe in this myth. So, the two choices with respect to VP Stein are that he is very dim or that he is overtly trying to make Guatemala a dangerous place for Americans to travel.

This is something that we feel is deserving of action by the U.S. State Department in an effort to protect Americans traveling to Guatemala.

Lee;

1) In what way are you acting upon your concern for Illegal adoptions?

2) Do you mean to say that disagreement with any type of "adoption" is an anti adoption stance? Theoretically, if one disagrees with selling a baby for perverse purpose, or organ harvesting, would you embrace or oppose them?

Vice President Stein echoes my sentiments, and that is that expressly because I want the children needing a family to be adopted...I am so frustrated that Americans turn a blind eye to the corruption they ( and you) keep referring to themselves.

By not distancing yourselves from the (10%? 20%? 30%? who knows? Because it is not stood up to and demands for accountabiltity are non existent) problematic part of the adoption world in Guatemala, you join the bad guys in the eyes of Guatemalans. Convince them otherwise!

Kevin,
I'm confused over what the grandfathering amendment actually means (including the 30 day comment). Is there any further clarification you could provide? Thank you.

Steve,

There is not one comment on this board that suggests people are turning a blind eye toward the corruption. Nor has even one person advocated not having accountability. The other bill that was before The Guatemalan Congress (8365?) did put into place a process that provided for transparency and accountability.

Every adoptive parent on this site wants the adoption process to be legal, smooth, and free of corruption.

Steve:

Forget corruption, set aside Guatemala, ignore who's adopting and answer these questions:

In your view, when is adoption the right answer for a child?

Should women be able to relinquish their children for any reason? If no, which reasons make relinquishment okay? Which don't?

Once I understand your basic belief regarding adoption, then I might be able to better see the black lens through which you view the entire world of Guatemalan adoptions.

Kevin,

Can you shed some light on what they consider the "Central Authority". Obviously,the ammendment requires current adoptions be registered within 30 days of the law passing which would be sometime in December, correct? Would it be PGN or Bienestar? If it's Bienestar then all adoptions with a filed POA can be registered to continue under the notario system, if it's PGN, well that means lots of people need to get in quickly. Any idea?

Thanks!

Steve,

First I want to say I'm definitely against abusing children. Now I want to quote something you said, "...if one disagrees with selling a child for perverse purpose, or organ harvesting..."

Are you saying that you believe that there have been cases where children have been adopted or kidnapped for the purpose of harvesting their organs?

Steve,

There was indeed legislation which would have instituted accountability and greater oversight, while preserving a woman's right to make an adoption plan. Unfortunately, the Guatemalan Congress adopted the Ortega Law.

"Adoption" for organ harvesting or sex abuse is not adoption -- it's a crime, pure and simple. Although I'm quite aware of cases where a child was "adopted" for abuse (there's been at least one case involving a child from Russia), I'm thankfully aware of no such case from Guatemala.

As for organ harvesting, this is simply a medical impossibility -- such operations are complex and can only be done in sophisticated medical centers by licensed physicians. These myths are common in several countries, not just Guatemala, but are just that -- myths.

With 2 million Guatemalan children working in low-paid, dangerous jobs, and at least 2000 children working in brothels in Guatemala City, certainly the preeminent concern is organ harvesting in the US. Because Steve says so. And many children are clearly sold. Because Steve says so. And arguing against the Ortega Law is pro-child selling. Because Steve says so. And what are Steve's qualifications? Are where are his data? Well, he says so, just trust him.

When there was a fairly tame negative comment about Susana, the poster was admonished. I urge you to apply the same standard to other posters when they attack.

There are cases of women relinquishing 7 babies. That is hard to defend. I agree with Steve that too few people here seem to want to see ANY reform (at least I get that impression). I believe that abuse of the system is less than the media portrays, but unfortunately more than most posters here are willing to admit.

1) It seems to me that the comments re my comments spoke to a straw man.

2) I think there are some good questions for factual info that have been asked.

So I will stop this track, by saying thet yes, selling babies for organs is an unsubstantiated rumor. BUT if it was being done, how would the system need to change for it to be possible in Guatemala? This lack of oversight over the years looks bad to the Guatemalan people at large. Ironically, they are using the logic applied in the U.S. congress regarding the president of Guatemala in 1954: "That little animal in my back yard says he's not a duck. But he walks like a duck, and talks like a duck..."

P.S. Organ harvesting is a scientific reality. On my U.S. driver's license, there is a statement of permission to harvest mine upon my demise.

To Steve:

Can you please tell me if you are still living in Guatemala. If your current status is being on the front lines in Guatemala and you have documented data to back up your claims then I would be willing to listen to your arguements. If you are on the sidelines with no tangible interest vested in the country and no data to back up your claims ( just like CNN had absolutely no tangible evidence to back up theirs ) then please refrain from delivering the propaganda, deligitamizing Guatemalan adoptions as a whole, and making out as if the only good intentions are the one's that you seem to have the answers to. The 25,000 plus Guatemalan children already living in the US and around the world need the support of knowing they were wanted by parent or parents that have sacrificed greatly to bring them into their arms. The problem with the shotgun approach that you seem to advocate is that it destroys everyone instead of those deserving destruction. This I believe is what is to come to those that would harm these orphans ( and the last time I checked all 25,000 Guatemalan children that entered the US since 1990 have passed the definition of orphan outlined by the US Governments classification.) The following passage can be found in Malachi Chapter 3 verse 5.

"And I will come near you for judgment;
I will be a swift witness
Against sorcerers,
Against adulterers,
Against perjurers,
Against those who exploit wage earners and widows and orphans,
And against those who turn away an alien—
Because they do not fear Me,”
Says the LORD of hosts. "

Even Jesus had compassion on the little children when His disciples tried to drive them away ( Mark Chapter 10 13-16 ) He gathered them to Himself and blessed them.

The children of Guatemala do not deserve to have the doors of hope slammed in their face ( mostly Mayan children ) because of a few that think that a culture that disciminates against the poor, slays their women and allows children to starve to death is a better place for that child to live.
You indicate from your post that because I /we have spent monies on an adoption we are somehow complicit with the corruption that takes place. What would you have us do, give our monies to UNICEF and hope that they would do what is right. The total shutdown of adoptions will ultimately satisfy your desire for stopping the monies from flowing into Guatemala but it will not stop the corruption, but it will serve as a destructive force towards the children. The data is there to support this!
I do not pretend to have all the answers but I do know this, my son and my son that is in PGN will definitely be better off in an environment that is loving, safe, and that gives them hope in the future for themselves and for the one's that they will help while thay walk the path of life.

Trusting in Him,

Paul

Steve,

adopting children to harvest organs is more than an "unsubstantiated rumor" as you would refer to it. It would be virtually impossible to adopt a child for the purpose of harvesting organs. One, how would you find a person that matches? Two, how would you find someone who is willing to buy the organs? Sell them on eBay? Three, how would you find a doctor or a hospital to perform the operations? What would the the economic incentive? I'm not so sure that a person would make enough money from this to warrant the risk. Look at all of the factors-the economics, the risk, the logistics and it is a virtual impossibility.

You basically said that Guatemalans believe that Americans are haresting organs because the US government walks like a duck and talks like a duck. I can't help it if individuals with certain agendas are taking advantage of people who do not understand all of the reasons that harvesting organs is an impossibility.

But you should know better. People like you should be helping to clear things up rather than continuing to muddy the waters.

AS to anon. Its hard to not set Steve straight when he makes black white statements and aludes to organ harvesting. He then says he "spoke to a straw man" calls it a "unsubstantiated rumor" but says that his driver's license indicates organ harvesting is a scientific reality. Boy now that is a bunch of contradictions. More muddying of the waters. Anyway, that is my opinion of it.

I received the following from Unicef. Thought you all might be interested. My response is at the bottom:

For more than 60 years, UNICEF has been the world’s leading international children’s organization, working in more than 150 countries to address the ongoing issues that affect why kids are dying. UNICEF provides lifesaving nutrition, clean water, education, protection and emergency response saving more young lives than any other humanitarian organization in the world. While millions of children continue to die every year of preventable causes like dehydration, upper respiratory infections and measles, UNICEF, with the support of partnering organizations and donors alike, has the global experience, resources and reach to give children the best hope of survival.

Thank you for contacting the US Fund for UNICEF. We would like to take some time to address your concerns regarding UNICEF’s policy on international adoptions.

UNICEF does not facilitate adoptions, nor does it impede adoption agencies from operating within countries. UNICEF is not and has never been opposed to international adoptions. Foreign adoptive families are an important option when a child cannot be placed with a family in their country of origin. UNICEF is well aware that international adoptions have provided loving homes for children in need.

UNICEF has received many inquiries from families hoping to adopt children from countries other than their own. UNICEF believes that all decisions relating to children, including adoptions, should be made with the best interests of the child as the primary consideration. The Hague Convention on International Adoptions is an important development, for both adopting families and adopted children, because it promotes ethical and transparent processes, undertaken in the best interests of the child. UNICEF urges national authorities to ensure that, during the transition to full implementation of the Hague Convention, the best interests of each individual child are protected.

