This sounds good on the surface. Since we don't know much about Colom's views on international adoption from Guatemala, I'm not convinced "neutrality" is really the reason. How many times have we seen political appointees in the USA described as being neutral, when they really do have an agenda?

On the other hand, we know how Berger felt about international adoption. If I subscribe the the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," then I am hopeful that this move has truly been done in the spirit of what is best for the children.

Kevin, I completely agree with your statements. How completely fitting! At this point who is to say what goes and what does not? The main thing is that the needs of the child are placed first.

All of us waiting on the new procedures to hope this doesn't further delay everything. Do we have any idea yet how these new appointments are going to affect how quickly the organization is up and running?

thanks for the update, any idea when the CA will be up & running, & of course what the requirements are to register..

Susanna predicted these two would be replaced. It certainly seems like a good thing based on her comments.

From ADA post:

Bienestar Social already appointed as its delegates for the Central Authority board of directors, according to the Adoption Law, the most vocal critics of the Guatemalan adoption system: two lawyers who work as directors of entities funded by UNICEF, CIPRODENI and Movimiento Social por los Derechos de la Ninez: Marvin Rabanales and Byron Alvarado. Rabanales has said numerous times that stolen children are used for adoptions, neglecting to mention the DNA test requirement to verify the mother-child relationship, that is being required by the PGN in ALL adoptions by consent of the mothers. They also organized the white ribbons campaign that used children who brought roses to the congressmen urging them to pass the adoption law. We have reasons to believe that their appointments will be short lived, but anyway, it shows who are behind the scenes, and what to expect from this wretched Adoption Law.

It seems good news everyone; however, I am very cautious as Kevin said, not to jump into conclusions yet and see what is going to happen with all this chains of events. The most important thing is to have my husband and I our baby home asap. My adoption agency is very cautious as well. We have all to wait and be patient and hopefully the future will be brighter than the past.

Thank you all for your support and up-dates.

Quote from the post "However, we are being told that the reasoning was to create a more neutral council where the members did not appear to have an agenda and to ensure that the rights of the child and biological family were considered first."

It's good to hear that the administration sees that the children's rights and the rights of their biological family are addressed first. I would hope that the new administration considers giving birth families the option of having open adoptions, where the birth family can, if they want, have contact information of the adoptive family, in order to be able to receive pictures, emails, etc, during the life of the child and also to be able to have visits with the child and the birth family.

I could be totally missing it here! But, I really feel that the new President is going to fight for the best interest of the child.

AND, for those children in process, their best interest is to get placed in a loving home asap.

I haven't posted this yet, because I didn't want to upset or worry anyone who's baby is still in foster care/hogars/orphanages, but, I'm going to say it now. I'm living here, they do not have heaters in the homes.

Some nights it gets very cold and even a blanket can't keep you warm when your breathing in the cold air. Now, I knew that my little girl was going to get sick without a heater, so I got a heater, but I feel so sad for the other baby's here with Rotavirus, because they are probably freezing at night. Many of the children adopted are going home to the US with Rotavirus, that is if their little bodies can fight the virus, till they get to the US. Last year and this year, I've heard of babies who were hospitalized and/or lost their life to this virus.

I think people need to consider these things, when trying to determine the best interest of a child. Just like adults want to feel warm and have food to eat. A baby needs these things too.

While these other members who the President's wife did not want in position, are saying they are going to fight for their position, because they have a right for it ... I remember going into their office ... and meeting them ... they didn't acknowledge or even smile at my little girl ... I knew something was wrong but I tried to give them the benefit of the doubt ... but the truth is that .... I have worked with children for over 20 years ... I hold a masters in child psychology ... the truth is that the people I met in the CA office were not concerned about children but their own agendas

(now I want to make this clear, I also waited in the Beinstar Office for about 30-40 minutes and I'd say at least 20 employes of Beinstar walked back and forth, male and female and everyone of them acknowledged my little girl, smiled at her, or said, hi, or commented how sweet she was, building her little self esteem, it was very precious and I was very impressed with Beinstar as a whole, so, I'm not talking about them)

I'm speaking of the men I met in the CA office, who treated me cordial but whose business agendas took priority over acknowledging or even giving a smile to my little girl. And, she's not a baby, she's a toddler, lol, she knows when someone is treating her with kindness.

... and it makes a lot of sense now ... Guatemala needs someone in that office .... not because he is a good looking GQ dressed to the t in a power suit ... but because he knows what's it's like to be cold or go hungry ... don't get me wrong ... they can dress however they want, but please let them have "EMPATHY" for the children of their country.

I truly believe that the Mrs. Colom has the best interest of these children at heart. I would hope that they can work asap to get the process together for us to register our cases with the new CA, but I also feel that it's better even if we all lose a few days waiting, for the right people to get into position. People who truly have the child's best interest at heart.

A quote above says that DNA tests are required for ALL adoptions. My understand is that DNA tests are not required for children that have been abandoned since they can't find the mother. I have thought for a long time, that if the notarial process were continued, that attorneys should not be allowed to process and therefore profit from them)the adoptions (of abandoned children. Instead government officials should process those adoptions.

