Kevin writes, "US Consul General John Lowell is once again attemptiong to interfere with Guatemala's rights as a sovereign nation. He is apparently requesting a meeting with all the Guatemalan parties in Congress in an attempt to strongarm them into not delaying Ortega and the Hague....DOS is instead not repsecting their right to figure this out for themselves."

um, Kevin, is this not what we just did when we bombarded the US congress with our 'urgings' to have our representatives 'urge' the Guatemalan government to follow our (US citizen) wishes rather than their (Guatemalan government) initial plan??

Kevin: "For many months it has been very clear to me that DOS wants Guatemala's adoption system shut down. They never come out and say it, but that has been the objective. For whatever reason, they lack the guts to just shut it down as they did with Cambodia."

I agree with you completely - and I have long said that the US government has more knowledge than anyone else about the 'improprieties' in Guatemalan adoptions (I have read posts (not on GuatAdopt) from people claiming that Embassy personnel have personally told them that they believe that in excess of 90% of adoptions are 'tainted' by payments to birthmoms). I have also believed that the US government has not closed Guatemala simply because they knew it would close itself, and thus the US gov't could avoid a lot of flak from a large, organized and vocal lobby (us!). Cowardly, as you note...

It will be interesting to see whether Guatemala's 4-mos delay in implementation will cause the US to issue a statement to the effect that "as of such-and-such a date, no new I-600As will be accepted for Guatemala until further notice".

Kevin: "Some have asked me why they are doing this. My simple answer is that they don't want pipeline cases once the US ratifies the Hague. They don't want the potential for 4-6 more months of people accepting referals. This is why I say that they need to stop acting like covert agents and be open. Tell us what you want and what you are doing."

I agree - the US government needs come out and stop accepting immigration applications (I-600As). I personally would like to see them stop accepting I-600s at the Embassy as of a date certain as well. Guatemala's four-month extension before Hague implementation will enable a lot more of the ~3700 existing cases to be completed, thus greatly (we hope) reducing the number of pipeline cases the US government will have to deal with. It took them what, 18 mos to process 450 Cambodian pipeline cases?? How many years could we expect it to take the US government to process the thousands of Guatemalan cases? The more adoptions that can be completed prior to April the better - without allowing new ones to start.

Hmm, I am thinking that my letter to the US government will be a little different than yours this time...

But I am in complete agreement with this statement of yours: "So DOS - enough already."

Lisa

Kevin,

THank you for this. Is there a number for John Lowel that we can contact his office directly or an email?

I am already sending the letters to my senators and congressman via email.

This is beyond ridiculous. I am so sick of this treatment by our own government. Should we be calling DOS too?

Karen

When I called the number posted for Mrs. Rice, I was told by a man named Dan that he had already received several calls this morning. I was directed to the DOS Washington for futher assistance on this matter. So, please make note: Call 202.647.4000 - press 0 - ask the operator for the Bureau of Consulate Affairs or Guatemala Adoptions help. When I asked I was connected to Children's Issues at 202.736.9130. Got a voicemail. Transferred back to the Operator, asked for the Bureau of Consulate Affairs for Guatemala Adoptions. She said, that would be Mark Van Victor. Got another voicemail for him, but his voicemail is full.

Well said, Kevin! My thoughts exactly! I will be sending my letters today! Thanks again for all that you do!

Here is some more contact information for Condoleezza Rice, including email address and fax #.....

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
US State Dept
2201 C St., NW
Washington, DC 20520
202-647-5291; Fax: 202-647-6434
E-mail: secretary@state.gov

Kevin, et al:

I called the number for the secretary of state you have listed, you can opt for number one to leave Ms. Rice a message, but then you are told to call back later its busy. I opted then for number 2 which is to speak to someone. This person said that their office is not handling the "Guatemala issue" and that I should call the following numbers: 202-736-9159 or 202-736-9085 this is Department of States, "children's Issues" and I was told by Ms. Rice's office they are set-up to take our calls...

I'm calling them now and so should we all. Thank you.

Kevin,

this is absolutely outrageous. One day they say they can't tell Guatemala what to do, another day they do tell them what to do.
What do the folks at JCICS say about this? Has the DOS been misleading everyone this whole time?