In regards to Guatemala, In September 2003, Guatemala’s highest court handed down a ruling that impeded the country accession to international treaties, which effectively rendered the Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption unconstitutional. UNICEF has concentrated its efforts on adoption of the Hague Convention and creation of a specific law regulating adoptions. A new procedure was introduced in Congress to restore the Hague Convention. This was done on May 22, 2007, and the Convention will take effect on January 1, 2008. A specific law criminalizing the sale of children and irregular adoptions has been discussed for many years but has yet to be created. Ratification of the Hague Convention by the United States of America, expected for the end of 2007, and its subsequent entry into force, should contribute to correcting the current situation, since 97 per cent of Guatemalan children are adopted by American families.

In coordination with the Hague Conference, UNICEF is providing technical assistance for implementation of the Convention. Recently, a group of Conference experts and member countries conducted a mission in Guatemala for the purpose of helping to put the Convention into effect and to analyze the impact. It also reviewed the Bill on Adoptions that is scheduled for its final reading and provided suggestions and recommendations to ensure its consistency with the Hague Convention.

The State Department is now accepting applications for inter-country adoptions from Guatemala and authorizing DNA testing. The State Department continues to monitor the adoption situation in Guatemala closely and urges the government of Guatemala to process all adoption cases as expeditiously and fairly as possible to avoid hardship on adopting families and children. For more information, please view the US State Department’s website on Guatemalan adoptions at http://travel.state.gov/family/adoption/country/country_389.html

UNICEF has no role in the regulation of adoptions. Our responsibility is to protect the rights of every child who is up for adoption. We also believe that children should remain within their extended families or communities, whenever possible.

Once more, thank you for expressing your concerns and desire to learn more about UNICEF and its work.

Respectfully,

Max Gebhardt
Program Services
U.S. Fund for UNICEF
MGebhardt@unicefusa.org

My response:
Dear Mr. Gebhardt,

I am aware that Unicef provides a lot of needed assistance for vaccinations, education and nutritional programs. And for that I applaud Unicef.

I also am very opposed to child abuse and human trafficking. However, there are more ways of becoming Hague compliant than the ways advocated by Unicef, which effectively shuts international adoption down, resulting in children dieing on the streets and piling up in institutions. To say that Unicef is not anti-international adoption is quite a stretch. I suppose the logic is that if a few international adoptions are allowed after implementing procedures advocated by Unicef, then technically Unicef cannot be accused of being anti-international adoption?

I also suppose that there are some people who will be persuaded when you tell them that Unicef is not anti-international adoption. But Mr. Gebhardt, the facts are getting out as to Unicef’s record in countries such as Romania, El Salvador, Honduras, etc…

In my personal opinion, the courses of action advocated (I think it is even fair to say “pushed hard for”) by Unicef are at best lacking in creativity and at worst reprehensible.

Paul
Wow – did I understand you correctly? You believe that your two sons come from a “culture that disciminates against the poor, slays their women and allows children to starve to death”? And on top of that you want them to grow up “knowing they were wanted by parent or parents that have sacrificed greatly to bring them into their arms”? Ok - let me paraphrase – your children’s birth culture is dirt and they should feel guilty for what you had to give up for them. Hmmm. I come from a family that has been formed through three generations of adoption. I’m really glad my great grandparents and grandparents didn’t lay that kind of crap on my dad and grandpa.

I hope you can find it in your heart to respect the vast majority of Guatemalans, who are good and who love and nurture their children, often through difficult times. When I look at my Guatemalan daughter I don’t see the culture you see. I see a culture of beauty, strength and perseverance. I hope she will grow up proud of her roots and the strength of her birthparents. Oh, and she doesn’t need to feel indebted to me. God gave *me* the gift of raising her (and my other children, who are mine both through adoption and birth). I am the lucky one.

Dear Paul;

I appreciate your position very much. Therefore, I want to honor your heart and respond to you at length. You, and parents like you who have for very good reasons taken children into their home are heroes, and I do not fault you for your intentions and what you will be busy doing for the next few years. I don't even blame you for the excruciating decision you have made to continue with the adoption even as a small voice in the back of your mind has maybe asked why you have to pay so much when all you want to do is give a child a good life.

I had a friend whose birth mother was raped and conceived him, and she chose not to abort, but understandably, could not handle keeping him. He found out rather traumatically that his parents were not biological, but had adopted him. The reality of his conception was hard for him, but did not ruin his sense of love from his birth mother or his adoptive parents. In this world, truth often hurts. But it is always better that accepting or even propagating the lie. The complication in Guatemala is that it appears to the Guatemalan on the street that by paying huge sums, you are collaborating with the “rapists”. International Justice Mission, I think, started out by buying girls from Pimps in Thailand. But they realized that it would never end. As long as they paid money, the pimps found more little girls. So they switched rather vigorously to prosecuting.

You say corruption will stay when adoptions stop. That is tantamount to agreeing there is corruption in the process now. Rather than document a shady business, like Jesus to Pilate, I will just say that “it is as you have said”. Sadly, you are right, corruption will stay. But you don’t have to be involved with it. It doesn’t have to be a part of international adoptions. How you say? By more discipline than we Americans have, or else by Laws like 3217.

Maybe I am just a dreamer, like the people who heard that man God who dreamed on a hillside 2000 years ago, and spoke of a life that was distinctly different than what the world had to offer. I really believe That You can’t stop having corruption while being willing to pay large sums of money. That’s my paraphrase of not serving God and Mammon. I really believe that if all the Americans could say we will not pay more than “X” for a child, that “X” would become the price, and that if “X” was low enough, the corruption would stop. Because corruption is only motivated by one thing. But I also sadly know that if even a large group of the best Americans would say that, there would be others who would pay more, and subvert the process. Actually, that is what is happening here. Market forces.

As for credentials, you might just call me Balaam’s donkey, because I am an ass, but can see what you apparently cannot. I try to only speak to issues and facts that can be read in the press, or in the lines of the Adoption world’s forums. But reading between the lines, and always asking “Why did they phrase it that way?” So if my words do not convince you, my status won’t either. One example: In 5000orphans’ web page it says:

UNICEF is dangling several millions of $$ in front of outgoing Guatemalan President Berger. He gets the money, if Guatemala gets "Hague compliant", which will effectively shut down adoptions.

They don’t really believe that, and no one in Guatemala thinks that the Berger’s would be that blatantly money grubbing. But they are saying that loud and long, to rile the adoptive parents against the duly elected leader of a sovereign foreign country. I think the U.S. Government is prosecuting, or at least spying on people based on less overt statements against our government. What arrogance!

I really am nobody, but I am married to a woman who is truly on the front lines of saving the lives of the least of these in Guatemala. Maybe I can catch some of her moral reflection. She has been doing this for a long time, and respects Wendy Berger, and Carmen Wennier for the advances they have succeeded in making for the women and children of Guatemala. She is presently caring for children who were in the adoption process, but found to be defective and were rejected from that process. We live in Guatemala, and plan on working with adoptions after the Ortega law is passed. The adoptions that will stop are not the ones with which we work , and those that are “notarial” will pass to the new system, and be able to be done…BUT it will not be as simple and as profitable a process. It could have been a better resolution for the children and truly noble adoptive parents, but the people who wanted adoptions only for profit have muddied the waters, and made it hard if not impossible for the weak and hurting sheep to drink. Hopefully, it will be left then to the people who want to see adoptions continue, because they have been adopted themselves, and want to be about their father’s business. It wouldn’t be so egregious if the system only affected the children who make it to America, but we see time and again the truly weak and at risk children, with no hope because of the system’s commodity mentality.

Eze 34:16 I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak, and the fat and the strong I will destroy. I will feed them in justice.
Eze 34:17 "As for you, my flock, thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I judge between sheep and sheep, between rams and male goats.
Eze 34:18 Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture, that you must tread down with your feet the rest of your pasture; and to drink of clear water, that you must muddy the rest of the water with your feet?
Eze 34:19 And must my sheep eat what you have trodden with your feet, and drink what you have muddied with your feet?
Eze 34:20 "Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD to them: Behold, I, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep.
Eze 34:21 Because you push with side and shoulder, and thrust at all the weak with your horns, till you have scattered them abroad,

You really seem like you are reasonable, Paul. Maybe you can tell me what no one else on these sites have been able to: Where does the $30,000 to $40,000 for the baby go? I can account for about $10,000 at most in a reasonable fashion. Don’t waste your and our time, so start your explanation after the obvious and legitimate costs that reach $10,000. Maybe Susana Luarca can help you with the numbers. She told me that ADA wants to document corruption, and it seems to me that the tactic used by the feds against Al Capone would work here…analyze the money.

Steve,
Regarding Casa Quivira, no shady dealings regarding the origin of the children were ever mentioned as the reason for the illegal raid of one of the best homes for children in ´Guatemala. Many reasons – groundless all of them – have been stated but “shady dealings” is not one of them. And you are wrong. IT IS NOT ILLEGAL for a gay person to adopt a child in Guatemala. Most people oppose it and very few support it, but there is no law that forbids it, so therefore, it is not illegal.

Since you seem to be very close to the Guatemalan government, you should know that it was Eduardo Stein himself who directed the raid of Casa Quivira and that he was in direct communication via cell phone with the DA agents who were doing the raid. Stein was who told the DA agents to arrest the lawyers, for no good reason. The address of the birthmothers is hardly a reason to disrupt the lives of those children It sounds like one of the absurd reasons that Josefina Arellano would argue. We are deeply grateful that she is serving our country as legal advisor to one of the Constitutional Court Magistrates, and that her legal expertise will not be used to harm the lives of the children in her desperate effort to promote her image.

