Thank you for posting.

If these cases are successful in being annulled by the courts (assuming the hunger strikes work)what can actually be enforced on these American family's? The other issue with this that is glaring at me, are they proposing that the cases be annulled without doing further investigation such DNA? From what I understand the identifications that the birthmothers made were from passport photos. I am not suggesting that these women did not have their children kidnapped, but no one is certain that the three children that are referenced are in fact those womens children. All of these are hypothetical questions but like the attorney Mr. Smolin who appeared in the video clip, there is no precedence set by any country and they don't know how to handle this.

This is such a sad, sad situation and one where I see both sides of the story. I honestly can say I don't know what I would do but hoping that all party's can come to some sort of agreement for the best interst of the child.

To the families who have these children, hold on to them tight. I stand with you and I am angry on your behalf. You do not have to give them up or make any connection with the BF, government or country! You have them for a reason and a purpose and I will be praying. Shame on anyone who makes you feel think otherwise!

As I'm sure you do, I feel sorry that the BM weren't more careful and I'm disgusted with both governments. The people involved will get theirs if not here on earth...

I can only hope that your process will help change future processes so that no one will ever have to get taken advantage so again in Guatemala or any other country for that matter. God bless you family.

Another Anonymous,

I hope you can clarify for me because I am having trouble. Being a Bible believing Christian, I have a very difficult time accepting that God would want me to pray in order to align God with what I want -- rather than aligning myself with His will. I also have a difficult time believing that God would entrust children to an adoptive family that have been kidnapped because God sanctions the families to "hold tight" to the children rather than seeking God whole heartedely in prayer and trusting God. I have a very difficult time believing that God who did not take these children from these women is standing in agreement with withholding the truth to be known and not allowing there be peace (totally against His character).

That is not to say that I know how if God is actually trusted to work in this -- and not each party do their own wills -- that the children would be returned.

But I would hope that you would elaborate and explain why it is God who would bless this mess? Because I am very very confused.

In light of this tragedy, I certainly would not want anyone to misunderstand God in all of this.

My heart breaks for these women. None of us knows what it is like to be in this situation and I do pray that none of us will ever deal with something so horrible. Not only were these women's children stolen from them but they have been treated as though they are wrong to long for their children and want their children.

And another thing Another Anonymous, are you suggesting that these birthmother's are responsible for their children being kidnapped because they were not careful? Raquel Par was drugged and Heidi taken from her. Arlene was in the care of her grandmother when someone came to her home and told her that the mom had asked them to pick up the baby; poor judgement but I suppose she had no reason to believe anything else. And finally Anyeli was playing in her house; does that make Loyda irresponsible?

What happened to these women could certainly happen to any of us and we would be heartbroken, devastated and move hell and high water to be reunited with our children.

While my heart goes out to the adoptive families as this has got to be the worst thing they could ever imagine, I truly hope that they do have the courage and strength and grace of God to deal with this and cooperate.

And I would hope that we could, as an adoptive community unite to support those that have been victimized by this horrible event -- the mothers, the children and the adoptive parents.

"I feel sorry that the BM weren't more careful"
More careful? These children were taken from their mother's arms! It doesn't matter that these children now have a nice adoptive home and families. They were stolen from their birth families and it would be a travesty to not give those families justice and return their children to their rightful parents. If your child was stolen from you and you knew where he/she was, you would be horrified that your child was not going to be returned to you. The only just thing to do is return these children to their original families.

Turning either the APs or the mothers into the bad guys is wrong. They are both victims. It is not fair to say the mothers should have been more careful.

This is the Solomon story. There needs to be an intermediary involved that both sides trust and can listen to who can maybe bring the emotion levels down a notch and get the families to work with each other to do the right thing before the children are torn apart. Whether the children are the right children we will never know without DNA and where the children rightfully belong the people who love these children should stop fighting and come together to figure out what is best and to ensure no further harm.

This situation makes me sick to my core. Whomever knowingly created such a situation should be condemned to the lowest pit of hell.

To Another Anonymous
I know Kevin reiterated being respectful but your comment about the Birth Mothers not being careful is making me boil over. Can you possibly be serious? This whole situation is a heartbreaking on so many levels and I honestly don't have the answer but to make a comment such as that is totally irresponsible.

Mary: this is not an accusation of an abnormal adoption. This is an accusation of Kidnapping. What is the other of the "both sides" you see? The Mothers and sobrevivientes have asked the people who were identified as having adopted the children to submit the child to a DNA test, as at this point they were only identified by the photos....as that was all the mothers had access to. The stonewalling on the part of the Lawyers, adoption agencies, and these "parents" gives the mothers little options. What would you do, Mary, if your child had been taken from you, and you knew where he or she was? Where would you stop at trying to get him or her back?

Anot anon: I don't mean this as a slur on you, but I see your comments as a sort of Stockholm Syndrome. The only people you don't even suggest as being at fault in this are the actual perps. You are disgusted with the governments, but Guatemala was a huge adoption source specifically because of the weakness of the government. Then you suggest the mothers should have been more careful. What is your specific suggestion to someone putting a gun in your face and locking you in a closet? ( Ana Escobar's experience)

You suggest these stolen babies are in the adoptive families for a purpose. I agree. They were purposefully taken. The paperwork was purposefully falsified. The PAP's were purposefully hoodwinked and bilked out of thousands of dollars. If you are suggesting there was a "higher" purpose, that reminds me of these verses, which should be considered by anyone listening who goes to church on Saturdays or Sundays:

Amos 5:21-24 (Contemporary English Version)

21 I, the LORD, hate and despise your religious celebrations and your times of worship. 22 I won't accept your offerings or animal sacrifices--not even your very best. 23 No more of your noisy songs! I won't listen when you play your harps. 24 But let justice and fairness flow like a river that never runs dry.

Micah 6:7-9 (Contemporary English Version)

7 Will thousands of sheep or rivers of olive oil make God satisfied with me? Should I sacrifice to the LORD my first-born child as payment for my terrible sins? 8 The LORD God has told us what is right and what he demands: "See that justice is done, let mercy be your first concern, and humbly obey your God."

These women are asking that the judges annul the adoptions. But to really do that, the judges would need to initiate investigations. It is pretty clear to many in Guatemala that the judges in question would be themselves vulnerable if the truth came out.

You need not fear storm troopers coming and wrenching your children from your home.

After all, you are not poor, and a woman in Guatemala.

I too can see and feel for both sides. I can't even imagine being in either situation. What I do hope and wish is that the PAP's have the DNA tests done to give these BM's an answer as to whether their children are okay or if they need to pursue other search avenues. I can't imagine the horror of having your child kidnapped and not knowing if they are okay or not.
To Another Anonymous - I am sure every parent has at one time put their child in a position where harm could have been done. I mean allowing your child to walk to school or bike to a friends alone, or leaving them with a sitter or at a daycare could potentially result in a kidnapping. Unless you are with your child 24/7 and never turn your back you probably shouldn't be judging these BM's for not being more careful - Sorry but I feel that is totally unjustified.

"As I'm sure you do, I feel sorry that the BM weren't more careful and I'm disgusted with both governments. The people involved will get theirs if not here on earth..."

More careful????? are you serious? what I do pray for is that these women are seen like you would see an American mother whose child was stole. How can someone justify any "reason" baffles me...this means that you believe that sometimes kidnapping is ok...it happens for a reason, right?

Before we all jump to conclusions, let's look at the possibility of poor word choice. I think the statement was intended more to say "I wish these situations had been prevented".

We all have decisions we make as parents. We all absorb risk at some point. And we all could be "more careful". The risk of not ever being in that situation is a life of paranoia an inexperience.

Point is, I don't think the comment made was intended to place any blame.

I had a second cousin die at a very young age - four as I recall. He drowned to death. He was playing in his backyard with his mom. The phone rang and she went in to answer it. She saw her some start to climb over their fence. She got his attention and motioned to him to get off the fence. He nodded. End result was that was on the phone for about three minutes and during that time he went over the fence, walked onto a slightly frozen over pool a few houses behind them, and drowned. His mother sure has hell has wished she had been more careful. And I am sure Rachel and Loyda have said the same things to themselves. But to blame this little guys mom or them would be cruel.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

I just saw a commercial about people's worst nightmare, which is when you dream & have no voice to speak with. I think we have all experienced this, and it seems to fit in this situation.
I take this hunger strike seriously--it is not a report from the likes of Al Jazeera (the death to America nut.)
I continue to pray for resolution for this mess-so that peace will be found for all. It breaks my heart to read these things, without being able to do more. When someone figures out what action we can take to help all involved please let me know.

"to the lowest pit of hell"

Amen Lisa

Or is there something worse than that?

Amen Lisa

Anonymous

I will not be popular for saying this, but it is obvious that, at times, some folks invoke God and God's will so things align with their own thinking and agenda. I am not here to start a discourse on this subject, as the topic at hand is too important to veer off of, however, if we take God out of the discussion, since no one knows what His will is, and we are all only speculating, then maybe we could look at this situation with more logic.