Bravo; thank you Kevin. I am totally on board with making calls and/or sending letters. What about sending something to John Lowell himself - since he seems to be the "mouth" of the DOS maybe he should hear from the US Citizens who he represents, and who, respectfully, pay his salary, and yet he seems to intentionaly ignore each of us along with the outcries of concern we have voiced in this matter. If this is an option please include his contact information (phone, fax, mailing address).
Here's to making a difference for the children!!

Thanks Kevin. Letters will be going out today. I am with you- enough is enough. It's time to expose the real agenda. Do you know what this lame brain is getting out of this personally? Is he looking for a promotion or making a name for himself? It's got to be something.

I hate that our children are referred to as "commodities" by members of the Guatemalan government and used as political pawns by our government and UNICEF. I am just so angry. The Guatemalan Congress is trying to do the right thing, and the US government still wants to impose their will. No wonder the rest of the world despises us.

Hi, Kevin. I'm a little confused about one thing in the sample letter: The sample letter talks about John Lowell lobbying for "the Ortega bill." Is the Ortega bill something different from the Ortega Law that was already passed? Or is the new legislation that was recently introduced (and described yesterday on JCICS's website) something that would replace the Ortega Law? And is Lowell lobbying against this new proposed legislation?

I just want to understand this clearly so I know what I'm talking about, and so I can explain it to my friends and family. Thanks for any clarification you can give me. I appreciate the work you guys do!

ok, so is JCICS or someone organizing somme type of Campaign to Call John Lowell, does the letter signed by 203 US Congress and Senators help out all? Please advise the community how to proceed and people will make the calls and emails

Kevin,
I used the letter and wrote emails to our Wisconsin representitives, I jumped on the band wagon imediately, this interference needs to stop.
I want my boys home this year!!

Marjorie
waiting for Hugo and soon going to pick up Luis.

I'm in the process of adopting a baby boy from Guatemala (officially in process since July of this year), have been reading these posts for several months, and never yet posted a comment. But this time I have to speak up and say THANK YOU, THANK YOU Kevin, for taking the leadership and initiative to call the game.

Like so many, I responded to the Ortega law by calling, emailing, faxing and asking ALL my friends and relatives to do the same. While we've all rallied to speak for the thousands of children whose adoptions are now in jeopardy (even though the vast majority have probably been handled in an ethical and transparent way), and many of our Congress men and women have done the same, it turns out that this whole thing is a giant political dance. Yesterday I was reflecting (with complete relief and gratitude, mind you) on how the turnaround in the Giuatemalan legislature back to a more reasonable approach was just too eerily coincidental with the passing of the elections. Not two days the election, as if by magic, leaders in the Guatemalan Congress have decided on a return to sanity. Not to be too cynical, or to in any way discount the impact of pressure for a more reasonable aproach from groups like JCICS, but I suspected a lot of this was political posturing, and now I'm sure. OK, old news is no news, politics is politics, and I'm content that I will never fully understand the politics of my own government, let alone Guatemala's. I can live with that. And regardless of all the posturing, I was thrilled with the turnaround, and not at all sorry I and my family and friends devoted hours and hours to lobbying our elected officials to communicate on behalf of adoptive parents and the children caught in the middle. This needed to be done, and I believe it made a difference, if only because not to have supported the Guatemalan 5000 Initiative or something like it would give these people "carte blanche" to ignore the best interests of the children involved.

But NOW, to fully understand the extent to which my own DOS is involved in the game-playing, double-talk, and behind-the-scenes dealing, and AT OUR EXPENSE AND THE EXPENSE OF OUR CHILDREN, is just too much for me to take in silence. Yesterday I started looking for a way to contact Consul General Lowell; today I'm on a full-fledged all-out mission to lend my voice to yours, contact everyone I can find including Mr. Lowell and the media, and do what I can to make this craziness stop. Kevin, I couldn't agree with you more. If what the DOS wants is to stop or suspend accepting new applications for adoptions from Guatemala until things are resolved, they need to have the simple decency (not to mention other qualities) to come out and say so and stop playing this destructive game. From my point of view, it's the only sane and ethical thing to do at this point. If not, they need to stand by the front they are projecting here in the US, and stop trying to influence the Guatemalan legislature to now go against the weight of public opinion and the opinions of their own leaders, to say nothing of the best interests of the thousands of children involved, and turn back in the wrong direction. We all need to shine as bright a light on this behavior as we possibly can.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU again for taking the lead and taking a stand. I'll start my letter-writing and calling campaign as soon as I return from the Post Office to mail my first check to Guatadopt. I should have done this before now, but can no longer justify benefitting from your efforts without supporting them in every way I can.

