Guatemalan papers are reporting that committees of Congress met yesterday on the adoption law. This was NOT the vote on the ammendments. But based on these reports, Guatemala will postpone implementing the Hague until April 1, 2008 in order to better coincide with the US's likely ratification date. Interestingly, one paper quotes US Consul General John Lowell as saying this is unnecessary.
In addition, one paper is reporting that the Ortega Law's effective date will be bumped back to April 1 as well. One story also mentions that one ammendment to be voted on is to permit singles to adopt.
Is that a sigh of relief I hear?
Once again, this all coming from Guatemalan papers.
Click here for an ADA Update/Commentary on this: http://www.adaguatemala.org/English/news/
Click here for JICS's update on this: http://www.jcics.org/Guatemala.htm
The Hague, until April
Congress delayed entry into force of the Convention
By: Ana Lucia Blas
Cover photo
(Photo Free Press: Mary Fleischmann).
Members of the Congress agreed yesterday to amend the date on which force charged the Hague Convention, which regulates international adoptions, for the April 30, 2008.
At a seminar for consensus on amendments to the draft adoption law, which could be approved in the next few weeks, deputies from different bench agreed to change the date it takes effect this international convention, with the aim of "waiting for States United implementation. "
A spokesman for the embassy in that country said yesterday that this treaty will enter into force in early 2008 "in the United States, has not yet been specified date.
"If Guatemalan begins to apply before USA, no child may be adopted in this country, and we can not afford that luxury, because there are children who really need a family," explained the deputy unionist Pablo Duarte, in proposing the amendment , which will be included in the adoption law, which also charged effect in April next year.
Moreover, in this term to prepare the institutional structure that will be required for the implementation of these two regulations, as the National Council for Adoptions, an autonomous body that will have to be created to comply with the Hague Convention, said Duarte.
"The important thing is that it was ratified after ten years of waiting, if it takes one or five months to be valid, then we will have to wait and prepare to implement it immediately," felt Nidia Aguilar del Cid, defender of Children and Adolescents , the Human Rights Ombudsman.
However, Jorge Luis Ortega, the Democratic Union, although it supports the extension, acknowledged that could help "those engaged in negotiations with adoptions, ran to initiate new procedures, to avoid having to comply with the new law neither the convention. "
"We should think about what we should to the country; The benefit of children and not on what the United States does. Remember that they have no hurry to implement the agreement because its country adoptions are handled legally, but in Guatemala same is not true, "said Oliverio Garcia, first vice president of Congress, but in the end it supported the extension because" has its logic " he justified.
Consensus
Adoption Act
These are some of the proposals agreed yesterday to the adoption law.
The central authority is the National Council for Adoptions, an autonomous body comprising representatives of the Supreme Court, the Human Rights Ombudsman, the Social Welfare Department and agencies accredited in the country to handle adoptions, among others.
They may take unmarried individuals.
Interest in approving Adoptions Act
• View other headlines
• Format Printing
National
06 November 2007
Edgar Hernandez
Members of the board of Congress deputies and representatives of the various bancadas met this morning to try to establish agreements on the discussion articles and final wording in the full Adoptions Act.
For Congressman Rolando Morales Francisco Chavez is necessary to establish agreements so that this initiative will be known in full as soon as possible because it is not possible for the Guatemalan children continue to be used as goods for sale abroad.
The chairman of the legislature, Ruben Dario Morales Véliz, expressed confidence agreeing inclusion in the meeting tomorrow, which appealed to the political maturity of the deputies of the different political forces represented in the Legislature.
The meeting was attended by heads of block and deputies of different benches to avoid further setbacks in the discussion and adoption at the plenary.
A group of lawyers asked for the ninth time meet with the board of directors and deputies engaged in the discussion because they say they had not been taken into account and be affected by not being able to continue working in the processing of adoptions, if the initiative is approved.
According to attorney Enrique Urizar, if approved as currently with the 61 amendments that were made, are committed several inconstitucionalidades and damage to more than 25 thousand children waiting to be adopted by families who offer better living conditions.