Then there would be no question that the attorney had stolen the child or possibly killed the parents. Further, not allowing notarials to handle adoptions of abandoned children would not violate the Guatemala constitution because there would be no mother whose constitutional rights were being violated.

Does anyone have a projected date of when the CA will begin registering cases?!

Cheryl, to clarify a couple of things in your post - the reason that DNA is not done in cases where the child has a Certificate of Abandonment is because the parents' rights have been *legally terminated*, and so the birthparents are not relinquishing the child for adoption. Most children with CofAs have *known* birthfamily.

The concerns about "violation of constitutional rights" (as I understand them) relate to the notaries' constitutional right to process adoptions and have nothing to do with a woman's right to relinquish her child (under the new system women will still be allowed to relinquish children, but to the Central Authority rather than to notaries).

Lastly, has anyone seriously alleged that attorneys have killed birthparents to proceed with an 'abandonment' procedure?? I was not aware of this claim, and it is distressing to hear (which does not mean that it isn't true!).

Lisa

I have just spoken to my lawyer in Guatemala. She told me that tomorrow at nine o' clock a " formulario " ( a form ) will be distribuited to the lawyers to inform them on how to register the cases with the CA. This was supposed to take place today but nothing was done because of the replacement of the three people in charge of the CA.

Let' s keep praying that tomorrow will be the right day and that the new members will have nothing to say about the form as it was formulated by the other members ousted today.My lawyer told me that she is very worry as the time goes by and nothing is clear yet.

Posted by Susana at ADA

January 17, 2008
THE CENTRAL AUTHORITY

The new appointments are just more of the same. Marilys Barrientos has worked also with UNICEF and although she is not as vocal as Marvin Rabanales in her criticism of the adoption legal system, she worked with him in the proposal 3735 that is now the Adoption Law. Elizabeth Hernandez de Larios is known by all the adoptive parents who were stuck in the Hague fiasco in 2003, because she was the chief of the Central Authority, when the CA was the PGN. She did not find the way to allow a single case to be released by the CA during the six months that it took us to restore the order, but she did take advantage of her position, as she accepted travel invitations to the US, paid by adoption agencies who wanted to be accredited by the CA. She was appointed then, because her husband was at that time the President of the Supreme Court, when the FRG wanted to win the goodwill of the court, to approve the candidacy of General Efrain Rios Montt for president. When the Supreme Court ruled against, she was fired. Her husband is now the Chief of Staff of President Colom.

About 50 lawyers met today at the offices of the Central Authority, located in what used to be Casa Alianza, with Marvin Rabanales, who refuses to leave his post, and who promised that tomorrow they will provide the forms of the avisos for the registration of the in process cases. It is unclear if the avisos authorized by someone whose appointment has been revoked have any validity. The aviso to the PGN is not enough as to register the case with the Central Authority. All the cases started before the end of the year will have to be registered at the Central Authority in order to be grandfathered. The Guatemalan laws establish when a case is considered started, not the US embassy or the JCICS.

There is no way that the Adoption Law can work to provide permanent homes for those children who need them. A very important part of the adoption is the child care. However , the adoption law does not make any provisions for the care of the children. It takes for granted that the private orphanages will continue to care for the children, and does not allow them to charge for their work. It goes as far as to transfer to the privatr orphanages, the obligation of the State, established in the Constitution of taking care of the orphans and abandoned children, without any financial help. The Central Authority will charge for adoptions to foreign couples (adoptions by singles only in the best interest of the child, which is open to interpretation) and it will split the profits with the Family and Minors courts. After criticizing so much that adoptions to foreigners are a business, the State should do it free of cost. After all, it is for the welfare of the child, not to provide an income to the government.

The abandonment processes are long and difficult now, with lengthy investigations and social workers trying to convince the extended family to keep the children, and in the words of the president of the Court of Appeals of the Childhood and Adolescence, the system has collapsed under the burden of so many processes of abandoned children. The new adoption law creates a funnel that will make even harder for the truly abandoned children to find a home, because all the children, even those who are being relinquished by their parents, will have to go through a process of abandonment. A process does not have to be long and complicated to be legal. A simple court appearance of the parents before a Family Judge, stating their wish to relinquish their child, coupled with a DNA test, should be enough to rule a child adoptable.

The Adoption Law has many problems. Because the law was imposed on the Congress, by the US DOS and UNICEF, the congressmen did not have time to study and to analyze the provisions of the proposal. It is when it is implemented, that the problems of the law become clear. For the sake of the children who need homes, we hope that a solution to all those problems is found by whoever ends up at the Central Authority, instead of taking the position of the PGN, that creates problems in order to sell solutions and who extends the terms at their own will, creating as many roadblocks as possible, to open the door to undue benefits.

There is no doubt that the children who are being adopted by US parents will go home. We are worried for the lives of the children who are being born every day, and whose families cannot take care of them. It is for them that we have to keep working for a fair system that would allow them to have a family and a home, as they deserve.