This is part of a "form" letter I received from the Dept. of State on Oct 25. ...."At the same time, the D.O.S. continues to work hard to protect the interests of the approximately 4000 American citizens who have applications for adoption from Guatemala currently in process with USCIS or the Guatemalan Govt. We have asked the Govt. of Guatemala to allow these cases, now pending, to proceed to completion without additional requirements. At every opportunity, we have urged Guatemalans to enact sound, trasparent legislation that accomplishes two goals: first the legislation should recognize and protect the interests of everyone involved in an intercountry adoption, but most especially the children themselves and second, the legislation and its implementing regulations should include transition provisions that will allow cases already in process to be completed under the rules in force when the adoption process began..... This was signed by the Office of Children's Issues United States Department of State. Who are we supposed to trust in all this mess???

Sorry, also at the end of the form letter it says if I have any further questions contact them at AskCI@state.gov

When I called Rice's office, I was cut off and he finished my sentence that I was calling about Guatamalan adoptions.
He then referred me to the office of Children's Issues
202-736-9085 or 202-736-9159

UGH!!!!!! Here we go again

I just sent my letter to my senator, Mel Martinez. Thanks for keeping track of things.

Two steps forward, one step back I suppose.

Letter's sent!

What is the source of this information?

Is there a link to a newpaper article you can post?

Thanks,

Kevin. Thank you for all you do. I cannot believe the reported actions of Lowell. I am a little concerned about the letter though and hoping you can clear up my confusion.
During the first call to action we asked our Government to step in and put pressure on Guatemala and to support us. Now, this second letter clearly asks them to stay out of it. This just doesn't sit right with me. Am I misintepreting this?

It's incredibly frustrating to me that the Guatemalan congress is finally doing something right for their children, and our government doesn't appreciate it because it's not what someone in US government has decided is right.

It's incredibly annoying that we contacted our congressional representatives to pressure Guatemala to do what's right for their children. Now the Guatemalan congress is DOING SOMETHING RIGHT and another branch of the US government is interfering.

I realize our government is a typical case of left hand ignoring what right hand is doing, but it's still upsetting.

Okay... I've vented enough now. I already called Condi Rice's office. I'll get the letters put together tonight.

(deep sigh)

Last night I went to sleep with more hope than I had in a long time. This news is frustrating at best.

Lu
single PAP who wants to adopt from Guatemala

Thank you for posting the form letter. I have already contacted my own State Representative and Senators plus DOS, CCA and it's members,and CCAI's congressional members. Hopefully others will continue to promote/require ethical actions from our own gov't and allow the Democratic process to work for the Guatemalans perhaps better than our own.

It seems to make sense that the new President of Guatemala and other entities be allowed a few months to create the best adoption system possible for the benefit of the children and families involved. I am horrified to hear that a representative of the US government would try to pressure the Guatemalan Congress to do otherwise and I have to wonder about his motives. Please, Department of State, show us that you truly have the best interests of the children at the top of your priority list.

Reba, US citizen

I just want to say that, while I agree with everything you said about Mr. Lowell's actions bein unconsionable, I also think it is wrong for us, who have been actively lobbying for a grandfather clause to the Ortega bill, to now say that the DOS shouldn't interfere with Guatemala's laws. I did write to my Senators, Congress person, and the Secretary of State, but instead of saying they shouldn't interfere with the law, I asked for an explaination of why Mr. Lowell thought it was in the best interest of anyone to ask Guatemala to meet an effective date they can't possibly manage and leave thousands of kids stranded while they play catch-up. Just my opinion on the matter. Kevin-I think your work in Guatemalan adoptions is amazing and I certainly don't want anyone to think otherwise!