Postponing Validity of the Hague Convention
U.S. government considers "unnecessary" postponement; PGN said that only the DC can do.
Gladys Ramirez, Ericka Marroquín, Century 21 |
The United States government, through its consul accredited in the country, John Lowel, considered "unnecessary" that Congress postpone the entry into force of the Hague Convention, which would be initially implemented locally from 31 December. At the request of the heads of block, it was decided to amend Decree 31-2007 and approve the April 30, 2008 as the date for its entry into force.
Lowel insists that it was not necessary to "postpone the date, since the Convention is vital for the protection of children."
The congressmen claim to be able to make the change through a legislative agreement to be prepared next week, but Mario Gordillo, owner of the Procurator-General's Office (PGN), which covers only the Constitutional Court has the power "to be an agreement international character. "
Similar position assumes a judge from DC, who did not want to identify themselves, to ensure that the way for amending the agreement is for that agency.
Discussion of changes
The Congress also proposed for the same date of the entry into force of Adoptions Act (also originally scheduled for January 1, 2008) and will discuss 69 possible amendments, among them, allow unmarried or divorced adopt a child (read: Council Nacional).
"Another four months would give us time to strengthen it, because if it enters into force too soon it would receive many attacks (protections and remedies for unconstitutional) that would weaken it," argues Congressman Jorge Luis Ortega, who made the proposal, which was endorsed by Pablo Duarte and Mariano Rayo.
Duarte also argues that a letter received from the United States Senate, urging the Guatemalan government to "be careful in the analysis of Adoptions Act," was reason enough to devote more time to his study.
The sending of the document is confirmed by Lowel, but rejected an intention to delay the adoption of the standard, but rather ask that there are no obstacles for 3,772 cases of adoptions in process and on track.
NATIONAL COUNCIL
The central organ or National Council in charge of adoptions would be a body "autonomous and independent," agreed legislators, who had previously placed the future institution attached to the Social Welfare Department (SBS) of the presidency. In addition, it would allocate a specific part in the General Budget of the Nation.
At independence the Council would be led by representatives of the Attorney General's Office (PGN), the Human Rights Ombudsman (PDH), embassies and SBS.
Big Sigh, Big Smile :)
Posted by: Krystal at November 7, 2007 08:17 AMPlease tell me this is true! I am literally shaking! I have been so consumed by all of this and have fear in the back of my mind for the past couple of months. I just pary that this will be true and the Congress will confirm it!
THANK YOU!
jen
bringing home Tess
Whewwwwwwwwww! Huge sigh of relief! Kevin, you and everyone who works so hard to keep us all informed and educated are to be commended! It is also nice to see that the power of the people accomplished something in pushing our Government to take a stand as it certainly sounds like the letters sent did make an impact! It is also great to hear that the impact on the children of Guatemala is finally being publicly considered!
My husband and I will continue to pray for all of the children in Guatemala as well as all of the parents waiting to give them loving families now and into the future!
Thank you so much, Kevin!
If Mr. Lowell's remarks are quoted accurately, I think we need another round of contacting DOS.
Posted by: In DC at November 7, 2007 09:05 AMI would like to understand what US Consul: John Lowell really said. Does anyone know if there is an email contact for this U.S. Embassy Official?
This is wonderful news. It's my hope that the entities involved can now work together to resolve the issues and create a system that will reform the process.
Posted by: Stephanie at November 7, 2007 10:03 AMThat sounds like wonderful news,if those are the facts. Lets all keep our fingers crossed and keep saying those prayers for those children in Guat and the families wanting to love them forever.
Posted by: Johnda at November 7, 2007 10:27 AMPraise the Lord!!
Posted by: Gracias at November 7, 2007 10:38 AMKevin, I could kiss you! I'm so excited, this is the perfect amount of time to ensure my girls make it home. Thank you Jesus! Hallelujah!