It is a terrible situation for all involved - we all acknowledge this, I think. As an AP myself, my knee jerk reaction is, I would never want to have to turn my child over after taking them into my heart. But, if I put myself into the equation, and imagine how I would feel and what I would do to get my child back if my child were kidnapped, then I realize that I would go to the ends of the earth (which is how it must feel for these women) to get my child back. How could one NOT feel this way if their child was ripped from them?

The reality of the situation is, that the APs still have all the advantages here, and these women are fighting against all odds to find their children. It is not difficult to see the inequity of this situation, nor is it difficult to imagine the devastation for all involved. I just think it would be easier to look at the facts, and not bring religion into it to cloud this issue, and this is in no way meant to offend anyone's religious beliefs.

I am really pleased to see such candid discourse about the various lenses from which to view this incredibly serious problem that is beyond grave. We must all be honest here, there is no easy answer and the families involved are in a spot that will inevitably end in tears, no matter what happens. Truth always prevails--no matter the stonewalling that the attorneys will inevitably put forth. It is the oldest trick in the book on adoption fraud--and at the end of the day, you can't build a sense of secure self with your child if they were indeed kidnapped, no matter how much you may try! As for the strategy of attempting to have the adoptions voided before a court of law--of course! If it is indeed a kidnapping, it is unacceptable to use the pretense of the important institution of adoption as a front to cover for this form of evil. ANYONE who does not understand this is undermining their own adoption from Guatemala. And, as for the comment of 'being careful', well this just underscores to me again that far too many people who have adopted from Guatemala are niave as to what is possible there. This is not a matter of careful--this is social class/race/poverty issues and women run the risk of their children being taken/kidnapped everyday in a nation notorious for human trafficking and other nefarious activities! Careful....in the US that means keeping an eye on your child while they play in the park or teaching them their full name and phone number and to yell is someone tries to abduct them. In Guatemala...far different story! So, let's all remember that the ideas that we have as US Citizens or Europeans are far from the reality of being poor and female in Guatemala! My hat is off to Norma Cruz and these brave women and I, for one, am prepared to do anything I can to help them in their pursuit of justice.

Are you guys serious???? Think of these kids. So Anne and everyone else if this was your son or daughter you would kiss them and send them on their way to Guatemala? Yes it is a sad thing , this has been going on for years. Not just Guatemala. These adoptive families would never HAVE to give their children up. they did not commit the crime, nor the child. I can see working something out were there would be visits, but Come on Really you think they should be sent back after years with the only family they know?? These kids would be devestated, and no Judge would ever find it in there best intrest to be sent back. This board is suposed to be supportive and informative . Everytime I get on to read the same 3 people are fighting about who's oppinion is the best one. Noone can fix this! Why argue about it!!!

First, I'd like to say as an AP, I would want to think of my child first. Since she is school aged and has been with me since infancy, I would never allow her to be forcibly sent back to her BM. However, I would encourage an open, and careful, communication with the BM. As karenms1 said, Guatemala is a very different place from the US. I don't necessarily trust that someone would not try to rekidnap my child in order to return her to her BM. I also don't think that I would trust any DNA sample or testing done in GT, either of my child or the proposed BM. I, frankly, am not so sure I would readily have my child's DNA test done again. I'd have to see a lot of evidence in her paperwork, etc. that raised suspicions with me. Unfortunately, SOMEONE in this equation is going to be devastated. All three parties involved now, the APs, the BM, and the child, are ALL innocent. But, by virtue of age, the child is the most innocent. I think I would have to consult attorneys and child psychologists before making any move in a case like this. I KNOW I would put my child first.
One quick comment which I'm sure will not be popular. I'd SO love it if people would leave the pontificating about God and His will out of this discussion. I'm sure we all have our own beliefs. Using one's religious beliefs as the main support for one's opinions often turns off the ears of others.

I can only speak about the case of Anyeli Liseth Hernandez Rodriguez, because I have all the pertinent documentation of her case. That is why I can say that she was not taken from her mother’s arms, as some of the posters have stated. I have a copy of the complaint that her father filed at the police station the day after she disappeared, stating that the day before, at 4:40 p.m., his wife went to the roof to hang clothes to dry, and when she went down about ten minutes later, their daughter Anyeli Liseth had left, that his wife went looking for her but nobody could tell them where she was. That complaint is the only effort that her father has done to find Anyeli Liseth. He left Loyda shortly after Anyeli was lost and has not responded to the orders issued by the DA to testify about the complaint he filed.

Loyda went to the Police to report about the abduction of her daughter until September 26, 2008 (almost two years after her daughter disappeared) and she told the investigators of the Police, that she was coming back from the market with her baby and her daughter and while she was opening the gate to get to her room, Anyeli Liseth took off and then she was told by a 12 year old girl that her daughter was taken by a woman, short, fat and with short hair who got with her into a white cab, that she screamed and tried to catch them, but she could not catch up with them and that the neighbors called the police who sent a patrol car, she got into the patrol and went looking for her daughter and because she could not find her, she went to the police station to file a complaint. That complaint is nowhere to be found, so it is doubtful that she ever filed it and it is puzzling why she is giving a different version of the fact as the one given by the father of Anyeli Liseth. The other version was published in Prensa Libre, where she says that her daughter was playing in the courtyard, and a woman came in, took her daughter and took off in a white cab. The house where she and her family rented a room at that time has no courtyard, as it was stated by the investigators.

A veterinarian who has a clinic around the corner of the house where Anyeli’s family used to live, told the police investigators that he knew very well Anyeli, because she liked to come to his clinic very often and because she was very thin, she used to slip through the bars of the gate of the house where she lived, to get out. A two year old girl, wondering in the street by herself is in danger, no matter how safe the neighborhood is and hers surely is not. Anything could have happened to her, and it is the DA duty to investigate to find the truth, not to prosecute people totally unrelated to her disappearance.

The District Attorney presented to the judge a mixture of the three versions given by Anyeli’s parents, neglected to take the depositions of both parents to find out why they differ so much and even worse, did not do a DNA test of the parents to see if they match the DNA of Karen Abigail,which does not need to be tested again, because the genetic profile does not change. It will always be the same, like the blood type.

The DA built a case on the false assumption that both girls are the same girl, just because Loyda and Fundacion Sobrevivientes say that they look alike, as they also said before of Dulce Maria, a girl that was taken away from the hogar where she was being cared for, taken to another hogar, her adoption was suspended and even four moths after Loyda admitted her mistake, things do not go back on track for Dulce Maria.

The damage done thus far in the case of Karen Abigail goes far beyond making nervous the Missouri couple who adopted her. It has brought to a halt all adoptions, because the PGN reviewers are afraid to approve any adoption after a PGN reviewer was publicly humiliated in front of all her neighbors when she was arrested for approving Karen Abigail’s adoption. There is also a new law to prevent traffic of people that includes “irregular adoptions” that includes the felony of any officer who approves an adoptions based on forged documents, a felony that is punished with eighteen years in jail. That explains why so few adoptions are being released by he PGN and even a case that was approved but the RENAP found a typo and was returned to PGN to fix it, has been under investigation for the last two weeks even though it was an adoption by relinquishment, where the birthmother went to the verification by the PGN and signed the final deed herself.

The judges are also afraid to rule children adoptable, which at this point is irrelevant, but the worse is that innocent people are in jail and that is something that never should have happened and there are people who will have to answer for it.

Susana Luarca

Well, my blood didn't boil when i read that a commenter wished the mothers had been more careful. But my blood boils now. A group of people who have profited for years and as the rumors and doubts grew all around them, resisted reform after reform attempt. This group is composed of people who have law degrees and assure us all they know the laws and and can tell you every wrong move the PGN and CNA have made....with great authority. They drive very nice cars and live in houses with incredible security systems, and have teams of assistants who investigate, and research for them.

My blood boils when a commenter on this blog suggests that these women couldn't have lost their child by robbery, and does so by holding her to a scrutiny that this commenter has again and again asked us to not apply to the "poor" members of the previous group: the attorneys and adoptions professionals. The mistakes, and the documented contradictions in ages, in names and many other circumstances in the adoptions dossiers over the last few years have been sloughed off when people have objected.

Do you remember the CNN interview with the owners of Casa Quivira? The lawyer gave absolutely false addresses.

We also have heard that the women were scared who did not show up for PGN interviews, that there were many reasons they were either coerced into lying on the documents that were found to have a lot more than uncrossed T's.

I am NOT saying she purposefully stated anything falsely, but this mother may have had many reasons to change her story. Besides mistakes in the fog of anguish, she may have been afraid. She may have been threatened by the people who stole her baby, and still does not want to implicate them for fear of her life...or if she feels safe, doesn't feel she can change her story now.

I urge every reader who is a pap to denounce the irregularities they know of. We have to help the world realize the deceptions that have truly occurred, or there will just be a polarized battle between those who have profited and now want everything to go away, and those who are calling for terming every adoption evil. Let's not let either extreme take the day!

We have to win back the OK but still bad anomalies in many adoptions, and separate them from the stigma of stolen children. Two completely different animals.

Also, the PGN is indeed afraid. The U.S. state Department has said it will be years, not months, before they even want to think about accepting adoptions from Guatemala. Both entities have been proven to have missed catching false cases. Don't blame the inspectors. Blame the people who used them ( with the well know $1500 bribe) to complete irregular adoptions.