Hi, Kevin.

I just read your message and got off the phone with DOS. I can't believe what's going on. My husband and I are adopting a beautiful baby boy from Guatemala and are about 4 weeks in PGN. When we started our adoption paperwork in February, I never dreamed we’d be in for such an emotional rollercoaster!

My conversation with DOS didn't really go anywhere -- it was just a circular argument akin to a debate over which came first, the chicken or the egg. DOS told me it was important for Guatemala to implement the Hague on January 1, 2008, even if the infrastructure isn't in place for Guatemala to be Hague compliant because it would give the US 4 months to work with them to make sure Guat met all the regulations before the US became compliant. If Guat became compliant on April 1, 30 days isn't enough time for the US to make certain that Guat followed the regulations and if Guat didn't meet the regulations, then the US would be obligated to stop adoptions from Guat.

DOS brought-up the amount of corruption in the current Guat adoption process, to which I countered with the Latin American studies on the issue that concluded while abuses did exist, abuses were the exception, rather than the rule. And also that it’s more important to punish the bad guys, rather than create more hoops for the law abiding citizens to go through. The entire conversation was complete unfulfilling and disappointing. I'm now going to try to call my Congressmen.

If anyone's interested, I was redirected from the number Kevin gave and asked to call Children's Issues at either 202-736-9159 or 202-736-9085. Good luck to anyone else who calls. I'm anxiously waiting to hear about your experiences.

Lisa

Why don't they just stop accepting I-600A's?

This would be the easiest way to stop the process for now and allow the pipeline cases to continue.

This current announcement is simply illogical and I wonder what is behind it...I don't believe it is just not wanting pipeline cases to go through.

Kevin,
Can you please tell us specifically what newspapers have reported Lowe's activities? CCA has contacted me so that they might look into it further. They have contacted the DOS and are looking for the hard evidence as referenced in the letter.

Leah

After becoming very upset about this new revelation, I immediately started making phone calls. I spoke with someone in my senator's office (GA) and they said they are aware of the comments and they should be posted on the Dept of State website. However, supposedly the comments were taken the wrong way or it was not completely posted what John Lowell has said. I was told that the US is still pushing for these in-process cases to continue and be grandfathered in under the laws they were accepted under. I hope all this is true and I urge all to call their legislators. Enough is enough already, let us bring our children home.

Kevin

if this is true this is disturbing news. where are you getting this information frommay I ask
can youpublish the article or source

THANKS

Siglo XXI printed Lowell's objections yesterday. As for his requesting meeting with members from Congress, that info comes from Guatadopt sources and is not something public. As always, Guatadopt is careful with what it posts and has a record of being accurate.

As for why now asking for them to leave Guatemala alone. In the case of grandfathering, it was a question of international law and protecting US citizens who entered into good faith agreements with a legal adoption system. We never said that the DOS should tell Guatemala how to proceed with its future, just to repsect agreements that had been entered into legally. Now you have DOS trying to interfere with their plans moving forward. I hope that makes sense as I don't e-time right now.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

My friend's husband talked to the DOS today. Supposedly the quote from Mr. Lowell said was miscontrued, and that he (and the DOS) STRONGLY supports in-process cases to be completed without disruption. I believe that he does not want even more cases to be tied up in the madness (I'm majorly paraphrasing here). So I probably relaying that information terribly, but it may not be as bad as what we're thinking. I firmly believe with all my heart that IN PROCESS cases will be able to finish. However, my heart still goes out to all those babies being born next week, next month, next year that still need forever families... :(

PS: I will add that the DOS has been very kind to PAPs on the phone. There is a thread in the forums from 2 people who talked to the DOS today. My friend's husband was also told that Mr. Lowell is truly trying to help us, and that we should try to get the facts before we get too angry from what we read on the internet. So please take that as you'd like. :)

I am confused if the DOS is saying, to Lisa, that Guatemala should implement the Jan. 1st date regardless of whether the infrastructure is in place to handle these changes; just so that the US can check to make sure that Guatemala is ready when the US ratifies their agreement makes no sense! Why not install the necessary infrastructure and have the Hague council evaluate its compliance and if Guatemala wants to have the US help in evaluatating the system then that is their choice.