Posted by: Melissa at November 7, 2007 10:58 AMPerhaps I missed it (it's hard to read while you are doing a happy dance) but I saw April 30th as the dates for both Hague Implementations and Ortega in the above articles. Not to be picky, but I'd sure like those extra 29 days!! Did another source say the 1st? And on another note, who is this John Lowell and WHAT WAS HE THINKING!! (assuming he really said that...) But I won't let him spoil my happy dance...I just hope the papers are RIGHT!
Posted by: Smith at November 7, 2007 11:06 AMWhat a relief........I am grateful that our Senators & Reps did send forth a document urging the Guat congress to consider the many thousands of cases in process.
Good news for in process families!
Thankful that God has answered the prayers of so many!
Gloria
mom to 5 Guatemalan blessings
Why is John Lowell saying this is unnecessary? Do we need to bombard him with phone calls,emails and letters? Again why is the US not backing its US Citizens in the adoption process this is so disconcerting.
What is really behind the US not wanting adoptions to continue. Susana Luarca brings up a good perspective on the ADA website about the US not wanting Immigrants in the US to include adopted children? This is appaling. Are the true true colors of the US Govt coming out now too?
All I have to say is WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN??????????????????
Posted by: Karen at November 7, 2007 11:27 AMI believe John Lowell's comments are politically motivated, so that the US cannot be accused of trying to influence the decisions of the Guatemalan government. All of this is about politics, money and power, not the best interests of children.
Thankfully, our Congress took a stand for us. And it was because of all of our efforts that they did so. Let us never doubt how much power we have.
Posted by: Linda at November 7, 2007 12:43 PMCareful with John Lowell comments. Could they be construed to mean that the US may not support this delay? Yes we need to have another round of calls, emails, etc. This giy sounds dangerous.
Posted by: Bob at November 7, 2007 12:49 PMKaren and all,
John Lowell seems to be saying that it is not necessary to postpone the law because Guatemalan adoptions are in a state that needs to be fixed and fixed right now (and in process cases can still be grandfathered and the state department's current position is that they are in favor of grandfathering). Remember, John Lowell has access to way more adoption files than all of us combined and he can see way more than any of us the severity of the issues with the adoption process as it is happening now in Guatemala.
What he seems to be saying is essentially what the state department has been saying for some time, let's not start new adoptions under the current system. I can't say I disagree with him.
And I'm afraid that nothing will get done to improve the system during the 3 or 4 month reprieve, just like nothing was done to improve the system after the 2003 Hague situation. And more children will be put at *risk* of never coming home as they get referred during the next 3 or 4 months. And most of the *good* agencies are no longer offering referrals, so the new referrals with be already at risk by coming from some of the not so good agencies.
Great news! Thank you. And, I sure hope Singles will contine to be able to adopt. I know the true blessing of being a Single mom my beautiful Guatemalan little girl
Posted by: Betsy at November 7, 2007 01:15 PMAlthough this sounds like great news for the people that are in process-but what does this mean for those of us who are thinking of adopting in the future?
Posted by: kat at November 7, 2007 02:16 PMI just recieved confirmation from my agency concerning the April date!!! YEAH. Thank you to everyone who has worked so hard in Guatemala and the US. Let us continue to work for the health and happiness of the children of Guatemala. God Bless.
Posted by: Nancy at November 7, 2007 02:32 PMI googled this John Lowell character. There is a picture of him with some JCICS reps and UNICEFs good ol' Manuel Manrique on the JCICS website. Maybe someone at the JCICS can get his attention? He can also be found on the Department of State's website's page titled "Background Note: Guatemala" listed as the Consul General. Who is this guy really working for? We have a letter signed by 203 members of Congress that says implementing this new law by January 1st "may cause unnecessary harm to Guatemala's orphaned children". Can the department of state just do or say whatever they want? Who are they accountable to? All this time it looked like UNICEF was pushing this why is our Dept. of State pushing this when it is not Americans are asking for?
Posted by: Jenn_in_PA at November 7, 2007 02:57 PMDoes anyone have an idea what might happen if your adoption is not finished by April, 2008 as my POA was only registered in October, 2007.