Right now, there are a group of very brave, very strong and determined women, sleeping in tents in front of the court house, starving their bodies in an effort to find justice. It sickens me that women whose children have been stolen from them have to resort to such methods to even be listened to, in an attempt to find some remote form of justice. My Lord, what has this world come to? Really? Where are we as humanity if we cannot join together and find truth? To read such horrible words here, now and in the past, filled with hate, entitlement and ignorance, makes the sting of the injustice evident here even more outrageous, and renders me speechless— and ashamed.

I just got an email from one of the strikers. She is getting weak, and she is getting tired. And as I read these words of hate from a few here now and in the past, I think of my friends starving themselves in the rain so far away.

This isn't about you, or I. This is about mothers needing their children back in their arms, who were STOLEN from them. This is about justice, human rights, and the ongoing issues of impunity and violence against women in Guatemala.

I urge the adoption community in the US, to instead of thinking of ourselves, judging and debating scenarios fictional to ourselves, to embrace these women and open your hearts to their pain. They seek nothing more than justice, investigation and truth, something they have been denied for so, so long. These women deserve the adoption community's support today and tomorrow, because they are part of our Guatemalan children's identity, and no matter how we may dismiss and deny their pleas, these women are our sisters.

http://discuss.flickrfan.org/2009/07/18/0902513.html
http://discuss.flickrfan.org/2009/07/18/0902522.html
http://discuss.flickrfan.org/2009/07/18/0902512.html

With all due respect Steve, I do blame the inspectors at the PGN, who accepted the bribes to pass along fraudulent cases, as well as all the others who did what was in their best interest instead of what was in the children's best interest. They are all to blame for the mess that exists today.

Some of those inspectors were faced with the devilish offer they couldn't refuse, ala the Godfather. Lose their jobs, or take a bribe. Their attitude was that it was going to happen anyway, and would mean a child going to a good family ( right?) so they were simply joining with the other people who profited from the desire of Americans to get a baby no matter how much it cost.

I was personally asked for a huge bribe by an official. I first said I didn't have the funds. The official got angry, and said "I know you all get a lot of money for these adoptions! Don't make a fool out of me!!!" I explained that the child had many special needs, and we had already spent a lot on their medical bills, and were not charging the adoptive parents anything, because they were going to have many more operations to pay for. The official then went out of his way to help me get what I needed to complete the adoption.

Remember, Dee, Bribes are fueled by money. Where did the money come from, and why?

You can blame the people who succumbed to the pressure and temptation of the money. I have found again and again, when dealing with Guatemalan government officials, if I presented them with clear facts and an assurance that they would not be in any trouble should they process my request, that they would do it without bribes. It seems to me, and this is only my experience and opinion, that bribes are paid when these straightforward requirements are not met.

Are the PGN inspectors wrong to take bribes? yes!!! BUT HOW CAN YOU SAY THEY ARE WRONG AND NOT SAY THE PARENTS WHO ULTIMATELY PAID THE BRIBES WERE NOT WRONG?

Pardon my shouting, but I feel sometimes like the obvious is studiously denied.

"This is about justice, human rights, and the ongoing issues of impunity and violence against women in Guatemala." I have a daughter. These cases are about little girls. I am all for trying to help fight injustice, human rights violations, impunity and violence against women. But NOT with my daughter. If you said this to me, I were one of the cases, and I was at the crossroads trying to decide what is the right thing for our children this is the kind of talk that would make me turn away [see next paragraph if your response is "but they aren't your children"]. I know there is more to Guatemala but we don't know what the APs know and the mothers are portrayed as victims in a heavy crime area where they are prone to being victims again. As a parent thats very quickly where my mind would go.. turn my daughter over so she can be kidnapped again, sold, raped, murdered, etc with no protections. This isn't about being poor. There is a difference between poor and happy and poor and miserable. If you are trying to get APs to cooperate you are going about it the wrong way. It opened my eyes when another poster said she thought why on earth wouldn't you cooperate and saw no reason not to until she saw these threads and then she thought she wouldn't cooperate either.

I don't condone kidnapping. But what some need to realize is however our children came to us, the majority of us I think doing everything we could to ensure a legitimate process although that does not guarantee no problem, if we are good people and good parents then we consider our children our children and feel a need to care for and protect them. We consider them our children despite what others say. You wouldn't want an AP who did not feel that way. If we are told we are not real [not a news flash people love throwing that in our faces on a regular basis] that doesn't negate our heartfelt commitment to look after our child for as long as we are able.

If you want this situation resolved stop throwing stones. Stop treating the victims on either side as criminals. Be careful how you portray Guatemala. We have to look at the bad to fix it but if you only talk about the bad and people do not know of or can't see the good... think about what message is being sent and whether you would want to send a child into that situation. Some of the most vocal know Guatemala very well and that is good but you can't expect everyone else to necessarily know the country as you do.

Its not about entitlement, suvs, being american, or any other anti-american insult that always seems to come up. Its about both sides seeing the other as a mother. The adoptive mother needs to see the woman starving herself as possibly her childs mother. The woman starving herself needs to see the adoptive woman with the child she thinks is her child as a mother. And the survivors group which has been mishandling this entire situation needs to see the adoptive family as another victim and not a whipping post since they couldn't get to the true criminals. Is it a coincidence in El Salvadore a priest helped families? Maybe the priest should have been involved here.

I totally agree with Jennifer. How to solve this problem is a totaly different subject than the pain that these birth moms in Guatemala are going through.

So many of you say how much you love your child and would never give them back, when you don't care if the very mother who gave birth to your child is starving to death. How will you explain this to your child some day. This is just another sick symtom of Babylon America and their totally self centered environment.

And to LA, we could keep God out of this picture if it weren't for the fact that He created each and every child, and on judgment day it is His laws (thou shalt not steal) that the ones who kidknapped these children will pay penalty to.

Don

Steve,

I agree with Dee. PGN desearves a large share of the blame. If they were well know for accepting these bribes as you say, then that is quite enough to blame them, but what about all the silliness of the previos--holding cases in pgn for 8 months or years even? I'm not talking about good reasons, I am talking about silliness like stating a document is not in the file when in fact it was, etc.
These people at pgn are not innocent and I doubt that cna is either. Everyone, all along the way got their slice out of the pie.

I'm not saying that all attorneys are innocent, but there you go again lumping all together in one basket.

anonymous

les0805, I don't think things are as clear cut as you think, when you say "think of these kids". First, at least one of these kids has been with the family in the US for only a few months, not years. Second, if taking children from "the only family they know" to a new place is wrong, how can we justify taking children from foster homes to adoptive homes? For some children, they are in their foster families for 2-3 years, since infancy. Are these children any less "devestated" by being taken from foster homes?
Think of it from your point of view as a parent, not as an adoptive parent. If someone were to kidnap YOUR child today, wouldn't you look for him or her? And if it took you a year to find him /her , would you say "oh never mind, s/he is settled in with the new family now"? I doubt it.
I'm not saying that the right thing is to return the children or not return the children--the point is, these are very complicated cases, with no easy solutions one way or the other.

I posted this on another thread and now realize that it may have made more sense to post it here.

I work with patent attorneys and I asked one of them some questions about legal matters that have been bounced around here. He said that if you do a DNA to see if your child matches the samples that are still at the lab and you get a mismatch, you are legally required to report this to legal authorities. If you don't, you will be an accomplice to whatever crime was committed. So the legal standard is actually higher than what I had thought.

He said, "I'm not saying that the child would be returned. I'm just saying that you have to report the matter or else you become an accomplice."

I also discussed with him the difficulties of getting a DNA sample from a child as a result of a birth mother's allegations that the child is her birth child and Law Professor Smolin's statement that there is no legal precedent for returnign kidnapped children. He said that the legal standard for obtaining bodily samples is very high. There has to be a lot of evidence that the person committed a crime. I think he also indicated, although I don't think he explicitly stated this, that the person had to have committed a serious crime. He said that there are problems with where the trial would be held. Would it be held in Guatemala or in the US? The laws in the two countries are very different. This makes it almost impossible to try these cases.

One thing to keep in mind, that this also pertains to children that are kidnapped from the US and taken to another country. Watch your kids.

I'm not telling people what to do. I'm providing information so that you can make a better decision as to how you want to proceed.

The attorneys I know are not adoption attorneys. They specialize in intellectual property. So their opinion cannot be counted on as absolutely on the mark. But there are a lot of principles of law that they know and so their sense of this is probably pretty accurate.

Kindest Regards, Cheryl

I understand how frustrating it is to have the adoption community start thinking of how they would feel or react in this situation versus just supporting these women. I think -- not a justification or excuse -- that Americans are so "non-offensive" that we wouldn't want someone else to do something that we don't have the backbone to do ourselves. This is more a reflection of the general lack of morality and to reference our favorite Another Anonymous or whoever the heck she/he is....lack of true spirituality. Cause seriously without a doubt every Bible study I've been doing these past few weeks the only thing I can see is God's not condoning the behavior of those that would withhold justice and peace from these women.

My heart breaks for these women because no one should have to experience any of this. I am ashamed that the adoption community has rearered it's ugly head -- we are only out to fill our families with cute little kiddos and couldn't give a rat's @ss to those whose children we have stolen or a country we have raped. I didn't sign up for that when I decided to adopt a child. I didn't sign up to stand by and watch women have their children stolen and think that they were selfish, got what they deserved and should have been more careful, or that the best interest of the child is served with us here in the US.