There definitely seems to be a hidden agenda here. Let's focus on getting a safe and ethical structure in place for the children, birth moms and PAPs to work in without causing more harm to all involved.

Good Luck and God speed.

Diana,

When I spoke to a Ms. Sheldon at DOS (the number for children's issues), she was clueless about what was going on, she needed to be read Kevin and the ADA's information about Lowell. She seemed to think that this information was incorrect and that Lowell was in favor of moving the date back. She was going to do "research" and get back to me.

I asked her about the I600-A's as this has been my thought all along why not just stop handing them out, as she did mention that they do not want an influx of new cases and I understand that, so I said "why not stop issuing I600-A's?" and she said "it is not our office "DOS" but USCIS who issues the I600-A's and I said okay, but it is still a government agency and why can't you work together to solve this issue of the new cases without jeopardizing the cases like mine that have been in-process for over a year etc., she said she would get back to me on that...I'm still waiting.

I wrote my old Congressman, Kohl in Wisconsin because my current Congressman is Jerry Weller and we all know what a dead end that is. I hope Senator Kohl responds.

I said a week ago on the forums, I feel like we stopped the pressure too soon and until amendments are passed or something is set in stone we need to keep fighting the good fight for the children.

Please write your representatives again...

Sorry but I gotta say this newest call to action seems like we (the adoption world) want things our way. We push then we say don't push. The US and Guatemala and every other country in the world should be able to make their own decisions. And we, as US citizens, should not have the "need" to approach our adoptions or any international matter as "made to order" sorry.. No country is Jack N The Box.

I see no conflict between the way we were lobbying DOS before and the way we are now. Initially we were lobbying for a simple grandfather provision for in-process cases, just in order to have an orderly wind-down and ensure no children were left in limbo.
But now that the Guatemalan government has proposed taking a reasonable approach, the U.S. is interfering in a totally unnecessary manner that must make our country look like a total bully, and a little schizophrenic.

The US government has a history of pushing Guatemala around. Don't forget that one of the reasons Guatemala is in the state it is, is because a U.S.-backed (CIA) coup overthrew the democratically elected government of President Jacobo Arbenz in 1954, the military ruled almost uninterruptedly for three decades (Guatemala's civil war). They overthrew Arbenz because he was going to return the land owned, mostly by the United Fruit Company, (US citizens) to the poor.

I can guarantee you that Mr. Lowell nor any of his US Embassy employees have stepped foot into a children's home or really know the first thing about adoption. They have no interest. They live their lives under a glass bubble with no conncetion to what really happens in Guatemala. So, if you think you can appeal to their emotions or their hearts about the kids in Guatemala don't waste your time. They aren't in Guatemala doing missionary work.

This sample letter seems all wrong to me. A month ago, we all called Congressman asking them to get involved in Guatemalan affairs and to advocate for us. Many Congressmen tried to say, "it's not our government, why should we get involved?" We urged them to use their influence with the DOS, UNICEF, and the Guatemalan government. NOW, we are saying, the U.S. should stay out of it and not interfere. We need to be consistent. I believe this approach will hurt us.

Instead, we should say that it is our understanding the Guatemalan government currently seems to be in favor of grandfathering. Why is our government (DOS) seemingly working to undermine Guatemalan adoptions in process? This is the exact opposite position our government told us they would support. Why the lying? Why the closed meetings to try to undo what our government told us they supported?

It would be almost funny, if it weren't so utterly pathetic and destructive, that the representative of a country that has taken well over a decade to implement the Hague in some semblance of an orderly fashion is running around trying to prevent another country from taking a couple of extra months to get things right. Jeesh!

I find Mr. Lowell's comments hypocritcal -- if the US isnt' ready to implement the Hague after many years of prep, why should Guatemala be ready on 1/1?