That Clifford Phillip, director of Casa Quivira did not bat an eye regarding the “false” addresses of the birth mothers is quite understandable. The birth mothers are free to disclose or not to disclose their addresses, and that has nothing to do with the origin of the child and cannot be used to discredit them, as it is their right to conceal the fact that they placed a child for adoption, and you may gasp about this, or argue if you want, that is also you right, but do not try to justify the atrocity of the raid of Casa Quivira. Many of the children at Casa Quivira had already their DNA performed. A good deal of the cases have been approved by the PGN and the DA is keeping them from releasing the approvals and the files, as a way to keep the children from joining their adoptive parents. On the other hand, the addresses of the birth mothers whose children were in Casa Quivira that were correct, are being used by the DA to intimidate those birth mothers and to try to coerce them into giving depositions against Casa Quivira, with the additional damage that now their whole neighborhood has learned that they placed their children for adoption.

Regarding the 28 million dollars that UNICEF is dangling before the greedy eyes of our little president, not even UNICEF uses its money to help the children in need in Guatemala, so what makes you think that in the few days between Berger's announced stop to all adoptions and his not soon enough departure, Oscar Berger will do for the children of Guatemala what he could not do in the four too long years of his administration? Regarding the impeccable record of Oscar Berger, let us wait until he leaves office and his successor finds out that the cookie jar is empty. FYI, to discuss the official performance of the government officers is not slander, but a constitutionally protected right. As it is constitutionally protected the right of the Guatemalans to suffer each president only one term.

I could not help noticing that you talk of Guatemala as “here”, which makes me think that you are living in Guatemala and perhaps working for the wife of the president? That would explain a lot of things, especially your determination to attack adoption lawyers in general and adoptions in particular.

Regarding the inflammatory and groundless accusations of a vice president who is well known for being in the sinister end of the political landscape, with a very dark past and little scruples to worry about, he did not say that the birth mothers get $3,000.00. He said – as it is stated in Prensa Libre – that ADOPTIVE MOTHERS get that amount. Maybe he was talking about the tax credit that the US gives to those who adopt a child to help them to cover the cost of the adoption (not of the child). But if he meant “birth mothers” instead, he should come forward and explain it, or are you that close to him, that you are who clarifies his mistakes?

Regarding the money that the birth mothers get or don’t get, that argument is getting tired, because the anti adoption forces, for want of a better one, keep harping on that. There are four versions of the same: a) birth mothers get paid; b) birth mothers don’t get paid: birth mothers get paid too little; and d) birth mothers get paid too much. Which do you prefer? Take your pick and stick to it, because the way I see it, today you think some way, but tomorrow that could completely change.

And I am still waiting for information about all the cases of coercion,corruption and else that you have been denouncing, to check them out.

Susana Luarca.

People criticize our adoptive families for many reasons (they could never love someone else's child, why didn't we adopt from America, etc. ad auseum). Then there are the folks who think we're doing something noble by saving a child from a life of certain destitution, poverty, and perhaps even worse. Of course, we attended those preadoption meetings and we're quick to answer that we are adopting because we want to form a family, not
because we have any desire to be saviors. Certainly we do not expect our children to be grateful, we've read about
how difficult it is for adoptees to grow up realizing that their new parents rescued them from their first parents. Even though they were never told to act as if they were grateful, the message seems very clear. Adds a big burden o childhood, after all, other children don’t join their families with a balance sheet.

What happens when portions of the world at large begin to question whether or not all of these adoptions are truly necessary? When charges of corruption, children as commodities, broken hearted first families, and blatantly illegal practices surface? We forget that we're trying to build our families, at least for the sake of the argument. We do not like to see ourselves cast in the light of being at all complicit in a corrupt and broken system. We assert that these children need us; if they were to remain in Guatemala they'd be certain to end up on the streets, the loving
choice their first mothers made certainly expired after the act was complete, just look at the poverty and malnutrition rates. How could anyone think that slowing adoptions was a good thing? We're on a mission to
rescue these children. Temporarily (?) forgetting that adoption is not supposed to be about parents as saviors and
children as waifs.

Fast forward to the future. We haven't been Pollyanna-ish about the corruption, sure, some exists, but not much was substantiated. We fought for our kids, remember how we stood up to those people who insinuated anyone would adopt a child to harvest organs? We fought against the biased media presentations of corruption and
insisted happy adoption stores were presented. We couldn't have loved our kids more if we'd given birth to them. Look at the opportunities with which they've been provided, truly they're thriving. Of course, there have been plenty of instances where people in the community have made our family uncomfortable with their hostile glares, other kids have told our children that they were stolen - similar to back-in-the-day when children would “just” be teased about being adopted, or unwanted. Now its stolen and others call their parents thieves. Our kids have grown up in a world where there's much anger towards "illegals" (they broke our laws!), and they find it very confusing. Our kids love us dearly, we’re they only family they’ve ever known. Some of them, however, have been struggling
silently, others have been acting out. In addition to the typical challenges adoptees face, they’ve had to learn that their first mothers might not have had a choice in the adoption at all. Suddenly, they realize that they weren’t adopted because their mothers wanted them to have another world of opportunities, but that their parents wanted
them so badly... They have to come to terms with being adopted internationally, transracially (usually), and realize that God could not have possibly intended for them to be coerced away from their first mothers, conceived for the purpose of relinquishment, or forcibly stolen. God couldn’t have intended this, could He? How does this make sense when your parents have taught you all along that you were meant to be a member of this family?

Steve, Karenms, and the others, please keep talking. Some of us are listening.

Elizabeth (a reunited adoptee)

I did a Google News search yesterday and found a lot of newspaper articles and a couple of TV reports in different parts of the country that feature "local" families who are in process and getting the word out. That's encouraging. Good job, folks!

I thought those of you in Massachusetts might like to know I got the following email response from Congressman John Tierney. He is getting involved, and I like his statement supporting adoption in general.

********
October 9, 2007

Your comments regarding international adoption from Guatemala and, specifically, changes reportedly made to the adoption application process by the Guatemalan government that may negatively impact such adoptions have been forwarded to my attention. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

Please know I understand your concerns. Like you, I believe that making adoption more accessible for wanting families will enhance our efforts to make sure all children can grow up in a safe and loving household.

In response to your email, my office contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to inquire about the circumstances raised in your correspondence. Unfortunately, we have not yet received a response. However, please be assured that I will bring to your attention any future response we may receive on the matter. In the meantime, I continue to monitor the matter closely.

Thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please feel free to do so regarding any matter of concern to you.

Sincerely,

John F. Tierney
Member of Congress

***********
His email also says if I want to respond to go to this page: http://tierney.house.gov/?sectionid=115

I am going to email him a picture of my beautiful baby girl who came home in Feb. and thank him for his support.

My prayers go out to all the children and families who are in process. Stay strong.

Kudos to you, Elizabeth, great post! I'm a PAP, no referral yet, who adopted from China a year ago and will be facing these issues with two(with His blessing) int'l children. We were verfy naive to Guat issues when we jumped in (but knew it was risky) and have had much education here. We listen carefully and appreciate all voices who share.

Hey Steve give it a rest. Honestly you are one we are many. Your opinions are just that opinions and I dont really see anyone asking for them. Go take your doom and gloom somewhere else. We have really all had about enough.

Thanks Susana for your quite eloquent rebuttal to him.

There seem to be a couple things that sometimes get lost in the passion of this discussion.

First, the question of if not adoption for these 5,000 children, then what? A credible response to this question has not been offered. And while adoptions may still be technically possible under the Ortega Law, the track record for these types of reforms is not good. We adoptive parents have a lifelong connection to Guatemala and want only the best for ALL Guatemalans, not simply those that come to the US.

Second, why does reform require essentially killing the institution of adoption? The analogy I make is to the US period of Prohibition when the courts, police, etc were controlled by the likes of Al Capone. Did the US disband the courts or police? No, they went after the individuals suspected of violations. The problem lies not with the institutions or the laws, the problem lies with the people. If the govt was truly interested in prosecuting child stealing and coercion of birth mothers, which I wish they were, it wouldn't be that hard.

I think the majority of us would agree that the Guatemalan government, be it the Bergers or almost any other administration over the past 500 years, does not have a strong track record of protecting its people, especially the women, poor, and indigenous. Most of us struggle to understand how giving a corrupt executive branch, one that has historically been corrupt and will most likely continue to be corrupt for the near future, even more power and control will somehow result in a better answer for the children. We've seen too many incidences of serious problems even in the US, much less Guatemala, to trust that the govt has the competency, resources, and will to do so. I do not personally know President Berger just as I do not personally know President Bush. I do, however, know the people who cared for my children during their first year of life. I place my trust in them but also follow the age-old wisdom of trust but verify.

I am speaking on behalf of Guatadopt.com here. This site's credibility nad populatiry have gorwn because unlike other sites, we allow it to be a free and open forum.

Because of that, we have managed to attract people to post here that do not do so on other sites.

All opinions are welcome on our site. People have be prepared for the backlash of what they post and I think most of our more "controversial" commenters understand that.

Let me say that while I do not agree with everything that some people post here, I do think it is of great value that we have many different perspectives. Guatadopt prides itself on the integrity of the site and so I'll add that we do make sure people creating a stir are who they claim to be.

Let's all debate with fervor but also remain respectful.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Is it possible that the Ortega Law will be overturned after Berger leaves office in Jan. 2008??

Just wondering about this...