Seriously, I can rationalize and justify that my son having been home for over a year and a half would be better off with me. I can rationalize and justify like all those people on the forum and main page. But that doesn't mean that God appointment me God. There comes a point in maturity, in morality, in parenthood that it is not about the "YOU" -- which is where the APs are stuck and therefore they can come up with scenarios that the best interest of the child is served with them.

They try to portray themselves as being selfless thinking of the children when in fact, they are not. If they were, they would not cause roadblocks that would make reunion more difficult.

The children are what matter here. I sit and think of the lengths that these women are going to get some action and to fight for their kids. And the reality of just how WANTED AND LOVED those kids are. To have those children grow up in a home thinking that they were "adopted" and dealing with feelings of abandonment from their birthmothers, creating fantasies about their family of origin, is cruel and unjust when none of it could be farther from the truth. When the AP does nothing, they have become the kidnapper and how sad that we can justify kidnapping in the name of adoption.

Susana,

You mentioned the "DNA profile| not changing just like a blood type, the child does not need to be re-tested and the alleged parents have not been tested. So, there is stored electronic data that reflects the child's DNA profile. Another DNA sample of the child is not needed. If they get a DNA sample of the alleged biological parents, their generated DNA profiles can be compared to the child's DNA profile that is stored on a computer. Right?

Best, Cheryl

Sorry, but one other question. Doesn't the Guatemalan government have copies of the DNA profiles? If so, then they can figure out whats what at least for cases that apply to the more recent adoptions where DNA tests were performed. They could do a DNA test on either of the biological parents and compare results to their copies of DNA profiles so see if there are any matches. The exception being if DNA samples for a different woman and her child were used as a part of the adoption.

Best, Cheryl

There are many good points being brought up here. Speaking for myself, I don't consider myself an adoptive mother, just a mother, and my daughter is my child. Period. However, no matter how much I love her, I am not sure that I could ever reconcile in my heart or mind not telling her she had been kidnapped if I knew of it and decided not to do anything about it. Of course it is easier for me to say, since I am not one of the mothers whose hearts must be breaking right now who are caught in the middle of this mess. I understand the sentiment that we are also mothers, but if the children were stolen, then how do you reconcile this in that child's life? They will read about this at some point and know their true history. Not here to judge, but again, if it were an American parent and their child was stolen, it would be a non issue. The child would be returned.

Steve, point well taken. I admit I have no idea of the inner workings of the PGN, however, please take into consideration that many, if not most, of the APs have no idea of bribes being paid on their behalf. I imagine if this is as common as you say that much of the time it is being done without knowledge or consent of the APs. So, I disagree that we are also to blame. Most of us wanted nothing more than an above board adoption, and to bring a child into our hearts and home. We NEVER wanted anything other than that.

Wow. There we go again with the american slurs. I haven't seen many posts which indicated a feeling of indifference or hatred towards these mothers. You guys are seeing what you want to see. What I have seen and what I have expressed is reasons why we can see an AP being afraid to cooperate. If fear is the motivator insults about sense of entitlement etc are not going to change views. This is why I have mentioned a priest or some other third party multiple times now. A priest doesn't go in and condemn a family for their american sense of entitlement and moral corruption. A priest goes in and says I know you love your child now think about this mother who may be your childs mother. You want to fix things.. then stop attacking and try to be sensitive to both sides. It does no good to put either family on the defense when they have a child stuck in the middle. You say you want support from the adoptive community. What kind of support are you looking for? There is nothing I see any of us can do other than offer our sympathies and try to offer suggestions on why a family might not help. The only other thing we can do is participate in a public tar and feathering of the families which I feel is the wrong thing to do. Do you really think a bunch of people online agreeing in the moral condemnation of the families is going to help do anything?

It has been fascinating and very interesting to read the responses to this and the other posts/threads previously posted on this topic and I guess what continues to surprise me is that people seem to think that corruption is some kind of new concept and that Guatemala is some kind of unusual phenomenon....and that magically the passing of the Hague and the creation of the CNA is going to change all of that. It would be a nice thought ! But seriously....there isn't an adoption system sadly enough in this world that is free of corruption and wrong doing. Hague, CNA involved or otherwise. There isn't a security system, government entity or whatever in this world that is impervious to corruption and extortion. This is the unfortunate reality that we live in. Just ask people in those Countries who have those adoption systems how much better it is. This is not to champion some of the things that happened in Guatemala and those that have broken the law in Guatemala or in the US involved in these things....because that is not my point. But if you really think that bribes and other things of the like are not going on in any other adoption system....than we are all naive. Is it wrong, yes. Should all be done to stop it when detected yes...of course. But I think people forget this point. It happens everyday somewhere.
I also did want to say that my heart breaks for these families, mothers & children...no matter what the outcome...the pain involved has to be overwhelming and horrific for all involved. But I do find it interesting that information posted by Susana Luarca sure casts a much different light on the story than I have seen posted anywhere else. Goes back to points made in previous posts about people not having all the facts....and really...how can we ? we are not parties to the cases. I personally would not presume to know the cases....I can only pray that it is all sorted out in the best interests of the child. I am personally just very sad for Guatemala, for it's people and for it's reputation because it is a beautiful country w/ beautiful people. To hear it talked about here, it is the most corrupt place on earth and while I am not downplaying what has happened in these and some other cases, I do not believe it is representative of the majority of cases.

Dee,

I'd imagine that our posts crossed paths so you probably didn't see my post before you posted yours. My understanding is that any child that is kidnapped for adoption in another country will almost never be returned. Smolin said as much in the video. My attorney friend said that from a legal perspective this makes sense since the two countries have very different laws and where would the trial be held? Does any one know of any instances where a child was kidnapped for international adoption and was returned after crossing the boarder?

There are many many cases of one biological parent kidnapping an American child, crossing a boarder where the child was never returned. It is almost impossible to get child kidnapped by a parent back into the US.

Best, Cheryl

A couple of posters (Don, Dee) have mentioned the possible consequences on the children if the a-parents make a decision in the supposed best interest of their children and do not tell them about the alleged kidnapping.

As an a-parent, I know absolutely that if my child were alleged to be stolen, I would insist upon immediate DNA testing.

I know a goodly number of adoptees who have learned as adults of lies told to them by their a-parents and others who have learned that their mothers were coerced into placing. As adults, feelings of rage, abandonment, disgust, hatred, mistrust, and utter betrayal are common responses.

I wonder if we ask adult adoptees for their perspective what the responses might be? If anyone belongs to IAT, that would be a good source. I'm going to post at an adoptee forum and ask if anyone there is interested in participating in this discussion.

Yes, I'm probably opening a can of worms, but my voice is too ineffectual here. So many people are talking about "holding tight" to their children, doing the best thing for their children, and saying that their child would be devastated to lose the "only family they've known." While I understand those sentiments, I think they are being made through a biased frame of reference or lens -- the adoptive-parent-lens and that they are missing the perspectives of adoptees.

Lisa, I apologize if I’ve offended you or somehow been inappropriate as that is sincerely not my intention.

When I think of what the families of these girls are going through, my instant response is: “I would die”. “I would rather have my heart cut out with a plastic knife.” Or I will say something like, “This has got to be the worst nightmare for any adoptive parent.” The focus if you will is on “ME” and how I would feel.

Of course since I consider myself enlightened I certainly have to make this about someone other than me because if not I become selfish and egotistical so I then proceed to rationalize why my son is better off with me. He’s been home for over a year. I’ve known him longer than his biological mother. He has allergies that left untreated could be detrimental to his health so I need to take care of him. He is very attached to ME and altering this set up would cause him damage. I am the only mom he knows, today. Because when I picked him up from Guatemala, his foster mom was the only mom he knew and I didn’t seem to have a problem with tearing him away from that life. But I justify it and rationalize that he is better off with me.

Then I realize that I am thinking of myself again….

When I think of the first mothers and the lengths that they have gone through, I consider them to be extremely courageous and having a lot more backbone and fortitude than I do. I admire their resolve and determination and I wonder if I would be so valiant against so much opposition. Oh, there we go again it being about me. But what I do see is their love for their children and their determination. We should all be so fortunate to have mothers that will climb every mountain and pound on every door, and put their lives on the line for their kids.

But it’s not about them either.
I’ve been listening to different adult adoptees to gain insight so that I can be a better mom to my son. And with what I’ve been listening to and applying it to this scenario, I feel that the children are the greatest victims in all of this and the ones that will be hurt the most in the long run. And they would not be very happy with the decisions or lack of cooperation by the adoptive families.

These girls, if they remain in the United States, are living under the false assumption that their mother’s gave them up. Many times adopted children create fantasies of their first families as well as dealing with the rejection of their mother. These girls would live with that even though it was not true – actually quite the opposite.

Eventually, in the era of information that we live in and google being so pervasive, these girls will learn about all of this and then what? How will the parents explain how they did nothing? How will they look into the eyes of these children and explain why they thought they did the right thing? How will they explain away the loss of identity, the loss of country, the loss of family, the loss of their birthright? How will they explain away that their parents did nothing while these women starved themselves and pleaded?