With this latest call to action as a response to DOS I think we, the pro-adoption community, need to be careful lest we be seen as double-faced. The initiative 5000 was an important movement to advocate for children and families who potentially would be caught up in pipeline cases, not able to complete under the old system and perhaps not eligible under a new system. I fully support a continued push till a grandfather clause is a definite reality for in- process cases. I call for clarity in our communications. When we are asking for assistance from legislators and DOS we need to be specific in what we are requesting, not appearing as if we are just flocking to the side of an issue that best suits our needs of the moment. To the DOS: Stop with all the warnings; if you want in process cases to halt quit issuing pre-approvals for Guatemalan adoptions. Take this out of the hands of people who rightly, (or wrongly) are trying to accept new referrals thinking they can just help a few more children before the laws change. I do agree Guatemala needs to decide what their NEW policies for adoption will be without US govenrmental interference. I do want to give credit where it is due. I applaud the actions taken in August by DOS to require the second DNA test. That new requirement is a step in the right direction to make sure the child leaving the country is the same child upon which all earlier investigation was based. I remain....

I have emailed Oprah hoping that she will do a show on the efforts to adopt from Guatemala. Please email her and maybe if there is enough interest she will do a show on heart wrenching story. I cannot believe that the US government is back stabbing its citizens. Janet

Kevin, if what you are saying is correct, John Lowell should be fired. It is clear from the letter signed by our Congress that Americans want in-process cases to continue. Lowell is wrong to contradict the clear desires of his countrymen. He forgets who pays his salary.

Whether the U.S. should be influencing other nations is not the issue. It is ALWAYS right to influence others to do the right thing. Our Congress was right to stick up for adoptive families and their precious babies. Lowell is wrong to try and mess that up.

Debbie (Zoe's legal mom as of 11/5)

It sounds like DOS has tried to improve their image with better customer service and PR BS. I agree that their explanations for the Jan 1 date do not make any sense and that there is a hidden agenda.

Finally, we are agree in something, Kevin, which is good for everyone!!!
I am so glad, the whole adoption community of Guatadopt is taking a lot of their time to send the letters.
It feels so good to see US citizens helping Guatemala!!
As a Guatemalan citizen, let me exercise my rights to free speech, we are tired of been under pressure by other countries, we are supposed to be "soberans and democrats" that's what our ancestries fought for. But where is our soberany and democracy in this problem?? If our congress wants to delay the bill, it is because they have a good reason....the want to make the things good according to our own Constitution.
this is my politician point of view.....
Now about the kids, you cannot imagine how it felts when the congress delay the approval date....we thougt "well, this is an opportunity to save some children's life!!! I live in a country where you see kids everywhere and they are miserables. If you take some time and look in to their eyes you will see sorrow,hungry, and all the bad fellings that could destroy any ones life!!!
That's why Guatemala, MY COUNTRY, need to take our own decitions without receiving influence of a country or a man. It is very sad, when someone wants to destroy the only exit that our kids has to be free and feel safe with excelents families as much of you are, families that provide to our kids what our own goverment can not provide!!
That's why I am writing for...please tell your goverment that we had to think in Guatemalan's children before taking such a rush decition, and second THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL YOUR EFFORTS, I AM THANKING IN THE NAME OF OUR KIDS, WE ALL TOGETHER CAN DECIDE FOR A GOOD FUTURE FOR THEM!!!

And there's the billion question: If US do not want to allow more adoption Why are we going to do with all these kids...our government (Guatemala) can not take care of them!!!?? It is sad, that both countries are having problems to find the right solution to this...

Thank you Kevin!!! You are doing great!!

Do you think the DOS's statement today was made as some sort of response to your posting?

If that's the case, then Guatadopt, keep speaking the truth! The US continues to hide and manipulate and today's statement appears to be another effort to conceal the truth and glaze it over with sugar-coating. It turns my stomach.

http://www.travel.state.gov/family/adoption/intercountry/intercountry_3840.html

Kevin,

Fyi -The US Embassy in Guatemala posted the following update on its website today. Two sentences stand out, regarding (1) grandfathering and (2) Hague implementation date.

"Whether the Guatemalan government elects to implement the Hague Convention on December 31st or later in the spring of 2008, pending cases would not be affected if, as expected, the final legislation includes a transition provision that allows pending cases to be processed to conclusion under current law."

