what's up with point 5? are they asking all birthparents as far back as 2005 to communicate with them? why would they do this? my child was born and relinquished in 2005....so i'm just curious what they would hope to accomplish.

Is this saying that our laywer's should contact PGN to set up an appointment for the bm interviews?

Does that CNA Update indicate that they are going to try to reopen the 2007 and earlier adoptions?

The bm can schedule her own interview when it's good for her? Well, boy do I wish they would have said so before.

Kevin: Is this in lieu of the CNA interview as we knew it and if my BM has already interveiwed will she need to come in again with the baby present? They seem to be making things up as we go along. I am worried as the license for my agency expires on August and if things take longer I do not know what will happen as they plan to close after the last child goes home.

Can they (birthparent or Guatemalan government) take a child back if coercion was used? I do not know anything about our cases that would indicate coercion, but I thought the beauty of international adoption was that once it was done, it was done.

My read of Point V is that this is the time spread for the cases that are still open. I don't see anything to indicate this means opening old cases.

The thing about the lawyers bringing bm to the PGN: it sounds like they do want them to bring them and just show up. Probably because it is hard to bring some in from the villages, so this way, the attorneys don't have to worry about appointments, but can just bring them in and get the interviews done voluntarily.

That is just how I read it . . .

I agree with Sheryl's interpretation. They are simply referring to cases that have not been completed yet. As I understand it, they are simply highlighting the previous point (about not waiting to be summoned, but just make appointments). It makes sense to me, this way they will allow attorneys that are ready to bring the bm move their cases faster.

Our agency is now telling all clients that they will not allow us to 'request' our interview for verification without signing a waiver, absolving attorney from any responsibility if anything goes wrong at interview. They also want rest of payment PRIOR to this verification/interview. Can they do this to PAPs? Whose responsibility is it, if not theirs, to complete our cases and do what is required? So our original contracts are now null and void? Attorneys can make new rules as they go? Is this legal? It is certainly not PAPs fault if cases have issues: We signed on, paid fees etc, in good faith.Why should be carry all burden now? Does it stink that new requirements have been added? Yes, but unless they have had these requirements successfully overturned, legally, what recourse do we all have but to comply? So now we have no idea if/when we will be able to move forward. Does anyone from the Guatadopt forum know what is behind this decision of these attorneys to not voluntarily bring in BM and baby for interview? What is the difference here, what am I missing?

I'm wondering if you are using CCI/Sue Hedberg. She is the type that would do something like that.

We have adopted three times, one of which was during the Hague 2003 shut down. My attorney husband suggests that you look at your contract. He doesn't believe that *we* would have been required to pay, but that is based on his recollection of the contract *we* signed. He said it all depends on what your contract says.

If your contract does not require this, then don't pay. And, don't sign any new addendum to the contract!

This seems mean on our part, because we are supposed to be working in good faith with the agencies, but in my opinion, they are not doing enough to advocate for the successful completion of these adoptions, therefore, *I* don't feel compelled to give them an extra benefit, if you know what I mean.

I can see why they don't want you to request an interview -- babies are being taken from bms, problems are being found, etc. It depends on who your agency is using in Guatemala and what their track record is with these interviews.

Some agencies seem to be flying through while others are having major challenges. It really seems to me that it just depends on the attorney and the attorney's reputation with the PGN. If your attorney has a good working relationship with them, if their other interviewed cases have gone fine, then you probably don't have a problem.

The agency is being conservative and trying to protect themselves, which is to be expected. However, unless you have direct contact with the attorney, you don't really know what the attorney recommends and it is the attorney's opinion that is most important here.

When we worked directly with our attorney in one case, we found that his approach and advice was quite different from the agency. Sadly, they do have different goals and even more sadly, I don't think the agencies are wanting to get all that involved in this whole thing. I think they are waiting to be able to wash their hands of Guatemala.

So, it is really up to you to decide.

Decide with fully open eyes, though, about the possiblities of what can happen in the interview.

Are you in contact with any other families from your agency? That might help you here, too.

My heart is with you . . .

As for waivers of liability, I´d go back and look at your original waiver. Anyone that is requested to amend a waiver under this sort of duress, in my non-attorney opinion, would have quite a civil case to settle. Of course, you don´t want to go to court--you want your child--but this is full blown unprofessional and downright shady! Obviously they´ve got you over a barrel, but I´d be documenting EVERYTHING. Obviously they´ve got something to be worried about.

We are using CCI/Sue Hedberg to handle our adoption & have never been more impressed. Our case has not been without it's challenges & we have had information almost instantaneously. Her commitment to the children & the welfare of the families is unparelled! We consider this agency a true God -send! We were considering others that are now in trouble. The problems that are being posted here & on other forums really shock me. It really makes me appreciate the wonderful communication & care that is taken relating to our adoption through CCI. Sue has been wonderful to work with & I think you should retract your post. Posting names should be left to the original party, not responders to start irresponsibly throwing names around.

V. Finally, an appeal is made to all biological mothers or fathers who have voluntarily given their children up for adoption in the years 2005 to 2007, as well as those who have been subjected to coercion or deception and anyone who knows of them, to present themselves at the Attorney General's Office.

KEVIN - WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? DOES CNA INTEND TO REOPEN ADOPTIONS COMPLETED BETWEEN 2005 AND 2007?