At the end of the day, it’s not about how the adoptive family must feel. It’s not about the women who are fasting and praying or as some would say having a hunger strike. It’s about the children and the bigger picture.

I am not sure that bringing in a priest, rabbi or a pastor is the answer. We all surround ourselves with people who tell us what we want to hear. Legally, these families might have no reason what so ever to cooperate or do anything. Legally, these families have a file that says they are the parents. Legally, these families hold all the cards. Morally? That’s another issue. I am just not sure what digging one’s heels in and fighting to the end, or ignoring these mother’s longing for their children is going to appeal to the children who are caught in the middle.

So for the children, my heart breaks.

Susana Luarca has a huge incentive to present the case as she wants this community to view it. She is very persuasive, and a lawyer. I am not a lawyer, but am close enough to the story myself to doubt her presentation of the story. But when I commented after her post, I did not feel like becoming the opposing attorney to deconstruct her remarks. I only wanted to point out the changing use of tactics when she presents Guatemalan issues. I consider that disingenuous. But now that someone has referred to her comments, and also pointed out that they are indeed different than what we hear elsewhere, I want to point out that there would be two reasons for her account to differ from others. Either they are wrong, or she is wrong. [see first sentence of this comment] Given that, I wonder if she would be willing to reiterate if what she said in the previous comment is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help her God?

Another proof that the campaign sponsored by Norma Cruz is directed at Asociacion Primavera is in today’s El Periodico. Under the headline “Hunger strike continues in front of the Judiciary Power” it states that their petition is clear: “to declare the nullity of the adoption processes of Karen Abigail Lopez Garcia and Yahaira Noemi Muyus” Both girls were at the Primavera hogar and were ruled abandoned by the Court of the Childhood and Adolescence. Karen Abigail went to the United States when her adoption was finalized and Yahaira is currently living at another hogar in the outskirts of Guatemala City. The birthmothers of both girls are NOT participating in the hunger strike.

Yajaira’s birthmother relinquished her daughter in 2006, but lost connection with the people with whom she was doing the adoption and fearing for her daughter, she filed a missing person complaint. She never accused anybody of anything illegal about her adoption, it was at the District Attorney office where she was told horror stories about what the adopted children were used for once they are abroad, but after meeting with the adoptive parents, she saw that they love her daughter and that they would never harm her, so she withdrew her complaint at the criminal court and expressed her desire to finalize the adoption so her daughter may go with them. Therefore, Norma Cruz has no right to meddle in a private matter and she is misrepresenting Yajaira’s case. There is no finalized adoption yet, and Yahaira’s case is before two courts: the Criminal court and the Court of Childhood and adolescence. Both courts will rule on the matters before them, taking into account Yahaira’s birthmother wishes, not the opinion of Norma Cruz who is just using her case to further her agenda.

Norma Cruz has no right to request the Supreme Court Chief Justice to annul the adoption of Karen Abigail, because there is no proof that such girl is the same as Anyeli Liseth Hernandez Rodriguez, whose father has not done anything to find her daughter and whose mother, Loyda Elizabeth Rodriguez Morales is not participating in the hunger strike. The first day, Norma Cruz said that it was because she had to leave the country, after armed men paid her a visit to intimidate her. The next day Norma Cruz changed the story to justify her absence, saying that it was because a relative of Loyda was intimidated. She did not specify how or when.

The judge who has the criminal case of Karen Abigail and who put in jail two lawyers and the director of Association Primavera, yesterday refused again to order Loyda and Dayner, the parents of Anyeli Liseth, to provide specimens of their DNA, arguing that it is the job of the DA to gather the evidence. The DA refuses to do the DNA without Karen Abigail being tested at the same time, “because they do not trust LabCorp”, but they do trust the negative DNA results of the test of Karen Abigail and the woman who posed as her mother, to the point that it is all they have to justify all the measures they are taking in this witch hunt: raids, sequestration of computers and documents unrelated to the case, prosecution of six people and investigation of other two, orders to prevent people from leaving the country, etc., just to build a case around a negative DNA tested by a lab that the DA labels as “corrupt”. It is useless to try to explain to those investigators that they cannot have it both ways and that the DNA of Karen Abigail does not need to be done again, because the genetic profile is what the results of the DNA are about. Until it is proven that both girls are the same, and that such girl is actually the daughter of Loyda, she has no right to demand the nullity of the adoption, and even then, Norma Cruz has not the legal representation of Loyda as to demand anything on her behalf, much less if Loyda has not voiced that petition herself.

For the adoptive parents abroad it is scary that there is someone trying to disrupt adoptions done according to the laws of another country, based on false allegations and the pressure of the media. Just imagine how the Guatemalans who have adopted feel about this, with no borders to protect their children from the attacks of those who need to discredit adoptions to a point where the DA starts thinking of adoptions as if they were a felony. That is their goal. To end adoptions for good.

Susana Luarca

I know it has been suggested not to bring faith into this discussion-I aplologise if this offends anyone-it is not my intention...
Romans 14:4
(who are we to pass judgement)-
Proverbs 16:25 (the obvious is not always the truth)
John 2:23-25
(trust God completely, man discreetly)
1Kings 18:21- -(How long will you halt and limp between two opinions?)
1 thessalonians 5:11-(encourage & edify one another.)
Phillipppians 2:4 (think of others)
Jmaes1:5 (without reproaching or faultfinding, as it helps no-one and compounds the problem.)
John 2:23-25 (for only God can read the hearts of men.)

I have also read the following in regards to adoption in Guatemala as a whole:
1 Corinthians 13:7-(suspicion cripples, and destroys.)

To the families that have these children,

When I was 18 months old I was taken away from my BM against her will (here in the US) and away from a difficult situation for both my BF and my family that raised me. I have a relationship with both my BPs now and I can say that my life was blessed because of the difficult decision that my family made for me. They kept me close despite efforts by my BM to get me back. Was it right to take me from my BM and BF, maybe, maybe not, but from my perspective, I’m so glad my family chose to hold on tight. I did not have a relationship with either BP until I was an adult but when I did meet them I asked all the questions I could about the situation that surrounded my adoption. Both families thought they had my best interest at heart but I know that I got the best life I could have with my family.

I am not saying that my life mirrors what you are experiencing but I wanted you to be able to see the side of a child who was taken against a BMs will and given a life that my BF could never have given me.

I may not be someone’s favorite person, this may go completely against others views but it is MY life story and God made me a stronger person because of it and He allowed me the desire to adopt my two favorite people in the world. The beauty of a loving God is that he allows different views. My family and I continue to pray for you and hope that your hearts heals with your little ones.

Ana, no need to apologize. I'm sorry and I'm a hypocrite. Its a good lesson. I'm grateful for your voice and other voices. I do feel for these mothers. After I read the children are unlikely to be returned the fear cloud dissipated but I did not feel good because it did not obliviate the wrong.

I guess that was what I was hoping for with priests, ministers, or doctors. Someone good and trusted on both sides to get both views then come together for discussions then hopefully bring the families together in safe setting to talk. Fantasyland I suppose. I too am guilty of not only wanting to protect my children but being biased where it would cloud my judgement.

I welcome views from adoptees. I do not think any APs plan on lying to their children about these situations or I certainly hope not. Yes the children would probably not forgive and there would be no way to pull it off. This cannot be hidden. We are all going to have to deal with this.

With all that said.. the one thing that nags me about returns, outside all the voiced reservations and our obvious bias, is the day after. Several years back I picked up a book on interviews with slaves after emancipation. I was expecting horror stories followed by a happy ending. But what I picked up was life was often worse after emancipation. When freeing the slaves we did not plan for life afterwards. We "saved" them and then threw them into a black hole. We did not plan on how they would find work, food, or how they would be protected once they were no longer considered property. Where I am going with this is what are our plans for the day after if children are returned to their families? Are we going to try to do anything about the gangs which reportedly kidnap at will with no repercussion to prevent our children from being kidnapped again? Are we going to do anything to try to protect these mothers and our children from threats or retaliation? I think it would make me feel better in all this if we had plans for the day after and did not just expect a cinderella ending with no followup or safeguards in the future.

Regards

Lisa,

I appreciate your sharing about how priests deal with these kinds of tough situations. I'm not Catholic so there are many things that I do not know about Catholicism. I'm really glad that the priests are trained to handle things in this way.

As far as building a team of people that you consult, people may want to consider adding an attorney to their team. I know that some think that all attorneys are corrupt blood suckers, but that definitely isn't the case. Also, many very well intentioned people (and I mean truly moral and well intentioned) have suggested doing a private DNA test. As I have pointed out, if the results come back indicating a mismatch, you have to tell the authorities or else you are an accomplice. I'm sure that many people don't know that. This brings to mind the saying "ignorance is bliss."