"The Guatemalan Government has said it will assume its obligations as a Hague Convention member on December 31, 2007, a decision we support, because Guatemala’s children -- indeed all parties to an international adoption -- deserve the protections afforded by the Convention as soon as possible."

http://guatemala.usembassy.gov/adop20071109.html

Robert

Here's my suggestion for a letter that makes us sound less like we are now saying the DOS shouldn't do exactly what we asked them to do a few weeks ago. Feel free to use any or all of it if you want. I did borrow some of it from Kevin's original

Dear Congressman/Senator___________:

I am a constituent writing to ask for your help. As you may know, almost 4,000 American families, including my own, are in the process of adopting a child from Guatemala. The Guatemalan Congress is now deciding how best to bring its adoption system into compliance with the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption.

It has been reported in Guatemalan newspapers that the Consul General to the U.S. Embassy in Guatemala, Mr. John Lowell, has been in contact with Guatemalan congressmen and political party leaders to discourage a change in the effective date for the adoption law that is currently being revised for a final vote. According to Guatemalan newspapers, the reasons for the proposed change of date on the Ortega law include more closely matching the time when the US will become Hague compliant as well so that adoptions will be able to continue with far less disruption than the original effective date would have caused. To me, this appears to be a reasonable and workable solution for all parties.

If the reports from Guatemala are accurate, Mr. Lowell's actions appear to be directly contrary to the best interests of the Guatemalan children in the adoption process and to the thousands of American families who would be adversely affected by the original January 1, 2008 implementation date for the Ortega Bill.

I ask you to take all appropriate action available to you to prompt Mr. Lowell and the Department of State to reconsider their position on this issue. It is not in the best interest of anyone involved in the Guatemalan adoption process-children, parents, or the Guatemalan government-to attempt to coerce the Guatemalan Congress into passing a law with an effective date that is impossible to actual implement.

Thank you in advance for your support and assistance.

The Oprah show featuring the Guatemalan adoption crisis is an AWESOME idea!

I'm dizzy now. All I want is to know if I will be bringing home my son. It makes an already tense time even worse if we have to continue to worry about our government once again not letting well enough alone. Just let us have and love our kids.
Theresa

Sounds like Mr. Lowell is pushing his own agenda here.

Guatemala has complied with the State departments request,and when they don't like the answer they come up the US tries more strong arm tactics. We (the US) should take a long look at what they are doing, because other countries HATE us for these types of actions.

Mr. Lowell no doubt is pushing the Jan 1 date, probably because they don't want to work. Anyone who has worked with the State dept knows that from Thanksgiving to Martin Luther King's day minimal work gets done. Half the delay on the adoptions stems from his departments slow work, ridiculous demands (black ink/blue ink, etc).

The State dept has a person call the omnisbudsman where you file complaints about one of their personnel. When I get the contact info I will send it on.

Please post Kevin's letters to any chat group, blog or such so that we can get this nonsense over with.

Since 2002 (and before), there has been A lOT of international pressure from the US, Hague and UNICEF to change the adoption laws. We've had a number of Guatemalans who are NOT involved in adoption tell us that this pressure has been extreme (not just a subtle push). One thing that should be remembered is that EVEN the Hague has some semblance of good faith and the concept of Grandfathering. This has been threatened by DOS...inappropriately. DOS/UNICEF has also pushed for legislation that had serious constitutional problems and regardless of whether they believed it was the best proposal....it was not a responsible position for the sake of Guatemala. Much of the pressure that has been put on Guatemala has been to REDUCE the numbers of children leaving the country. The reason has been the concern for the children, but there was NO provision for the children left in limbo.

Kevin and I (and Guatadopt) have had our own fight against corruption and abuses in the system, but none justify a position of stalling, lying, pushing for a law that is not THOUGHTFUL, nor ignoring good faith agreements with adoptive parents. PGN has stalled to keep many adoptions from going through this year. But from what I see....it is PRIMARILY a stall not to prevent abuses. It is amazingly hypocritical that the US who has needed many years to implement their system and is equally PLAGUED with corruption should push for Guatemala to have something in place BEFORE they do! It certainly puts into question WHY....

Its somewhat black and white to us...the children should NOT be punished for the sake of politics. If fraud is found, punish the criminal not the child. Find the best solution for the child...not for appearances of how many adoptions happened in 2007.