To Anon:
Read the statistics of the current culture existing in Guatemala today not yesterday or in years past and you can see the definition of where my thoughts were going. If you turn a blind eye to what is actually going on then you deceive yourself and your children. The one's in control at the Government level are not and I repeat they are not from the Mayan indenginous culture. The Government of Guatemala has waged a war against these people and will stop at nothing from silencing them. The current culture that is in control, the government, criminals and the narcotics trade would rather kill, mutilate, rape and silence those that get in their way, example--over 600 women murdered last year and practically no arrest, no government healthcare for the poorest and most vulnerable, one of the highest rates of malnutrition in the world. Definition of culture--- (the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group: the youth culture; the drug culture.) The suppressant national culture is the point that I was trying to make. My children will know of the beauty of their country and the great heritage of the Mayan culture and they will also oneday read of the horrific pain inflicted upon their peoples. Painting the canvas with only rainbows does not create the entire picture of the Guatemalan life. You stated that you are from 3 generations and this is great but obviously you were not from a third world country whose government would like nothing better than to silence you. I will not put any burden on my children as you claim but rather show them the love they deserve
through facts and not fiction. The Guatemalan people that I have broken bread with, talked to at length and conjoled with are some of the nicest and warmest people you would ever want to meet. I will soon take a trip to Guatemala and when I do I will take my son's into the country to see their homeland and visit with their people. My wife and I have taught our oldest son Spanish as a second language and I refuse to americanize my children to the point of painting a picture of their country that is not inclusive of all aspects of Guatemalan life. Try feeding your family on $25.00 a week, this is what the average day laborer makes in the Guatemalan highlands and keeps his or her family together and my heartfelt compassion goes out to them. The mothers that relinquish their children obviously know that there is something better they can offer their children than the harsh enviroment that is inflicted upon them by the minority that is in control. Just to let you know my children are a gift from God that I do not take lightly, they call upon His name and they know that they are a child of His creation. I am simply a man that will defend my children and their peoples.

Thanks Steve:

I now know where your heart is and I respect that very much.
Shalom, Shalom!

The money trail it seems is the logical place to look. When I do the math I am paying about $75.00 a day over the course of about eight months which covers legal, clothing, food, and medical needs. This seems to be a small amount when viewed through the American economic lens and a tremendous amount when viewed through the Guatemalan lens. I am all for transparency that keeps the opportunity of hope available to the Birth Mothers who choose relinquishment, the abandoned children and the Little One's that need special attention.
My heartfelt thanks goes out to you and your wife for the work that you do in Guatemala.

Trusting in Him,

Paul

"The Government of Guatemala has waged a war against these people and will stop at nothing from silencing them."

Paul, I can see how passionate you are about Guatemala and its history. Next time, please just mention the role that the U.S. government played in this war against the indigenous population.

I read some truths and MUCH exaggeration, plus I read over and over how commenters skip the not so small detail that many of the horrible things that happened in the past against the Maya communities took place with the blessing of United States.

We had a budding democracy between 1944 and 1954 WITH a welfare system and institutions that, had they been allowed to continue, may have led to a society with fewer gaps that we see today. Unfortunately, the United States decided that wasn't a good idea. They helped put back in power that same elite that you and others keep blaming for today's problems.

"The suppressant national culture is the point that I was trying to make. My children will know of the beauty of their country and the great heritage of the Mayan culture and they will also oneday read of the horrific pain inflicted upon their peoples."

I am sorry to read that your children will get your version of Guatemalan history. How do you plan to explain that their country of adoption played a major role sponsoring and training the torturers and persecuters of the victims of war? will you mention that many ladinos also lost their lives in this war?

I'm sorry, but I am getting fed up of comments that claim to defend the truth and yet present a very biased version of history.

This may of little interest to most, and I am sure that many will think it is irrelevant to adoptions. I'd agree, except that I see commenters using history to discuss the present state of ICA. I just want to put out my own view, as a Guatemalan, as a ladina, as a supporter of ICA, and as someone who actually lived through the horrors of our war.

Mariale,

You raise excellent points. Guatemala is still "recovering" from 36 years of civil war and all that went with it. I can speak only for myself but my children WILL learn about what happened in Guatemala, why it happened, who supported it, and how it is not only a history lesson, it also is part of the reason why their birthmother was in the position she was in. There is no doubt in my mind that one can piece together the impact the war, the US culpability in it, and the reasons why women relinquish children today.

With that said, I also think that it is fair to look at the inequities and violence that exist in Guatemala today, whatever their cause, and realize why women might be happiest if their child is adopted elsewhere. Right or wrong, women could believe that there is no fairness, opportunity, or security for the child in Guatemala but that those things might exist elsewhere.

Ultimately, what needs to happen is for problems in Guatemala to be resolved, for there to be greater equity, social programs, education, etc so that this debate need not occur. I have often said that I yearn for the day when Americans can't adopt from Guatemala - not because of a law, but because the people of Guatemala are in a better position than they are today.

US intervention in Guatemala was/is tragic. Every one of us should understand what happened in 1950s-1980s! Read Bitter Fruit. Read Paradise in Ashes. Read Noam Chomsky.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Steve,

it seems highly unlikely to me, that in a country where there is so much corruption going on, where the government doesn't follow it's own laws, that someone who is clean and not corrupt would make it all the way to the top. I grew up in a communist country, not the exact same situation, but similar in many ways (the ones in power would make the laws works for THEM or just simply disregard the laws). Why is the president in such a hurry to pass the law before he leaves office? Adoption seems to be quite a complicated issue, wouldn't it be much easier to leave it to the next administration? Well, but then it would be the NEXT president who would receive the UNICEF money, you see? If the current president was so not corrupt as you say, on his way to the political top, he would have to be resisting those who ARE corrupt. If he was doing that, he would probably end up murdered Guate style.

Susana said to Steve “And I am still waiting for information about all the cases of coercion, corruption and else that you have been denouncing, to check them out.”
Susana I have a question for you. An acquaintance of mine told me that during an adoption, she commented to you that she would like to adopt a certain type of child. You responded that, if that was what she wanted, your “finder” could get a child for her. Would you explain to me the role of “finders”, what they get paid, and whether they use coercion in their work? This exchange sounds frighteningly like someone taking orders and procuring a product (in this case a child!).
I hope your explanation will put my mind at rest that no coercion is involved. However, I believe that adoption should always be about finding a family for a child – not about finding a child for a family.

Kevin, I am 100% with you. I hardly ever bring up the U.S. role in Guate's history because I am a firm believer that it is up to us Guatemalans to pick up the pieces and get down to work. I just felt like some balance was needed in this discussion.

There is a lot of work ahead, and folks, believe it or not, many ladinos, or whites, or Spanish or however you prefer to call us are doing their best to make up for the 50 years we've lost since the counterrevolution.

Mariale and Kevin,

My daughters will also know the truth. That is why I am spending time learning now so that I can.

Peace,
Lizzie
Proud Mama to Anarosa
Waiting for Migdalia

Mariale and Kevin,

My daughters will also know the truth. That is why I am spending time learning now so that I can.

Peace,
Lizzie
Proud Mama to Anarosa
Waiting for Migdalia

I just have a brief comment regarding all of us that are waiting parents, and all of the efforts we are making to bring our babies, and older children home, I want everyone to know that we need to keep a positive attitude here too. So many times lately I have sunk to that dark place with sadness, and I realize that isn't helping to bring my son home. We are very hopeful that all of our efforts will pay off in the end. These next few days and weeks are just a test, to help all of us understand how to handle the stresses of being parents, if we can handle this we can handle anything that our child will bring to us, both good times and bad. So please everyone lets try to remain positive too. I am very confident that all will turn out due to all of our efforts with our representatives, and other officials. Please lets all hold to our word, and bombard them with positive pleas to help us.
Theresa

I think it is time to move the conversation towards HOW Guatemala can evolve in such a way as to (1) address and cease illegal and nefarious activities of adoption fraud and (2) how the nation has an opportunity to MODEL what is possible in terms of an ethical and transparent system. We ALL know that there will always be orphans in Guate and there will always be PAPs who are committed. I look upon system reform favorably because the current one-attorney process with unscrupulous birth mother recuiters and some questionable facilitators is ripe with problems. You can attack the Bergers or UNICEF or any other group that has invested in attempting to put some controls in place and the ADA puts forth those attacks very well. In fact, the distraction is such that confusion seems to prevail. I have NEVER seen Susana L. offer candor about the amount of money the attorneys make--she should have some influence here in moving forward with transparency as she appears to be the voice of the adoption attorneys. However, we continue to hear the same rhetoric and it is clear that she steers away from this subject. At the end of the day, an ethical and transparent system is essential--no matter what people have to say to argue against the current reform attempts. So, we can continue to be side tracked by all the noise or MOVE FORWARD as the soverign nation of Guatemala transitions into a civil society. A society that has world-class legal standards and a meaningful child welfare system that includes ICA as a possibility, but not the first priority. The first priority is to provide a supportive environment for families within the nation which requires meaningful social development ultimately opportunities for all Guatemalans to live in peace with a decent standard of living. I happen to believe that is possible--especially if all of the energy of the various stakeholders were to be channeled into the way forward. However, right now it appears that the energy is being channeled into a battle that has been and will continue to be lost. The dye has been cast and Guatemalan Congress has voted...and democracy is in action on both sides of the border.