To any one who can clarify the process for me: Susana has mentioned that the birth parents for one allegedly kidnapped child have not been DNA tested. It makes sense to me that they have not been DNA tested if only US entities--US government, US adoption agency, US parents-- have the alleged child's DNA profile. I suspect that the Guatemalan authorities have no way of getting their hands on the alleged child's DNA profile. I say "alleged" because they also cannot rule out that children were swapped. I suspect that Guatemala needs the US governments leverage not only to get the child DNA tested but they would also need the US governments leverage to obtain a copy of the child's DNA profile. Even if they could get the child's DNA profile and it didn't correspond with the birth parent's DNA profiles, they still could not absolutely rule out that the child is their biological child, since children could have been swapped. I'm don't know the process well enough to be sure of all of this, but that is what I suspect.

I say to the guatemalan government, shame on you for not having had your own process of doing DNA testing. I'm sure that the authorities understood that once the kid is out of the country they have practically no legal recourse for getting them back. So shame on you.

I truly hope and pray that we can find a way to significantly reduce the problems surrounding adoptions. I know there are people who think why are others surprised at the corruption and besides there will always be corruption. I'm not surprised that there is corruption. But I sure hope that we don't sit on our laurels accepting the status quo. Sure the corruption will probably never be eliminated. But what if we could lower it by 50 percent? That would make a big difference in a lot of people's lives. What if it only made a difference in one family's life? Well, maybe that is also worth the effort.

I want to thank the adoptee for their post. You are right that sometimes adoptees get tarred and feathered when they present a story that doesn't conform to what many think they should be presenting. Too bad. After all, "it is your story" not ours.

I think a lot of people are capable of relinquishing a child before they have spent time bonding with that child. But once an adoptive parent has bonded with the child, I think their bonds tend to be as strong as any biological parents. Would you want an adoptive parents bond to their adopted child to be less than a biological parents bond for that child? Not very many biological parents relinquish their children. Usually only because they feel they don't have much of a choice. I think of it as a very strong biological drive to bond.

Well, I'm done. At least for today. *smile*

No one other thing. Steve :) I should have said this long ago. I'm so glad that you and your wife are helping so many children.

Kindest Regards, Cheryl

I am having a difficult time understanding the details of the reported kidnapping cases.Is there a website which explainations what is reported to have happened/

Thanks

Do I believe that children have been kidnapped for the purpose of international adoption? Absolutely yes. The kidnapping of a child is a horrible thing. However, as has become painful obbvious many times during our discussions, most of us are not corrupt or creative enough to think of all of the possible scenarios that could transpire. So, even if a woman alleges that her child was kidnapped and a lab reports that a child is the biological child of that woman, it is not a forgone conclusion that the child was kidnapped or that the adoption was illegal. Lets even add into this mix that the report is correct, the woman actually is the biological mother. It still isn't a foregone conclusion that the child was kidnapped or that the adoption was illegal.

I'm not saying that any of these 3 women are lying. I'm just saying that we have to be careful. For this reason and for many other reasons, it is absolutely understandable that adoptive parents wouldn't run out and have a DNA test done because of an allegation. From their perspective, they are the "parents" that are responsible at this point in time to protect their child.

Kindest Regards, Cheryl

Steve,

This time I will borrow some information from Wikipedia. The subject is Logic and the lesson is the “ad hominem argument”. It says:
“An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.
The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.
Ad hominem argument is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.”

Susana Luarca

Cheryl, I'm not catholic either. I'm a former agnostic former ex-smoker. I'd still call a priest and a rabbi, doctor, minister, etc. Psych people or lawyers only if prescreened.

Regards

Susana:

Wikipedia? My son finds it amusing to go there and add all sorts of fun and factless facts.

As for your comment here, re ad Hominem, I think I agree with what you have said here.

That is the reason I find your attacks on Norma Cruz specious.

It also makes me want to then reiterate my simple request:

Will you swear that your first comment on this string was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

To all: the reason I only comment on this forum, and not a million others, is because of the owners of it. They are lovers of the truth, not merely casual acquaintances. The Truth, after all is said and done, will make the adoption community free.

Adoptive adult child, your comments here weigh more than any of us.

Cheryl: I don't always agree with you, but I can't help but love you!

Maybe I've been very slow on the uptake and all of you figured this out before I did, but I'll share this just in case it is useful to someone. One person posted that if you are going to do a DNA test, you need to do it before 7 years from the time the child's DNA was first taken elapses. Susana's remarks about the DNA profile stirred my curiousity and I starting looking and investigating. Please don't take anything I say as gospel. Everyone should double check things for themselves.

I looked at my DNA reports and did some research on the Internet. I think the DNA profiles of both the mother and child are on the first page of the DNA reports. There are locations (also known as loci) on a DNA strand that the DNA is measured. Examples of Loci are D3S1358, D7S820... They are depicted in the top row of the DNA profile. A standard DNA profile has 12 or 13, I cannot remember which. Mine yas 16 loci. I think the 16 loci profile is provided by Promega Corp FFFL.

The child's profile is in the line designated with the "C" and the mother's profile is in the line deisgnated with an "M."

So it seems to me that if you have your child's DNA profile there isn't a limit on when you perform another DNA test to see if there is a match.

Ditto to Henry: I feel like I need an xml spread sheet to correlate and keep track of what what has been said, what information pertains to which set of people and so on.

Steve, in many respects, we are on the same page.

Kindest REgards, Cheryl

Trenka, Jane Jeong, Julia Sudbury, and Sun Yung Shin. Outsiders Within: Writing on Transracial Adoption. Cambridge, Mass: South End Press, 2006.

Check out Patrick McDermott's story. He was taken from El Salvador.

Adopted children are helpless in respect of being placed wherever and with whomever they are. If theft was involved in their past, it remains part of their story forever. It becomes part of who they are. If their mothers protested and starved themselves, then these mothers are strong and will encourage them. They will know they were loved and sought after. They were not forgotten or replaceable.

Adopted people have two families, two sets of parents: as adults they belong to neither and as adults they will choose what sort of relationship to have.

Whatever happens to these daughters now, I hope they grow up well...learn these stories and change the world. There will be much to learn about the world from how these events are decided, who speaks, who is silent, who has power. What will they say about us all when they are old women?

May these daughters have power and strength. Bless them!

Steve,

Your son adds “fun and factless facts” to Wikipedia? I am sure that he finds that very amusing, but it is a bad way to ruin a good source of information. I wonder where he learned to do that.

I used the Wikipedia definition of the argumentum ad hominem, because it is very clear, hoping that you would understand that you have not provided a single piece of evidence to support the allegations of Loyda Elizabeth Rodriguez Morales that her daughter was stolen and that she is the same girl as Karen Abigail López Garcia, but attacked my credibility because I live in a nice house and drive a decent car, which is exactly what the "argumentum ad hominem" is all about. You want me to swear that what I say is the truth. I could swear it and you could still say that I am perjuring myself, so better than that, I invite you come with me to the court to see the whole file of the Karen Abigail case and you will see that everything I said is true. Just tell me when do you want us to go to the court.

Steve, you said that you are very close to the case of Loyda. If you actually are, and if you have the power to convince Loyda to voluntarily submit herself to a DNA test, that could solve everything. If Karen Abigail is indeed her daughter, she can keep fighting to get her back, as it is her right, but if she is not her daughter, Loyda is wasting precious time, while her daughter is somewhere else, and who knows how she is being treated. Help her to find her daughter, not to further the agenda of Norma Cruz, whatever that is. To say that both girls are the same based on pictures is wrong. Pictures are deceitful and now with software as Photoshop, there is no limit as to what a skilled technician can do with a picture. Talking about pictures makes me remember the picture on El Peridico’s front page of Tuesday’s edition. The picture shows the mothers’ hunger strike, only that there are no mothers pictured, just Norma Cruz, with a very sad face, and an American woman who looks a lot like your wife. Is it your wife in that picture, Steve?

Susana Luarca

Steve,

One of the reasons why I read here is because of the quality of the site, and the generally respectful tone of the posters. I am glad you post, because I want to read a variety of perspectives--just wish you could be more respectful and less demeaning when you post. I know I would listen to your points better and probably others would too. Several of your comments above I found quite offensive.

anonymous

Susana: you said:

" You want me to swear that what I say is the truth. I could swear it and you could still say that I am perjuring myself"

I could? Maybe it is your misunderstanding of the finer points of English, but using the word "could" instead of another, like say, "Would" Implies I would be right if I said you are perjuring yourself.

I think, in a convoluted way, you answered my simple question.

Anonymous;

Looking back over my comments, I gather you are offended by challenging Susana's comments. I have tried to be factual, and not shrill. I didn't call her names, or ridicule. But what I sad: the content, seems to have offended you. I don't believe the facts are as she stated, and have asked if they are the whole truth as she knows it. She has avoided answering that. If respect means agreement, then I am confused. Susana has blasted about every government official in her comments over the years. The things she accused the Bergers were way out of line. I find her tone often pretty demeaning to people who aren't reading this site, and cannot defend themselves. But I have not said to her to change her tone or not write. I challenge you to consider that my responses to her have been much more respectful than these comments of hers.

These are hard issues. I really doubt that they would be less offensive if spoken differently.

I know that one can be obnoxious, and defend yourself by saying I am speaking the truth. But I also know that when the truth hurts, our tendency is to shoot the messenger. I ask you to really look inside, and see what about what I have said is offensive.

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful comments. Steve I also appreciate your attempts to get a straight answer from Ms. Luarca. Before adoptions in Guatamala were shut down, I asked Ms. Luarca if her associates provided monetary compesation to birthmothers that relinquished their children. She never answered the question. There are so many unanswered questions...