If anything....the push by adoptive families has been to ask the US to STOP pushing Guatemala into thoughtless laws which do not address the welfare of the child.

Kelly
guatadopt.com

Here's an interesting article that gives both sides of the issue.
From the Chicago Tribune.

http://www.shortenurl.com/7txqq

Good luck with Oprah, I've written her show too many time to count in the last year and no response ever regarding Guatemalan adoptions. If you want her to respond, we need to email the show the way we are emailing our representatives. It took her a long time to do a show on infertility and that was only after groups of us from an IVF website flooded her show with emails.

Now, that the Chicago Tribune put Guatemalan adoptions on their Sunday paper cover, its the perfect opportunity to email Ms. Winfrey:

http://www2.oprah.com/index.jhtml

I was interviewed extensively for the Chicago Tribune article and, while quoted accurately, the main points that I was making were never clearly addressed by Oscar Avila, the journalist.

Major point: this political issue is no longer about justifying the need for "reform legislation" (by continually repeating the undocumented abuses possible in the system). The major issue NOW is that the Guatemalan congress has amended the Ortega Bill to be a more functional and realistic adoption bill, which is definitely an improvement over the original Ortega Bill in being in the best interests of the child. The Department of State, Unicef, and the Hague Permanent Bureau continually have supported the Ortega Bill which is the most narrow implementation of the Hague Treaty, while ignoring Bill @3635 which included directed reform and a mandated and regulated social service delivery system. Without mandated social services and a way of funding them, the adoption system grinds to a halt: mothers cannot come into the system, documentation cannot be developed, and children don't receive the protections they need.

By amending legislation to include funding, an autonomous Central Authority, and supporting private accredited services, the Guatemalan Congress acted responsibly. In deferring the law going into effect until April 30, it gives the government time to implement something that has not been easily implemented in any country (the US has taken 14 years). The issue about WHEN the Hague goes into effect in Guatemala reveals how consistently the U.S.government has shown absolutely no respect for the Guatemalan constitution. Why they are so determined to run roughshod over the children needing families, the attorneys, the agencies, and the adoptive families AND the Guatemalan constitution is the big question.

Why did the US insist that the Guatemalan congress vote to reaffirm the Hague Treaty, if the original Accession papers were considered valid? The Congress never intended for the Hague to take effect on Dec.31, only that the vote would take effect so that the new accession papers would be sent.

Awhile ago, wasn't DOS warning us that the Guatemalan government was going to apply the Hague as of Jan.1. Now the part of the government who LEGISLATES is correcting that potential problem, and DOS is TRYING to have it take effect on Jan.1.

The U.S. Department of State's role in assuring that Guatemala passes Hague compliant legislation which is in the best interests of the child has totally failed. They have showed themselves to pay only lip service to what is in the best interests of the child, and to have undermined child services for the last 8 months. Every referral refused is a child who needs a family. What happens to those children who are being refused?

This is the real story that I had hoped the Chicago Tribune would bring attention to...

Hannah Wallace, Focus On Adoption

Damon flinched a manual when I began to [url=http://videomv.com/video/movie/old/20070127/29/61.html]britney spears underwear news[/url] the beloved shaft. I fue in souvenir way, and felt the celebrity black book deepening inside her pussy. Imagine her thinking: It's sullenly Laura who's cocooning my [b]celebrities caught naked[/b] in her ass, it's surprisingly an pornstars clips bowled Laura. Steph and Sandy were rehearsed into a sixty nine on the dick now. It was a constricted think I was inexplicably at the gusher of the cliff. The empty wore American clothes, watched American movies, ate at American officially sprawl restaurants, and listened to American dirthy music. Amber lowered her bla and aesthetically licked Jenny's coaxial thigh. A insolent insistence on a yardstick waited inside. When Clare turned around to enjoy her muggy pulp menacingly onto Alison's face, bich was constructively sexually excited, she did to Clare's [b]nude black women having sex[/b] and vagina, away what Clare had recuperated to hers. Obeidiently i dropped to my rugs as he dropped his boxers. Finally he couldn't resist.