Posted by: Lisa at November 7, 2007 03:42 PMI am so excited. I pray this is all true!!! I'm single and especially love the part about singles being able to adopt. Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!
Posted by: Kimberly at November 7, 2007 04:16 PMGreat news,
But the John Lowell thing is confusing,
Anyone have anymore details on that?
If Mr. Lowell did say that, I supose he is right. As I understand it, countries can choose to work with countries who are not Hague compliant yet. Maybe he is trying to make nice, as if the US has not been bullying them and making the Guatemalans seem like the "bad guys." Or maybe he's an idiot. Or both. I'll take the good news with relief either way.
Posted by: lauren at November 7, 2007 04:38 PMSo thankful for this great and amazing announcement!!! Praying for when congress votes and everything becomes official! I agree with everyone who posted about John Lowell~~~ where did these comments come from?? I thought DOS was behind the adoptions being speedily finished??
Posted by: tracie at November 7, 2007 04:51 PMActually, we heard from John Lowell today and he said that the US was not asking for a delay, but, they were/are advocating for the in-process cases to be allowed to go to completion under the notarial laws that they were initiated.
my opinion: No, I didn't like Lowell's quotes in the papers, but what he meant was that the US does not want a delay in Guatemala implementing the Hague. I am not a fan of the Hague, but, if it gets us on the same page than I am for it. I NEVER want to have what happened to the 2003 in-process families or all of us current in-process families to anyone else. If the US and Guatemala are Hague countries, conceptually this kind of massive disruption to children's lives and to families will not occur.
I am grateful for the April reprieve but hope it doesn't mean that unethical agencies (YES, I AM SAYING IT) won't take advantage and still refer babies. Then April 30 will come around and hundreds and hundreds of babies could be caught again.
Please, if you are considering accepting a referral because of the April date---don't. My husband and I have had considerable pain related to our case delays and many fears that we will not see the babies again. No one should have to go through the pain. And, the children should not be caught in th e middle.
Posted by: Ann at November 7, 2007 05:57 PMLike 'kat' in a previous post, I would also like to know:
What does this mean for those of us who are still hopeful about adopting from Guatemala in the future?? My husband and I held off on accepting a referral in Sept. when the DOS & JCICS warnings were released. But we really still very much want to adopt from Guatemala.
Thanks for any input, and thank you for keeping us all up to date with the latest news in Guatemala. God Bless you for that.
Rosie
Posted by: Rosie at November 7, 2007 06:01 PMI still am a little wary of this April date. I have seen nothing official and until I do I am not getting my hopes up.
Posted by: Nancy at November 7, 2007 08:00 PMWHAT a GREAT day! Praise the Lord! Whewwww!
We also learned today that we were entered into pre-authorization last friday! DNA a match! YEA!
It's a good day! I am very grateful!
Posted by: Shelley at November 7, 2007 08:31 PMTHANK YOU GUATADOPT for keeping me in the loop!!!! All of the hard work you do is so deeply appreciated and you really are a lifeline.
I just let out the BIGGEST sigh of relief that our little one will hopefully be home with us very soon.
John Lowell and the DOS have been in UNICEF's bed for some time. It's disturbing that the representatives of our elected government show so little concern for the interests of their citizens -- or, for that matter, the best interests of Guatemalan children.
Posted by: Bob at November 7, 2007 09:24 PMBob: It is a FACT that a subset of children and Guatemalan mothers are victims of unscrupulous facilitators, attorneys, and agencies. How in the world can you assert that this is in the best interests of the children? Really, it's not even in the interests of pre-adoptive parents. Shouldn't we want only to adopt children who have been ethically relinquished? How much of a "risk" are we willing to tolerate when it concerns a child's life? If both governments are saying that this is not currently a guarantee, under the system that is in place, shouldn't we be advocating for change, rather than lambasting those who seem to be acting contrary to our will?