Mariale,
Thank you for your comments. I am well aware of my government's (US) and corporations' shameful role in the history of Guatemala, and their role in the recent history of other Central American nations as well. I believe many other adopting parents are informed about this reality too.
It is sometimes difficult for us to talk about it at this point....but someday I will be helping my child understand this as part of the whole complex, beautiful picture of her homeland and its relation to her new home.

To Mariale:
I am not a revisionist that wants to re-write history and yes my children will know the absolute unequivical truth just as I am made to know the truth about my country and how it has carried out overt and covert wars against Central and South America. You choose to look for an escape, a possible loop hole that will get the Government off the hook, but you will not find one just like I will not find one for my own country. The confidence I'm sure you find in me is OK since you know that I'm only telling the truth concerning the persecution then and now. How is it that you can only comment on the past and not the present. The facts are the facts no matter how ugly it may seem, please help me understand how a man such as Rios Montt can escape justice and the poor have no voice.

Truth is in the facts,

Paul

Chapinstudent, thank you so much you have no idea how much those words mean to us. I never thought when we began this process that a simple act of kindness of kind words could bring me almost to tears because at times it feels like the world is fighting us.

Steve,
I don't know where you get the costs. Except maybe the papers and we, or some of us, know how well they get their facts straight. It was 23k for attorney, translation, agency, and foster care. We adopted two children so thats 46k. Earlier we were in a HAGUE country, and it was 20k there for attorney, translation, and agency WITH NO FOSTER CARE. The breakdown of costs for your precious Hague country were close to the same. Add 1500 for the central authorities "potential visit" fee and that is 21500 (which would have been 45000 later). Is 1k with no foster care enough to pass judgement on Guatemala attorneys? We didn't mortgage our house over 1k. Not counting the "donations" where only the agencies who donated the most for humanitarian causes would get referrals despite the large number of institutionalized children there. The country also has horrible trafficking rates. Meaning, as well investigated decent people we had almost no chance in hell of adopting a child but any murky characters could probably pick up a child very easily (you really need to rethink whether traffickers are really going through the supposedly non-existant process we go through or whether they are simply jumping the border). We watched the press on a regular basis talk about the horrible nasty adoptive parents who only adopted because they were selfish or were looking for sex slaves, house slaves, or an extra kidney. Many think the allegations are specific to Guatemala and I know those people are not reading the reports in other countries. We asked, the selfish people we are, for them to consider us as parents for a child in an institution there. We heard nothing but negativity and got the impression they would rather sell kids to traffickers or hold the children in institutions for the rest of their lives before allowing Americans to adopt there. We originally did not come to Guatemala even though we love the country and had ties there because we heard the negative press. By chance our paths crossed with our children here. With the sour taste we had so far in our adoption experience we approached the concept of even considering Guatemala with no short amount of fear because if the other countries were that bad we thought we'd never survive Guatemala it must be 10 times worse. I see more safeguards here than anywhere else and a lot of hoopla with no evidence and of course some of the same allegations we heard before. I hear people saying in here well they wouldnt say it if it weren't true.. they are saying it everywhere not just Guatemala! I am so sick and tired of hearing trafficking for sex or organs used in the same sentence with adoptions which IS STILL an honorable institution and people who connect these things should be sick of themselves. For the people who tell us they don't know how we sleep at night I don't know how they sleep at night. We were told to walk away from our children by our gov and there was just no way. Our children are born. We walk away then what? People are telling APs to stop adopting so what happens next to our children? People told me it was "sad" but we should just walk away. NO FLIPPIN WAY. Anyone who cares for a child should consider that to be a completely inexcuseable answer. Then we find out we were approved for two in the Hague country after we had switched countries and I do not know who was supposed to tell them or if they just didn't process it or what. They were mad and said we should have waited. Waited????? THEY THOUGHT WE WERE ALL HORRIBLE LOWLIFE UNGODLY PEOPLE WHO WERE OUT THERE FOR SELFISH REASONS OR TO HURT CHILDREN!!! I wonder where they got that idea from! We thought there was no way they would ever consider us and year after year passed and it occurred to us well there are other children who need families or we can sit there waiting for them to decide if we were good enough. I wonder how many people have spent so much time getting the run around that they never complete an adoption and the authorities if you think about it stole a potential family from a child by their playing around. We had given up there. On the positive side we felt we were meant to walk this path to our children. We found our children. Anyone who says they are not ours can jump in a lake. On the down side two precious children .. I can't say how horribly wrong this was for them and how unfair but we could not afford anything further plus we found our two children and we do not know we could care for four.. so these poor kids. Other families are also walking away from adoption because they get all the abuse and think there is no hope in ever adopting one of the children. Anyway, I have never said there was no corruption anywhere but many of you I feel should be ashamed of yourselves because you really aren't out just to end the corruption you have been attacking the institution of adoption itself and you do not have an answer for the children other than institution noone wants to pay for. Enjoy your ivory towers.

Steve,

I know that more than one of us posted this before, but we aren't paying 30-40K. When you see 30-40K that is the total amount for the adoption, which includes travel, state home study, all of our fees in the US, as well as what we pay for in Guat.

About 14-19K goes to Guatemala. The guatemalan attorneys pay for EVERYTHING out of that 14-19K, such as the foster care, medical exams, fees, food, ... You can find a more complete list of what is paid for out of the 14-19K in the study at http://www.familieswithoutborders.com/FWBstudyGuatemala.pdf.

Like you, I think there should be an accounting of how the money is spent. And I'm under the impression that a lot of parents who are adopting feel the same. That is one of the reasons I get so frustrated when I hear people say that we are against reform.

My total bill will probably be around 32-35K. My child is being fed one of the best formulas that is offered here in the US. She is also being fed a baby food that is made by Gerber. My fees cover almost a year of care for her. These things are not cheap.

Now please commit what I have said to memory about the 14-19K... because I know I have posted this in the past in response to your question.

Best, Cheryl

Here is another Hague country other than Romania we perhaps can use as a shining example of how well enacting Hague without government means to support it works in the real world.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/bulgarias-children.shtml

I found the ambassadors response very enlightening.

Speaking of the present, I just want to take a minute to share some points that might exonerate the current administration. I have no agenda, no relationship, just respect. Hopefully it will give hope to people who love Guatemala, as I have hope in many things happening in Guatemala. Finally acknowledging the shady actions here, and by our neighbor to the north in the recent past is an important part of the process. Thanks Kevin.

Actually Governments are limited in their ability to do god. They can only at best, limit bad. The people of the country have to do it. Just Yesterday, more than 1/4 million Big Macs were purchased in the campaign to fund the beneficial efforts of the Ronald McDonald house. One of the key ways that poor children are hindered from receiving the free healthcare available to them at the series of well equipped and well staffed pediatric hospital units in ZN 11 of Guatemala City is they have no place to say during visits and pre and post op, and this was a good example of what needs to happen as the middle class grows. Appropriate timing relevant to comments here!

The Bergers are definitely either feared or reviled on these pages, but they really do not have horns...and I will cover all bets on their taking the unicef money (Kevin, Kelly; would you hold the pot?) Reform is ( as we see here) not a simple thing...especially after years of entrenched corruption, and ( believe it or not!) i have not been real happy with all of the outcomes of their attempts at change.

Regarding Stein's "error", I believe that in English and Spanish, "Adoptive" refers to having to do with adoption, and can be used to refer to the birth mother who has chosen be involved with adoption, as well as the receiving parents.

SH, you are correct to doubt Berger's motive, based on his association in an exclusive, and not very nice club. But he is an exception in Guatemalan Politics. People around him have been implicated, but he has not tolerated it, and has remained for all to see, clean. He is mocked now because he has been frustrated in many of his stated goals, but he has not been said by any of these naysayers to be corrupt. I heard him described as a true "compassionate Conservative" because he spoke of the need to strengthen the infrastructure, and the economy as a base for social improvement. That made him unpopular with everyone, as the conservatives feared the equity of his compassionate reforms, and the compassionates decried his business friendly moves. He was roundly mocked for running an honest campaign and losing four years before he reran and won, in part by standing bravely and in many cases dangerously in opposition to the thugs running against him.

There was a different attitude on the streets there right after he came into office, and Guatemalans breathed a bit more freely, especially the indigenous folks, as he gave Rigoberta Menchu a cabinet post.

Even as the previous President still hides from a warrant for his arrest, there are many members of the previous administration that are now serving time for their crimes. One of the unique things Berger did when beginning his Presidency was to prosecute the corrupt officials from the previous administration. This I think tells of his intention to remain honest, because the norm had been to allow the previous scoundrels to flee the country, while loudly denouncing them, but not really wanting to make a precedent. [sic]

I am not involved in the Government, but was in a meeting in which Wendy Berger refused large donations being offered, asking to wait until the corruption was stopped, before pouring money, like gas on a fire.

Maybe people think that I am connected with them, because I mention my wife's charitable work. That might be because there was a large movement to engage the wealthier women to do charitable work within SOSEP and the other welfare when Wendy Berger took over. It was little touted, but more effective than anything else to do what has been spoken of here: raising the position and health of women and children at risk throughout the country.

I want to appeal to open minded, level headed folks, rather than respond to people who cloud the issue with a clear agenda:
The Bergers have been vigorously pursuing adoption reform for most of their presidency. They are not just lately racing to get it done, even though this may have been the perfect political time to press it forward, during the lection season. But the idea that they are doing it now to get the dangled fruit is ridiculous, and not believed by the people saying it. ( and, yes, saying someone is planning to commit a crime when they are obviously not is slander, not merely comment) But think about it: with all the publicity, and the cries to this effect for almost 2 years, do you really think they could get away with it if they wanted to?