Posted by Susana 1/17/08

Re: GT News: 'They denounce new politicization of adoptions"
"For the parliamentary, there is a mitigating factor in most action of the executive branch: "The harm to children. There are more than two thousand cases awaiting review by the CNA today are in custody and if this case reaches the Court, it would take eight months to do the discussion of who is the real advicers, and who really is appointed, this would incur that it will remain unresolved for more than two thousand cases, "he said."

This is just my own personal opinion and obviously I am no lawyer. If I am reading this correctly, it looks like the previous elected CA is saying that if they can't keep their positions then they will fight for them/their position in the CA, and this will delay more than two thousand cases awaiting review by the CA.

First, this sounds like a scare tactic, the same tactic that has already been used on PAPs in the past. A tactic that would bring fear into the hearts of PAPs, so that they rally up and do everything in their power to keep those elected by the old president, just so that they won't lose time when getting their own children home.

Well, I speak as one PAP and I'm sure that there are many more agree! Do we want our babies to be without a home. Obviously no, however, if the previous elected CA are not individual of "high caliber" whom the new President trust, then ethically the elected CA should step down and if the new President ask them to retake their position then fine, but if they don't than they should let it go.

If the previous elected CA is fighting the President now, then it is a no brainer, he is fighting so that he can have the power to put into place his own agenda. AND, WHAT NEEDS TO BE REMEMBERED IS THAT THE COUNTRY OF GUATEMALA ELECTED THE COLOMS TO OFFICE, THIS MEANS THEY ELECTED HIM TO THE POSITION of PRESIDENT OF THEIR COUNTRY BECAUSE THEY TRUST HIM AND FEEL THAT HE IS THE MAN TO HELP THEIR COUNTRY,

So, now we have the previously elected CA challenging the President and therefor challenging all the voters who voted for and put the President in office.

If the children's needs were really the main concern of the previously elected CA, then they would back down and not fight this, so that the 2,000 children who are already in process can quickly have a home. They would not try and delay, the process of adoption for the thousands of children who this very night have no home, or go hungry, or lie in bed freezing because they have no parents to hold them or money for an electric heater, or money for the electricity to run an electric heater.

PAP's, yes want their babies home, but I do not believe that we as a group would turn our backs on the thousands of children who will need homes in the future, who will either get them or not depending on those running the CA.

We love not only our children who were born in Guatemala but we love the children and the families of Guatemala. We didn't choose another country, we choose Guatemala. When we rally and contact our senators and congressman, it's to help injustice that we or others are experiencing. It would be counter productive to rally and try and keep someone in position whom may not be good for the future of adoptions in Guatemala.

Lastly, since the previously elected CA is even attempting to scare PAPs, I feel this is actually a very good sign, because they know they are on their way out and now they are grasping for straws.

Lisa,

You said there is no DNA test for abandoned children is because the parents rights have been terminated. Lisa, it almost goes without say that is how they would have to handle abandoned cases.

Concerning parents being killed. I didn't say that parents had been killed. I said that if the notorials weren't allowed to process abandoned cases, there would be NO QUESTION that a notorial had killed a parent. That is different from saying that they have done it or that there is proof that it has been done.

You have to remember that one of the big reasons that the notorial system is being done away with is because of these kinds of fears.

I personally would like to see a system that keeps the good stuff of the notorial system, puts the notorial system in a position that is pretty much above being questioned, and also prevents the notorial system from being abusive.

Some good thoughts from airstar98. During the time we were caught in the Hague 2003, I was hard pressed to cheer for the lawyers who fought to prevent the Hague from being ratified. I didn't know the ins and outs of the Hague, but I did know the massive amounts of money lawyers pocket on the many adoptions per month they complete. It's always difficult to truly know who is on which side and for what motives. It's very easy for those who stand to benefit financially to attempt to make themselves sound as if they are all about the children, when they truly might be more about continuing their lifestyle, which contrasts sharply with a vast majority of Guatemalans. I also agree that to only be for bringing our own child home soon is not to truly be for ethical adoptions for all of Guatemala's children. It is very sad that somewhere along the line, since referrals weren't stopped and PAs were still being given out, someone's child had to become a victim of change. But the fact is, some children are going to get hurt during this "shut down". In order for things to be made right for future Guatemalan children, others will have to pay a price. I have to disagree with the use of the phrase "languish in orphanages". Our four from Guatemala all came from the same orphanage, where they were not languishing, but rather going about their lives in the only way they knew. I think sometimes we project our adult emotions on children and make things seem much worse than they might be for the child, possibly for the sake of sensationalism. I'm not accusing people here of this, but some involved in the process have been shown to do this. Children are resilient. It's very unfortunate that any child has to wait for years for a family. But in the end, they are the blessed ones. Thousands of others around the world are much less fortunate. Yes, it can make things harder for a child to come home at an older age, and those years can never be regained. But in the grand scheme of things, we need to be about more than just our own, and more about encouraging those in charge to clean up all aspects of all adoptions. Birth families, adoptive families, and most of all the children deserve the highest ethical standards. Adoption first and foremost must be about finding homes for children and not children for families. I would venture to say that is what got Guatemala into the mess it finds itself in now. It's just too much money for too few people, at too high of a cost, all at the expense of children with the basic needs of love and security.