We need to keep our moral compas in place and universally condemn the kidnappings.

That said, I would encourage those of you who don't have a reason to question the validity of your adoptions (as well as those who do) to think about a search for the birthfamily. My daughter, who is 8, has found a lot of peace and pride from hearing facts about her birth family and hearing their side of the story on her adoption. She will not grow up wondering if her birth family was tricked or coerced into their decision.

One poster really put things in a great perspective. Our children have complex, stories that are their own. Our job as parents is to shine light on all the corners of their experience and help them deal with the everything they find -- the beautiful and the sorrowful.
He said (sort of) May our sons and daughters have power and strength.

Like Susana Suggested to Steve if he truly is in fact close to this situation and I am assuming that he is as his wife Shyrel is in the picture that Susana referenced-why not encourage this mother to do a DNA test? Also, Susana also has offered for Steve to review her file on this particular case which if I were there I would do. Like so many have pointed out, the focus should be on the children and to me or at least in this one case it is easy to determine if in fact this in the child this woman claims her to be.

I have to agree with Susana in regards to identification by pictures let alone passport photos. It is not concrete evidence. I am not downplaying the possible kidnappings as it is wrong but I think if it is possible to know with a doubt through DNA and it can be done with this mother then why not do it? My father was in law enforcement for over 20 years and many times false id's have been made through mug shots and pictures of suspected perpertrators of crimes. I am saying it happens.

I am hoping that when the truth is revealed (if it ever is) that the criminals are punished and not the children, the parents both birth and adoptive but that is exactly what is happening right now.

I have some questions that I hope are not too basic for someone to answer.1) Who is Susana Lucara? 2)The women who claim there children are stolen, what evidence have they provided? 3)I gather that 1 of these women has identified her child, how does she know its her child(photo?).4)Some folks seem to be saying that bribery and payoffs where very common, how do they know this. I believe every poster to this board who has researched their adoption claims it was above board.
I apologize it these questions have already been resolved but its that numerous claims and countercliams are made with little supporting data.

Steve,
Just had to make a quick point since your tone always seems to be so "high in a tower" as though the rest of us might not understand what you do. I don't know whether I agree with Ms. Luarca or not, but the word "could" does not have only one possible implication. Yes, one implication is that if something "could" be said then it is true. But the other implication is that you "could" say something just because you have the ability to do so and has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement. I think addressing anyone using a very biased interpretation of what they said and then making a snide comment about their knowledge off the english language just serves to make your arguments less credible.

I did a little research on DNA profiling and the legalities of it. It is hard to keep our DNA private if someone wants to get a sample. For example, think of how hard it would be to never throw away anything that has your DNA on it, like your soda cans after you drink from them, or your tissues that you blow your nose on, or our babies poopy diapers. Someone could go threw your garbage and get all kinds of DNA samples.

I found in Wikipedia *smile* that some countries allow DNA profiles performed based on a person's DNA obtained without the person's consent to be admitted as court evidence and other countries do not.

Sussana, if Guatemalan law allows DNA profiles from DNA samles obtained without the person's consent to be used as evidence, then why not go through her garbage and get some?

I'm also having a hard time understanding why a woman would refuse to be tested when both she and the alleged child are in Guatemala. Ithink that refusing to be tested undermines her claims. But I could be wrong. There may be other reasons for this.

Best, Cheryl

Thanks, Kate. Those are wise suggestions. To know is better than to not know intentionally out of fear. The fear will plague them forever.

Mary; Which court is Susana inviting me to review files in? Why do you think they would give me access to those files? How does she have access to those files? Either she is bluffing, or she is inviting me to do something that might be illegal. I really don't know which.

You seem to think that a sample of the mother's DNA will prove something. But if the child was fraudulently processed for adoption, it is not likely that her DNA was used, and so of course the DNA on record will not match the mother claiming that that is her stolen child. I think that Susana knows that, and that is why she pushes in that direction.

That is why I suggested that people privately check and match their child's dna to the paperwork in their adoption files. If it matches, it is very unlikely that their adoption was fraudulent.

The point of the hunger strike was to get DNA testing of the suspected children. All involved agree that you cannot be sure by a photo only. BUT that is all these poor mothers are being allowed access to at this point. Proof in so often in the hands of the perpetrators.

LA: I hear you, and wish I could come across correctly in tone and substance.

But you have to admit it gets hard when Susan talks in circles like this one

" you have not provided a single piece of evidence to support the allegations of Loyda Elizabeth Rodriguez Morales that her daughter was stolen and that she is the same girl as Karen Abigail López Garcia...

[they are asking that evidence be gathered! That is the main point, that they THINK she is, but need the DNA test to be sure]

... but attacked my credibility because I live in a nice house and drive a decent car, which is exactly what the "argumentum ad hominem" is all about...

[ yes, I have attacked credibility, but NO it had nothing to do with a nice house and car. No one on Guatadopt has. Why is she saying that? Where did that come from?]

...You want me to swear that what I say is the truth. I could swear it and you could still say that I am perjuring myself,"

IN that last part, I really was trying to give her the benefit of the doubt, by saying she is intelligent, and bilingual, but not a native English speaker. I would be interested in seeing a psychologist analyze this last sentence. She brings up the word Perjury, and seems to be saying a very ironic thing, if not a veiled confession. My question to her had not been focused on the swearing, but that it was the WHOLE truth and NOTHING but the truth. Susana brought in the legal implications of swearing to something one knows to be a lie. Very Freudian.

I don't have the degrees or experience, or access to facts that Susana has. I try to help folks here understand that that the other thing I don't have that she does is a motive to keep people who read this from focusing on the actual facts. I choose to do this by reasoning mostly with facts stated in these comments, so it is not a matter of Who, but What is said. I don't want to state some authority from, yes, being very close to many things. I want to challenge folks to not accept something because of who said it, but to logically question, and wonder why.

And yes, My wife was there in the hunger strike. She also tirelessly helps adoptive parents find the children who have been " misplaced" by the attorneys here. ( see June 8 post) She has no motive except to help her neighbor in need, whether it be an American adopting parent, or a Guatemalan woman whose child has been stolen. She sort of stepped in when Loyda's life was clearly threatened at the beginning of the strike. We banter on these pages, but the stakes are very high.

Henry: 1) Susana is the head of ADA, and there is a link on the main page of Guatadopt for that.

2, 3) The point is there is no proof, because people who do bad things don't then say when asked: " Oh yes, I did it and here is the proof." There I go again, sounding all high and mighty or maybe a tad sarcastic, but sometimes it seem the reasoning of denial needs a sharp rap to get one's attention. The mothers and the prosecutors want accurate information. The people who might be implicated by accurate information do everything they can to hide it, destroy it, and when they can't do that, to focus on something else to distract people from the actual point of issue.

4) Regarding actual data on bribes...see above reasoning regarding proof. From personal experience, I can tell you I heard from the actual person that they had a budgeted line item for the bribes to a judge. Do you believe me? It seems I HAVE read other commenter here saying they were sure there were payoffs in their adoptions.

Here is a link to an article that gives a broad background for the phenomenon of adoptions in Guatemala: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4508&page=0

The hunger strike ended after ten days of Norma Cruz , the mothers of Arlen Escaleth López López and Heidy Sarai Batz Par, joined later by Shyrel Osborne (Steve’s wife) camping in front of the Supreme Court building . Loyda Elizabeth Rodiguez Morales, the mother of Anyeli Liseth Hernández Rodríguez did not participate in the strike, although the picture of her daughter was displayed at the site. They claimed a victory because their lawsuits were accepted by the courts.

Loyda Elizabeth Rodriguez Morales did not sign the civil lawsuit that supposedly she filed last week, only her lawyers did on her behalf. Her demand is that the court annuls the final deed of adoption because she says that the notary, the lawyer who represented the adoptive parents and the director of the hogar who had legal custody of the Karen Abigail, all knew that such child was not the daughter of the woman who recorded her birth as her daughter, because the DNA turned out negative for maternity, and despite that, they did her adoption, and since Loyda’s daughter Anyeli Liseth was abducted, Karen Abigail is her daughter. I will not discuss here my opinion about this lawsuit, I just bring it up, to point out that, again, the DNA of Loyda was not offered to prove her right to claim Karen Abigail as her daughter.

In the criminal process against the director of Primavera and five lawyers, the judge refused the DNA test of Loyda’s genetic material requested by the director of Association Primavera on the grounds that the petition did not express who will pay for the DNA - as if the State is not obligated to substantiate all the proof – that the judge will not go to the lab to watch how the specimens are drawn as the petition requested, because “the people must come to the court” and because the petition did not state the name of the person who would draw the specimens. It would have to be the Forensic Institute who does it, and because the specimens are sent to Spain, the results are obtained after three months. Even if it takes that long to know the results, the DNA is the only way to establish if Loyda’s claims to be the mother of Karen Abigail have grounds or not. That Karen Abigail is no longer in Guatemala is irrelevant, because her genetic profile is on record, within the same file. The argument that the child could have been switched is absurd, since those very same DNA results are the cornerstone of the accusation, they cannot have it both ways: either it is the DNA of Karen Abigail or it is not. Since the DA and the court have taken for granted that it is, they cannot come later and say as Steve says: “But if the child was fraudulently processed for adoption, it is not likely that her DNA was used, and so of course the DNA on record will not match the mother claiming that that is her stolen child. I think that Susana knows that, and that is why she pushes in that direction.” We had nothing to do with that DNA test, as Karen Abigail was brought to Primavera in September 2007 and the DNA was done before then, in July 2007, but since it was negative for maternity, what was the purpose of using another child? To say that I know that a different child was used to get a negative result does not make any sense at all and to think - as Steve says he does – that I know that a different child was tested, is low, even for him.