I am really appalled to hear the term adoption in the same sentence as organ harvesting. This urban/rural myth being perpetuated as a possibility of occurrence when there has been no substantiated case is irresponsible. That language is inflammatory and encourages violence by those that believe it. Let us talk reality, not propaganda.
Important issues as I see them: 1)Let us work hard to ensure that each child's case in which the child has been legally relinquished does not end up in ongoing limbo. If adoptions are halted those children have NO family. 2)Verify that first and second DNA testing is performed in a certified lab with the sample collected by an uninvolved, licensed MD. 3)Push for independent representation of birthmom and PAP, or in the case of abandonment, child and PAP. 4)Push for prosecution of people that are known to have participated in illegal adoption processes.
For those folks interested in stopping ICA altogether, you may want to take a close look at the current status of orphans in Romania and Cambodia. My sign-off reflects my position.

When reading some of the posts, I can't help but be personally offended. The words of "paul" really have bothered me, not just for myself but for my children and the people of Guate. It sounds very much like instilling this bigotry in their own children towards (love how Mariale put it) "whites, Spanish or whatever you call us".
No, the Ladinos, nor Spanish (a term not used since 1908!) do not kill nor enslave their women and children. Is there no idea how US-backed policies have damaged GT and other countries throughout the world? Why do you turn a blind eye to the programs now in Guate that help families and somehow think that adopting is the only answer? What you see is a post civil war country trying to rebuild itself.
This is about building patria. I wish this for myself and my children but most importantly for tierra madre.
Marie

Marie, you say that we "turn a blind eye to the programs now in Guate that help families and somehow think that adopting is the only answer."

I am not adopting to save your country. I am not adopting to better your country's infrastructure. My adoption is a private matter between my daughter's birthmother and my family. Your government examined the validity of this arrangement, but it is an adoption, not an attempt at social engineering. You must think we are a very altruistic people, the Americans, if you believe we are adopting to "fix" your country.

Just to be clear, I am turning a blind eye towards nothing - my eyes are FIRMLY FIXED on my child. It is not MY JOB to fix your country's problems. And my daughter should not live unwanted with a birthfamily while your country works out its serious infrastructure problems. Sorry.

To Marie:
This is not bigotry it is a fact, if you wish to sugarcoat, this is your perogative but not mine. Guatemala along with other central and south american countries live in a CLASS SYSTEM
which perpetrates inequality among it's citizens.To enslave as you put it can as does mean children having to work to feed themselves and their families and women not being allowed to make choices for their own childrens welfare. Enslaving does not mean your form of conatative thinking such as chains and whips. I did not group all Guatemalan citizens as you suggest I have merely pointed out the facts of a Government, criminals and the narcotics trade that is hell bent on destroying lives.
Take a trip into the highlands or to Livingston, Genova or to the northern section and see for yourselves the true Guatemalan living conditions. You can take this trip by way of the internet if you would like to view this first hand. The original intent of my post was to illustrate why these children need to have international adoption as an option to escape the violence, starvation and poverty that is sure to be inflicted upon them. Would you want to work in a building with no fire escape? Would you or anyone of us be willing to send our children back to this environment. I think not!
If I have offended anyone my sincerest apologies go out to those on this site and to the people of Guatemala.

Respectfully,

Paul

Hi All,
Just received word that Pres. Berger has supposedly recommended all in process cases be allowed to finish under old law. Anyone else hear this?

This would be wonderful news! Gayle, could you reveal your source of this info?

I have not heard this yet, Gayle. From whom did you hear this? If it's true, that is excellent news.

RE: SupportingReform's note: 3)Push for independent representation of birthmom and PAP, or in the case of abandonment, child and PAP.

Imagine this scenario: picture an uneducated, fearful, desparate birthmom who is on the cusp of making a decision about how to care for a recent newborn child...then picture her seated at a table with a more educated attorney or facilitator, who appears to be in a position of power or control to this birthmom...picture the facilitator or attorney nudging her to make a final decision by focusing on how hard it will be to care for the child versus how much better off the child might be if she relinquishes.

Maybe the child would have grown up poor and happy, or maybe she would have starved - very tough call. But I can easily picture the birthmom being strongly influenced by the facilitator (sign here please...) or attorney, who appears more polished and professional and whalaa, there you have it. Subtle coersion. Nothing can or will ever be legally proven because the conversation was a private one.

I spent 1.5 days with my child's birthmother. Though I am confident her story is true enough, I also saw a woman who could have been easily manipulated if she fell into the wrong hands. So, Supporting Reform has it right - and I wish Susana Luarca would address this reality, rather than posture about "prove to me this happens." It's common sense that it could and probably does happen. FYI, I totally respect Susana's heart and efforts. But I did send a message and questions to her about this last year and she did not post my comments. So, I felt kinda like she doesn't want to address the things that might happen under the table, so to speak. Susana, you could be even more of a hero than you already are (and you are a great champion) if you could/would address this problem, stemming from the representation of both sides of the transaction. You have stated that it's a voluntary process, not disputed, so no need for two attorneys. I don't think it passes the straight face test, based upon my personal observations, to say that frail birthmom's are never influenced by people who appear more powerful than they are. Heck, even I felt somewhat scared signing my legal papers - and I have a college degree. I thought I knew what I was doing, but I also "signed where I was told to sign." Fortunately it worked out very well for me.

Supporting Reform has it right, I think. Focus on making it work well. Though I still have a problem passing control from private attorneys to a Central Authority in a country where corruption has been documented in most departments of government, from what I've read. In other words, the controls might be better at the relinquishment stage, but the opportunities for bribery corruption to be an inherent part of the process do not go away. By the way, our attorney was a salaried employee of the organization that runs a home for abandoned and relinquished children - so there was no motivation to push or not push my birthmother. This is as it should be.

Amen to Stephanie!!! Finally, a voice of reason in the midst of this endless debate about the complex problems of Guatemala. There seems to be an expectation on the part of some people that just because you adopt from a certain country that you are then obligated to spend the rest of your life immersing your child in that culture and language, planning return visits, and focusing all your philanthropic efforts in that country. I know plenty of people who have adopted who started out with that sort of philsophy only to be told by their own kids that "they just want to be like all their friends". And no, I'm not saying that doing any of those things is wrong - we are very interested in our children having other guatemalan friends and learning about their birth country and language - but neither is it wrong for the kids to be proud of being american citizens and embracing our culture.

The fact of the matter is that children (people) are suffering all over the world. I would hope that every american would give what they can financially and otherwise to help alleviate suffering everywhere, including the US where thousands of american children are abused and neglected by their parents and often fare no better in foster care. So many of them are older children longing to be adopted yet very few people seem willing to step up.

I'm not qualified to have an opinion on anything Guatemala does. I don't speak the language, I have only been there briefly as a tourist and to pick up my child, and I don't understand any of their social, religious, or political problems because I don't live there. I just want to bring the children that we are adopting home.

In that regard, which is why I'm still hanging in here, it seemed like Gayle had some good news. Can anyone else confirm???

B,

In your imagine this scenario - how exactly would having separate attorneys make this any less likely. I am sure that both attorneys would be compensated in some way for their services, so wouldn't both attorneys have the same motivation for this scenario to take place as the 1 attorney in the current system? I am honestly asking out of curiosity since I have seen many people indicate that they think involving more than one attorney would solve a lot of problems. I am not saying I agree with the current system -- I totally support reform -- but just trying to understand what would really change if 2 attorneys were involved. Dishonest attorneys could still very easily circumvent the system.

Cudo's to Stephanie. I share some of her thoughts. However I'd like to think that all of the posts here are relevant even if we don't want to hear of some of the thoughts from people from Guat, it doesn't defer us at all. We are still falling in love with their children which will be our children some day. So we need to also remember that Marie is just expressing herself too. Maybe we should open our train of thoughts somewhat. This is a very trying time for all of us and although it isn't our problem, maybe we as caring parents need to be more open minded, and try to find a way to educate the media, our legislators, and others of how we feel as adoptive parents, and hold ourselves to high standards. I'm not trying to start an issue, just hopefully get everyone thinking about being part of a solution.

You don't want to obligate yourself to spending the rest of your life immersing your child in the culture and language of his birth country? That's your choice. But the issue at hand is basic respect for that country and its culture. The fact that posters on this site can't listen with an open mind to someone from Guatemala unless he or she is championing us is shocking. And arrogant. And so very American.

To Trying to Understand.....Hmmmm, good point. Maybe it wouldn't resolve the issue.

To Trying to Understand....I meant to add this to my last post, but "entered" too quickly...in theory, it would work if the attorney representing the birthmom was not compensated "by the case" as in the private attorney scenario, but was compensated as a salaried employee of a trusted entity who works on behalf of an uncorrupted welfare system.

Excellent suggestion of trying to involve Susana in this dialogue. I have much respect for your work Susana, I would have even more admiration if you would start to champion the cause of independent representation. As stated by B. above, the second attorney would need to work for an entity independent of the current adoption process. The current side of the debate which believes an uncontested adoption doesn't need a separate representative holds as much water as my kitchen strainer. Due to the power and authority inequity of the involved parties, I see independent representation as a critical piece in reforming this program. As "finders" often locate children for independent adoption, the birthmom should be represented by a lawyer so that she can better understand the process and make a better informed decision. In the case of an abandoned child the lawyer would represent the best interests of that child. For instance, if the child had special medical needs a lawyer representing the abandoned child would be in a position of advocating for the child.
I truly believe that many adoptive parents do want good reforms to happen. There is no doubt that any reformed system will have flaws, but every system is a work in progress. I believe that St Augustine had it right "...change the things we can, and the wisdom to know the difference".