I would never want to be in the position of explaining to a pre-teen that our own government advised against starting an adoption due to corruption and I ignored it only to learn some years later that her first mother had no choice in the placement and that losing her child had come close to destroying her life. It DOES happen - even in this country (think Baby Scoop Era). That scenario will turn the adoptees' lives upside down, not to mention their adoptive parents'.
Posted by: Elizabeth (reunited adoptee & a-mama) at November 8, 2007 05:23 AMThis is indeed good news, and I hope it gives in-process families some sorely needed hope.
However, Susana's response which accuses the US govt of xenophobia and racism isn't helping anything. Please Susana, less conspiracy theories and conjecture. There are enough concrete problems to work through without throwing inflammatory (and arguable) accusations out there. You do so much good work for the adoption community, and I understand emotions are high right now. But please, tone down the rhetoric a little.
Thank you for sharing this information. As much as I would like to be excited I, too, remain guarded until this is announced as law.
I read Susana's remarks and am curious if we should all contact John Lowell and the DOS to ensure that our country will not, as she is afraid, insist that Guatemala adhere to the January 1, 2008, deadline as issued by President Berger?
Obviously those of us still in process (our case is going on a year and we are now back in PGN awaiting an update) are hoping that Guatemala and the US DOS stand by their original commitment of grandfathering in cases already in process (although there does not seem to be a definitive definition of this term). Even with that said, the US Embassy has already issued warnings of future changes that will be implemented (i.e. As of January 1, 2008, the pink slip will be issued by the PGN rather than the US Embassy) so now the question is "will the process remain as it is today, on the US side of things, until the new date of April 1 or 30 - or whatever it may end up being – or are the changes that we have already been warned about take effect regardless?".
I believe that all of our efforts have made a difference but agree that we should continue to voice our concerns about the US supporting each of us in bringing home the children that we already love and consider part of our families.
Keeping each of the families currently awaiting their children in our prayers and also keeping those children of the future in our prayers as well as they, too, are deserving of a future filled with love and happiness.
Posted by: CEF at November 8, 2007 09:43 AMI am here in Guatemala now with my daughter. On the way to the Embassy our translater told of the new news, we were so happy. As we sat waiting our turn I looked around at all the proud parents holding their bundles of joy,and how happy they looked. I almost started crying to think of all the children that would be left behind if things don't change. Sounds like good news for now but we know how fast things can change. I also am glad someone is reconsidering singles being able to adopt. My daughter has not a husband as of yet but she has the support of alot of family and friends that works out very well.We still will continue to pray for all in process and future cases.
Posted by: Cindy at November 8, 2007 11:48 AMI completely agree agencies should absolutely NOT be giving out referrals now and people should absolutely NOT be accepting them. This is not what I see in the news of what John Lowell is saying. it says he does not support the delay of the law to April. I would like clarification from John Lowell as to why he is making this statement. Personally I think that Guatemala is in NO WAY ready to implement the Hague at this time. I think it is ridiculous that they should try and implement something that is going to FAIL MISERABLY. They have nothing in place. IF the USCIS and DOS would stop giving out I600A's for new referrals this would solve some of the issues and allow Guatemala to get caught up and sign off on current cases now wouldnt it. Let Gautemala get their act together in their time so that the law will actually do what it is supposed to do not just some crap written on paper to appease the US and UNICEF and Casa Alianza and whoever else is pushing for something that is being set up to fail because they have absolutely nothing in place to suppport the law. Seriously use your HEAD people. Its not rocket science.
Posted by: Karen at November 8, 2007 01:36 PMLet's no to forget that beside the case of women that may have been compensated to relinquish a new born ( horrific practice ) there are a lot of kids in the orphanages declared abandoned and up for adoption. My wife ( which is Guatemalan ) and I have just had a referral for a four years old boy, found on the street of Guatemala City in 2006 and up for adoption in 2007. We visited him last month and our power of attorney was registred last week. We hope every think goes well. I can not think of any unethical behavior about the adoption of older kids living in an orphanage. DO NOT CLOSE THE DOOR TO THE INTERNATIONAL ADOPTIONS.
Posted by: vincenzo at November 11, 2007 09:29 AM