To all,

I would not worry about section V is you have a child home. My guess is that they are looking for inforamtion to build prosecutorial cases against some attorneys or others.

There is no precedent to show an adopted child being returned to Guatemala or any other country after homecoming that I am aware of.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Yes - Annonymous, the attorney who filed the amparo is essentially holding our children hostage while she wages political protest. And we are outraged and disgusted.

But, what can we do? We are afraid of her vengence. I am afraid to even attach my name to this post for fear of what will happen to my child. Worst of all, our agency refuses to support us.

If we sign the waiver, be have basically signed off all of their culpability. What are they afraid of? What do they have to hide?

This is hell like no other, and we are sick of it.

I agree with Sheila about Sue Hedberg. I've gone through 3 adoptions - 2 were with Sue and she was 200% on top of ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING !!! I have not met a more committed person to the children as well as the parents.
My 1st adoptions was NOT with CCI and I almost lost my mind with BS that was happening with my agency and atty. Needless to say, the atty was fired, and the agency, I didn't use again.

Question: Aside from the emotional value, what is the "visa" advantage/paperwork advantage to finalizing adoption when/if we visit. We have heard different stuff: I3/I4 Visa, Embassy items, visit before exit PGN, etc.??
Can someone offer resouce on this? We are considering the visit now that PGN is taking so long...
Thanks for any info!!
Thanks to all for prior as well!!

DKM,

If you visit now and get the IR3 visa, you get an automatic certificate of citizenship a little bit after getting home. If you don't visit and ge IR4 visa, you have to apply for the certificate. It costs money to apply, but it costs money to visit, too.

Other than that, I think it comes down to personal preference.

We never visited our babies. I don't think I could have done that, seeing them and leaving. It would have been too heart-breaking for me.

On the other hand, I wish I had been able to do more sight-seeng, visiting Guatemala and seeing more of the country before picking up my babies.

I should add that if you come home IR3 and get the CofC automatically, if you do a name change, you will have to apply to get the CofC changed to your child's new name.

If you come home IR4 and change your child's name, that is, give your child a different name than is on the Guatemalan adoption paperwork and birth certificate, then you can wait until the U.S. paperwork is complete (readoption, if you do that) to apply for the CofC. That way, the CofC is in the child's new name and doesn't have to be changed.

Yes, there are more hoops! They don't stop when your child is home!!

DKM: Our daughter came home on an IR-3 (our son, hopefully soon) and compared to what our friends have had to face with an IR-4, it's been well worth the time and money for an extra trip to Guatemala.

Your child will become a U.S. citizen upon arrival at your airport, whereas our friends fought red-tape at every turn for over a year to get their son's citizenship. We also got a SSN for our daughter within a month of returning, and also a US passport within three months. If you will need either of these documents quickly, it will be much easier with an IR-3.

After the reams of paper you've had to file during the adoption, it's really nice to have something streamlined once your child is home (not to mention it's harder to attend appointments and make phone calls with a baby around!)

Worried 2:
It seems that you have no other choice. The thin veil of civility has been lifted and you must navigate this with great caution. I suspect this is the tip of the iceberg and others are remaining quiet about their own issues in re: waivers and extortion. Once you complete this adoption, PLEASE complain to the relevant parties. PLEASE make sure that the Council on Accreditation knows about this as they are involved in Hague Accreditation (that is assuming that the agency is accredited or undergoing accreditation). Obviously this group/agency needs to be shut down and hopefully Kevin is right about attorneys being scruitinized and we can hope that your attorney is top on the prosecutor´s list! By the way, there will be prosecutions and Guate is not playing around. People there are mad, mad, mad and they can see exactly what is happening. It reflects poorly on their country and this whole problem is a grand embarassment. The problem is so bad that we may well be looking at a self-imposed moratorium beyond Hague just out of embarassment.

We are having difficulty getting information from our agency and lawyer and are getting a little frustrated. Has anyone ever used the services of Adoption Supervisors? If so, can you tell me which site is legitimate - adoptionsupervisors.com or adoption-supervisors.com. One claims the other is a scam and don't know which one to trust. Thanks for any help!!

DKM: If money is not the issue, take a visit trip and go home on the I-3 visa. I visited my daughter but because I got through PGN much quicker than expected, my visit trip was actually a few weeks after PGN approval, so I had no choice but to bring her home on an I-4 visa. Bringing her into the country was a degrading experience sitting in a small holding area for over an hour with no ability to communicate with my family while we waited to be "processed". And, as someone else has mentioned, I am already going through more hoops as I applied for her US citizenship which is about $420 for the application fee. Plus, the visit trip is great to have a "trial run" before you go back to pick up your child. It really makes the pick up trip even more special having a better lay of the land.

Lisa,

I haven't heard of anyone being separated from family while being "processed." What airport did you come through? All entry points are not the same!

In Houston, only the parent(s) and adopted child can go into the "processing" room. My mother and older child could not go, but I'm assuming my older child could have gone if my mom had not been with us to watch him.

Does anyone know of a case being released without a bmom interview? Our attorneys seem to be having trouble finding ours. Is there anyone who can help us? This is not any part of the "old Laws"!! we have been in PGN since December. so worried and sick of it all.