To B and trying to understand;
I have two daughters, one from Guatemala and another from a different latin American country. In the non-guate adoption, the child’s interest was represented by an agency of the government throughout the process (not just at the end). There was a state appointed person, a social worker, who advocated for the child. When we went before the judge, the advocate came and acted as our daughter’s guardian (our daughter had been abandoned). I believe that system was more “above board” than the system in Guate. Not to say corruption couldn’t occur, but there was less financial incentive for corruption because the advocate wasn’t compensated more if the adoption was finalized. Also, the social worker really emphasized that the adoption was about finding a good family for our daughter, not trying to fulfill our desire to adopt. I strongly believe this is a better system than the single attorney system that exists in Guatemala today.
One last thing; in our case the time it took for each adoption was about the same.

To K - your "how very american" sarcasm reflects your apparent view of yourself that you and your views are superior and mine inferior. I consider that to be a typical "american" attitude, to use your words.

Since you don't know me, I really don't understand how you can make judgements on what I expect or don't expect so let me enlighten you - I don't expect anyone to 'champion" my cause except my agency that I signed a contract with and my government who issued our I-71 and preapproval.

I have immense respect for the people of Guatemala, as well as people in Asia, Africa, Europe, etc. However, I don't view Guatemala's problems as any more dire than the problems of Darfur, Somalia, Congo, Indonesia, Honduras, etc. just because I have adopted a child from there. As I stated before, people are suffering everywhere, including our own backyards. Everyone must pick the causes they wish to support with their time and money and that is a personal decision that shouldn't be judged and/or condemned, especially by strangers.

I can totally understand why any country would resent foreigners adopting thousands of their children. I fully expect for many countries to close and/or strictly limit intercountry adoption, regardless of whether that is "right or wrong".

My husband and I both feel that the best thing we can do to honor the sacrifice of our children's birth mothers is to love our children and provide them with every opportunity possible. Whatever they wish to know about their birth countries, aside from all the information we have shared and will continue to share as they grow, we will make every effort to provide.

Finally, I would like to request that sarcasm have no place on this forum.

Doesn't the social worker in family court interview the birth mom? Is this a real inteview or something to check off the to do sheet? This is an opportunity for a candid conversation, right?

Most of us agree that corruption exists and reform is needed. What scares us is that things can change while we're in process. My son turns 15 months this weekend and should have been home ~ 6 months ago. The process will have to change slowly and PAP's should be notified at intervals when new laws will be applied to their cases.

Big picture: reform is good. My picture: please let my son join his family. I don't want to save the world by adopting- this is an extremely inefficient way to fight poverty or apologize for past wrongs. But I do want my family to be whole and for us to work together to make the world a better place.

K,

I agree with what you are saying about posters keeping an open mind to what people from Guatemala have to say, but you shoot yourself in the foot with your own anti-American sentiment. So basic respect for a country and it's culture applies to all countries except the US? How does your insult to all Americans on this list (except the self hating ones) illustrate an open mind and basic respect?

B, supportingreform, and kl --

Thanks for the explanations, that does make sense to me now. I guess the key would be finding the much so needed uncorrupt and trusted entity.

Sorry I posted too quickly, too! What I wanted to add was with all the propaganda from all sides right now, I have no idea who the trusted entity could be!

Okay, lets see if I understand this, not understanding my childs roots is somehow OK for the child?
I think you need to think this one out a little more clearly. By not at least knowing something about their roots you are simply telling the child that they are not worth the effort and please just take on my identity its a better one. The notion that the child does not care about his background is just a self serving indulgence of people that can't fathom the thought of identity independence. The children need to know we care about them as a whole and not just what we make them into. When the child ask "donde esta mi pais" we should know the answer.

To K,

I would love to be able to do everything for my child-provide her with emotional, physical and financial security, enable her to make many friends as well as to know the Guatemalan culture well. But there is only so much time in a day. Working moms is pretty much a fact of life in the US. I could go back to college to brush up on my Spanish but then I wouldn't have time to provide for her emotional and physical needs. I could take her to Guatemala every year, but then I probably wouldn't have enough money to fund her college education. Life is about trade offs and a balance.

Her room is decorated with things from Guatemala. I have Latin baby sitters lined up. Her male role model is Latin. I can brush up on my Spanish in my spare time and I'll probably manage a few trips back to Guatemala. I will also have play days with kids that belong to the local Guatemalan groups. I give to SAve the Children and to the Oakland Children's hospital. I teach her to also give to charitable organizations.

By the way, she will also probably learn Chinese because her day care is run by Chinese and a lot of my neighbors have immigrated from China. I also have neighbors from India, Korea, Egypt. I have friends from Mexico, Spain, France, Australia, UK, Russia, Japan, New Zealand, Canada, Germany, Denmark,...She will be a very international little girl.

People seem to be awfully quick to get angry here lately. Let's try to pause before we post and imagine if we would say the same thing if we were face-to-face with the person in the same room.

Regarding the criticism of K's comment about typical American arrogance: if you read a lot about international relations you find that to be indeed how Americans in general are interpreted by many around the world. It doesn't mean we all are, but that is a stereotype of us that is sometimes true.

It doesn't make K a "self-hating" American to acknowledge that, it makes K someone who loves this country enough, as I do, to try to correct our errors when we have an opportunity to, so that we can live up to the ideals we stand for.
History shows America has been arrogant in its foreign policy toward Central America for decades, and the sooner we accept that the sooner we can heal relations.
Hope I didn't misinterpret what anybody implied...

I like it that we can debate here knowing we all are basically good people who have common concern for our children.

Reba

I heard from a reputable source that Berger supports finalizing cases in process--and stated this publically within the past 48 hours. It will be important for everyone to keep very good documentation of their case timeline and supporting documents of the various milestones.

Hi All,
The information I posted earlier about Pres. Berger came from an agency. I have since tried to find a relevant article with this included and have not been able to. Hope it is correct, but realistically, I can not confirm it.

I think it is correct to say that Americans have been prone to being ignorant of the many dirty things our government has done to other countries. I suppose part of the reason is that our country is so huge that many Americans may never travel outside of our own country.

Contrast that with Europeans. Their borders are close together and they tend to really stay up on the international political scene. But in many respects it isn't accurate to imply that Americans are not open to other cultures. We have a pretty high rate of inter-racial and inter-cultural marriages. Further, I have heard more than one person from India and the Middle East who have lived in both Europe and the US say that they greatly prefer the US because they feel more accepted here. So I guess what I'm saying is, I can understand K's anger toward the US because Americans are prone to not knowing what our country is up to which gives our government too much of a free rein. But I disagree with extending this observation to implying that American's aren't open to other cultures. It is considerably more complex than that. Just my ten cents worth.

JCICS posted on its web site today that conversations with Berger are continuing and that there will be an update on Monday.

With regard to the ongoing cultural debate.... I think we have to realize it will depend on each child. Some kids will want to learn everything about Guatemalan history, the Spanish language and Mayan culture. Others won't be interested at all, even if (or especially if) their parents try to steer them in that direction.

Zoe's mom

Cheryl;

I am so sorry for missing your series of responses. I have been in meetings where $14 - $18K was "on the table" NOT including fostercare, but am sure a lawyer could handle the foster care even with that figure. Then there is airfare, etc. and the US side...How much is the agency fee? What do you get for that?

Here is my point, best told in the words of a Guatemalan on the satreet, and it applies to countries regardless of their internal adoption structure ( i do not think Hague compliance will fix anything either)

I was speaking with a Ladino Guatemalan man who had asked me about adoptions. We were interrupted by an earnest indigenous man, who asked a question related to a comment I had made, then asked.."Is it true that Americans pay ( he said ) $25,000 for babies?" I said yes. he asked what they wanted them for. Believe me, I said that maybe some could not have their own, but they all wanted them to give them a life that would be blessed,. etc...to raise them as their own child. He then said, "yes, but some are harvesting organs, right?" I said I truly knew that was not the case with any child being adopted to the United States. "so, all they want is the welfare of the child?" Yes " If all they want to do is help, then why do they have to pay so much?"

Mom...
I appreciate your frustration with the horrible trafficking that is going on in Hague compliant countries, but please do not be so naive as to think that adoptions as they are in Guatemala are stopping any of that from happening here. The sad truth is that those traffickers are paying MUCH less than good American adoptive parents. Do you know why? Because those asking the money know the criminals will not pay that much.

And lastly, Susana may have been right in saying it was not illegal for Gay couples to adopt a Guatemalan Child. I may have confused once again the formal and informal aspects fo guatemalan legal enforcement. But I would be interested in finding out who would be rejected due to it being illegal? ( there are way too many hoops to jump through, as all adoptive parents painfully know, but they are not for legal issues, it seems.)

I have heard convicted Felon. Anything else?

Here is an idea.

Lets say that the adoption fees from people who want to adopt are paid into a common pool. This common pool is used to pay a guaranteed salary to counselors. The counselors are the first point of contact for women who are considering putting their children up for adoption. The counselors can advice the women of all of their options. If a woman decides to go ahead and put her child up for adoption, she is given a list of attorneys to choose from. The attorneys pay their expenses from the pool. They can also receive their salaries from the pool. Since the money to pay their expenses and their salaries is from the pool, the amounts withdrawn can be monitored.

I don't like the idea of the first point of contacts (whether attorneys, counselors or whatever) being paid by the government. Because the government can also coerce women according to whatever their agenda is. So that is what got me to thinking about this common pool of money from adoption fees.

This might be extended to also caring for children who end up not being adopted by paying for their care out of the pool of money. In a way, this is happening to a certain extent already as certain attorneys are charging extra and using the extra to take care of children that end up not being adopted or haven't been relinquished yet.

I know this idea is rough and I don't know Guatemala well enough to know if it would work for sure but it is an idea. We can keep brain storming.

I think one of the problems with my idea is how do women in remote areas manage to use the system. The buscadors currently take care of that but of course the buscador system is ripe for problems.

Today, October 12, there was a interamerican human rights hearing in Washington, DC. Testimony about the ICA situation in Guatemala can be found at the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) website.

Specifically:
The public hearings of Group A that took place will be available as audio recordings through the IACHR's webpage.

I think everyone here knows that some people in some countries view the U.S. as arrogant and interfering, among other negative things. I just find it almost laughable for someone to say "how very american" in a sarcastic, hateful way and then proceed to tell me what I should and shouldn't do, as in the case of K and P. P is actually going so far as to tell me, and others, how we should raise our children AND to assume she knows what all children want! Children are all different. There are many adoptees who, upon learning they are adopted, spend their whole lives wondering and obsessing over who their "real" parents are. Some even go so far as finding their "real parents' later in life and depending upon how they are received, I know quite a few who have left their adoptive families behind and forged relationships with their "real" parent(s). Some kids, however, have no desire to know who they came from biologically or where and spend their whole lives happily content with their adoptive families.

I have known many well meaning parents who were so focused on "immersing" their children in their birth culture, which they can never fully understand, only to be told by their kids that they just wanted to be "regular kids". This is coming from the children themselves!!! Are you going to negatively label these children as you so easily do adults just because they want to fit in with their adoptive families and the culture they live in????

We belong to a Guatemalan support group. It is very interesting that most of the children in the support group are under the age of 5. I asked a couple of the mom's who I knew had older children why the older ones don't come to the get together's anymore, which are held on the week-ends. The answer is always the same - they just got tired of it. They want to be with their school friends and do sports or other activities. You almost have to wonder if these "immersion" experiences are more for the parents than the kids. My husband and I decided that it was important for us to participate in our local Guatemalan group, which we love, so our children could get to know other children that look like them and for us to connect with the other parents but that is really OUR decision, not theirs. Only time will tell how long they remain interested in participating in Guatemala-only events. Our hope is that they will forge lasting friendships with other Guatemalan kids but that isn't something we can control. Ultimately, it will be their decision who their friends are. By the same token, whatever our children wish to know about their birth country and culture will be our priviledge to help them discover but we will take our cues from them. We fully expect our 3 guatemalan children to have different levels of interest in their heritage, because they are all unique individuals. Unlike P who apparently believes that adopted kids are all the same.

I respect the rights of people who wish to learn spanish for their children's sake - even though the vast majority of these children have never spoken a word of spanish - and study Guatemalan history, and visit the country every year - I've even known people who moved to Guatemala to live so their children could grow up in their culture. We don't find these things to be practical for our family for a number of reasons, including having biological children and children from another country and we know many families who have similar views and guess what??? We are still good and loving parents whether K and P believe we are or not.

There are people on this forum who are sarcastic, rude, and intolerant yet I would bet they scream the loudest about diversity and tolerance when it comes to everything else. You can't have it both ways. And since I seem to be one of only a few who feel that any parent, adoptive or otherwise, should have the right to raise their children the way they believe is best, this will be my last post.

Cheryl:
Interesting ideas. I'm glad that you have pointed out that BMs in Guate do not receive counseling. This is considered to be a standard expectation in civil societies--adoption ethics. It saddens me to think that a nation would allow this to happen to women and children, but then Guatemala has a long way to go in terms of social development.

Here's my reform idea:

What if the Guatemalan Congress put a legislative cap on attorneys fees for adoptions? Our foreign attorney fee was $20,000, and that did NOT include foster care. A good chunk of $20K paid the finder's fee.

A cap on attorney's fees would make less money available for the "buscadores" and decrease the possibility that unscrupulous people will use undue pressure or illegal means to find babies.

(I want to add that I know my own lawyer personally and believe her to be highly ethical. She does not handle cases of questionable origin.)

Zoe's mom

Karen,

We have had a misunderstanding. I didn't say that birth moms don't currently receive counseling. I know that they meet with social workers. I believe that there are attorneys that pay for counseling. There are also attorneys that I think pay for training moms so hopefully they won't have to put additional children up for adoption. You would have to talk to someone that knows the current process better than I to find out whether women currently get counseling.

I'm quite certain that with the current process the first point of contact is a buscador.

A few other additions I'd make to my idea. It may also have facilitators of sorts that women in rural areas can contact. They could provide transportation, etc... They would also need to be paid a salary out of the pool to reduce the possability of them hooking women up with particular attorneys or influencing the womens' decisions. STatistics could be kept on how many women from a particular facilitator went to a particular attorney as a part of watching out for the facilitators influencing women/taking bribes.

The facilitators could also enter information into a database to track the case from beginning to end. This could be used to reduce human trafficking.

We need additional controls to reduce the probability that the counselors would form relations with specific attorneys. So maybe the counselors would be assigned randomly to the women.

One problem with this though is that a woman may need advice on which attorneys are the better ones *shrug* It is impossible to solve all problems. For example, another problem with what I'm proposing is that even though it pretty much prevents money influencing how a counselor would interact with a woman, all people have their opinions. many people have very strong opinions when it comes to adoption, whether to have children, etc... A counselor can exert a lot of pressure on a woman to do what the counselor believes is best. There should be a safe guard that a woman can ask for a different counselor if she isn't gelling with the one assigned to her. Yet another problem is the database. It helps to reduce human trafficking but it also provides information to government officials who may want to coerce women as some have reported to be the case in the CQ trials.

Lastly, the Guatemalan congress I'm sure is having their own discussions about how to implement things. They probaby aren't aware of what we are saying and of course that makes sense that they wouldn't so what difference does it make if we concoct a bunch of ideas?

Best, CHeryl

Challenge:

I cannot speak for everyone. But, I feel the best way to stop the problems in Guatemala is to be part of the solution instead of spouting accusations and blame. At this time in my life I am unable to relocate to Guatemala and dedicate my life to providing healthcare to those in need or assisting in person. What I ask is that this forum be used for all the voices for children to reach some agreement on a reputable organization to receive and ditribute $ to best imrove the healthcare, nutrition and welfare of the underpriveleged in Guatemala.

Steve, Kevin, Susana, Kelly, Paul
Let's start working together for the common cause.

I adopted my son for my own selfish reason -want of a family. Not as a mission to save a child. I care about my son's country not from an ivory tower, but as a fortunate citizen of the world born into a life of opportunity. I see the citizens of Guatemala as extended family- this is just me. I do not judge others that are less interested in Guatemala.

If I can, I would like to make a difference. I have looked into programs before and feel the folks on this forum (with their scepticism and smarts) are best prepared to guide me in this endeavor.

So... I put it to you folks- how?

Cheryl:
RE: Birth mother counseling. As with just about everything in Guatemalan adoptions, there is no standardization of care. As such, you can not uniformily state that BMs are getting counseling. In fact, you can state that (1) counseling is not required and (2) attorneys are not employing individuals that specialize in birth parent counseling. Yes, social workers prepare a birth family summary but that is NOT COUNSELING. I am a professional social worker and I have prepared birth parent summaries here in the US--counseling MAY be done as a part of that process but often it is a fact finding discussion to summarize family history and reasons for relinquishment. I would bet the summaries are handled as an investigation of basic facts and not "counseling". Finally, social workers in Guatemala are so poorly trained that I have no confidence in (1) ethical practice or (2) capacity to "counsel" as it would be defined in a civil society. Right now, one of the serious gaps in the system is the birth parent summaries that are used to document "orphan" status. Some of the reports are bogus/fraudulent so that a child may enter the US on an orphan visa. The truth will come out about this and it will be ugly as Federal Marshalls will have to document a number of cases of fraudulent orphan visas for the purpose of prosecution. Just see the history of the Cambodia prosecution--that is exactly what happened there. Unpleasant times ahead.

To Mom to Lina:

I believe this to be an excellent site to visit and consider helping. The opportunity to help in many different aspects are put forth.

http://www.mayanfamilies.org

Trusting in Him,

Paul

Perhaps trained counselors could work with MDs and therefore have contact with women throughout their pregnancy. But I wonder if we are romanticizing this some? These women have stark, and often harsh, realities. With no social services, I'm sure it doesn't take long to figure out if you can "make it." I have experienced an unplanned pregnancy and I knew quickly that it would be difficult but possible and I am so thankful for the wonderful 5 yr old that I can parent. I was very struck by how similar my new son's birth mother's situation was to mine. And I'm saddened that her opportunities are so limited. She is my hero for making this difficult decision. I pray that she does receive counseling, guidance, education and can break free from poverty. This leads back to the bigger picture of addressing poverty and social equality nationwide.

I second Lina's mom's emotion!