Steve said: “… yes, I have attacked credibility, but NO it had nothing to do with a nice house and car. No one on Guatadopt has. Why is she saying that? Where did that come from?” Just scroll up a little and you will find the answer to your question, Steve, where it says, right after my first post on this thread: “ … But my blood boils now. A group of people who have profited for years and as the rumors and doubts grew all around them, resisted reform after reform attempt. This group is composed of people who have law degrees and assure us all they know the laws and and can tell you every wrong move the PGN and CNA have made....with great authority. They drive very nice cars and live in houses with incredible security systems, and have teams of assistants who investigate, and research for them.” I dare you to tell me that it was not a response to my post and that you were not undermining my credibility by bringing up my car and my house among other things that I don’t care to discuss here. If you don’t want to go to the court, I invite you to come to my office, where I have a copy of all the file that I gladly would show you. I hope that your Spanish is good enough to be able to read it, but if it is not, you may bring a translator and if you are afraid for your safety, I can guarantee that there is nothing to fear. I am very interested in proving you that everything I say – not only the first sentence on this thread - is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God. The file is over one thousand pages now, and nothing in there ties the accused people with the abducted daughter of Loyda. The six accused have ties only to Karen Abigail, because she was brought to the Primavera hogar after an adoption by relinquishment was not an option any more, and therefore, a petition to grant protective measures to the girl was requested to the Escuintla Minor’s court, as the law states. Karen Abigail was unclaimed for two years and she still is, because Loyda is not her mother. The DNA results done to her and to the woman posing as her mother show that only two alleles are different between them, so that means that they must be related. We only want to get Loyda’s genetic profile to compare it with Karen Abigail’s and end this discussion that has brought so much grief to all the families who are adopting and to the unfairly accused and to their families and friends.

Bribery is a way to sway the opinion of a public officer in one’s favor, but there are other ways too and a hunger strike with the proper media coverage, acts in the same way. The PGN is not signing off any cases now, as this was the purpose of the media show of the hunger strike. To stop adoptions for as long as possible and to make people desist of ever thinking of adopting from Guatemala or doing any adoptions in this country. To say that it helps the mothers who have lost their children, is not true as it could have been accomplished by filing the proper lawsuits as everyone does, it only helps to further the agenda of those who pushed for the Hague Convention and for the Adoptions Law, that has left without shelter and without the hope of a family, thousands of children in Guatemala and who knows how many more world wide.
Best regards,
Susana Luarca

Steve,

Since you are close to the situation, maybe you can answer these questions that have confused me -
- If the point of the hunger strike is to get the DNA testing, then why have petitions been filed to annul the adoptions (without the proof of the test)? It seems like this tactic would only serve to scare the adoptive parents away from ever consenting to do a new test.
- Why would someone falsify a DNA test that came back as a non-match? The initial non-match DNA makes it seem MORE likely that it was not a falsified test to me.
- If all involved agree that you cannot rely on photo recognition alone, then why are there people in jail? (this is a serious question, I do not understand this)

I am not trying to defend anyone or attack anyone, these are just questions that I have when I read all of the information and opinions that have been presented.

Time for me to chime in...

First off, a thanks to both Susana and Steve for their participation and thick skin. I suspect what we are reading here is a more thorough discussion, with all opinions being given fair time, than has appeared in any other media, possibly including the courtroom. Think about that for a minute.

IMHO, until a NEW DNA test is conducted on both Loyda and Karen Abigail, this can not be settled with 100% certainty.

Susana makes a great case about the fact that since no one seems to be attacking the integrity of the DNA lab itself (just the point of collection) or the integrity of the sample that a test on Loyda could prove or disprove maternity to the child that had the DNA mismatch.

While it would not make sense to use the DNA of non-maternal match if trying to bypass the system, it is also possible. Susana points out that the non-match showed a non-maternal family connection. Once again, a HYPOTHETICAL to show how this could have transpired.

What if the woman paid to do the DNA test, presumably with her child, was a liar/cheat? What if she lied to the people paying her and used her niece for the test? She got her money. She was just cheating a cheat....

I'm not saying that is what happened and there could be facts in the case unknown to me that would prove otherwise. But I've seen some really stupid things done in adoptions because people thought they'd never get scrutinized or just didn't know better.

The point here is that there is only one way to 100% determine this and it involves a brand new test between Loyda and the physical child she believes is her daughter.

I am very curious what evidence there is beyond a photo recognition to show that this is Loyda's child. I'm not disputing it. I am not accusing anyone. I an not "taking a side".

We know of instances where a woman, rightfully desperate following the worst nightmare any of us can imagine, sees a picture and believes it is the child incorrectly. Of course anyone in that situation would want more than anything to locate the child and believe they have done so.

IMHO, I don't think that anyone is lying in their posts. Just as I believe that the case can be made to show how evolution and creation fundamentally work in tandem, I can see Steve and Susana both being factually correct in what they say (which is not to say there is not some opinion as well). This just leads me to once again believe that the damn DNA test needs to be done on the child and Loyda to prove this!!!

Peace,

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Sit down, Susana, because what I am about to say may make you feel faint. You are right! Also, I appreciate that you have now answered my original question clearly re the truth. That is good enough for me. My Spanish is as good as my English, but legalese in either language is lost on someone like me.

An example of why I did not trust the way you state things is in these comments, is the way you changed my stating that I "am close enough to the story" to "Very close to the case of Loyda". I meant the whole adoption story, the movement of children from one home to another and from one jurisdiction to another. I have never spoken to Loyda or her attorneys, but i have heard from adoptive parents asking for help in adoptions. They paint a different picture of similar modi operandi. [sic]

My mistake in recognizing your reference to my referencing cars and homes was in that I was not attacking credibility, but ranting about the arrogance of wealthy people when competing with poor people. The car was in contrast to Loyda walking back and forth with her daughter. The home with a security system is in sharp contrast to the security in which Loyda lives, as you explain it. That kind of existence is inherently more difficult, and less accessible to justice than the wealthy and powerful. To suggest she provide a higher standard of proof than you want the PGN to apply to the wealthy elite of adoptions was what made my blood boil. It wasn't credibility I addressed. It was something as basic as fair play, maybe a double standard as well, that is ironically applied in reverse to the vastly different standards of living. Then I mentioned staff for research. But that didn't make it into your attempt to create the ad hominem defense. All of these are evidences of the advantage you and other lawyers have when facing these women in court, or on forums such as Guatadopt. Yet most commenters have read of the complaints by lawyers that the PGN was using too fine of a comb in the processing of files, to explain their "mistakes" causing kick backed files. So, that was a rant, not an argumentum ad hominem. I think we both agree that argumentum ad hominem is not a good thing.

In light of that, what was your purpose in referring to Norma Cruz's marriage?

Bribery is done in the dark, under the table. The hunger strike was out in the open, before the whole world. In the light. You are right, Susana, that each hopes to influence the judges of Guatemala. Which type of influence, do you suppose, is trying to influence them to do the right thing, and which is trying to get them to do something they know to be wrong?

I appreciate your assessment and conclusion, Kevin. IMNSHO, we need to hear more from you.

Its funny how cheated cheats seem to be the most righteously indignant, too!

This goes to show how complicated the scenarios can get. So we have to be careful about jumping to conclusions. I can think of many scenarios that could make it look like the child was kidnapped when in fact they weren't.

For example, assume that a child was abandoned. The attorney didn't want to go through the lengthy process of getting the child declared abandoned so the attorney hired another woman and their child to get a DNA test taken. The international adoption completes. In the mean time, the biological parents are being questioned by their relatives and neighbors, "where is the kid?" OUt of shame, the biological parents say, "the kid was stolen by those awful adoption attorneys."

The same thing could play out if the biological parents relinquished custody of the child and didn't show up for the test and the attorney decides to bypass proper proceeds by having another woman and child come for the DNA test.

We have had incidents in our own country of parents killing their children and claiming that they were kidnapped. THose horrible adoption attorneys are good scape goats for blaming the disappearance of a child.

Sounds like the improper/corrupt DNA testing was done before Susana came into the loop for this child. That is definitely another scenario. And then what do you do if the biological parents don't show up for a long time after proper procedures were used to put the APB out for them? Well, keeping the child in an orphanage for ever isn't a good idea.

I can think of scenarios where there isn't a mismatch, the adoption was legal and the biological parents are claiming it is illegal. Their relatives and their neighbors start questioning them about where the child is, they feel ashamed or scared. Or maybe discussions between the US and Guatemala aren't going well. A government official bribes them to claim the adoption was illegal to put pressure on the US. *shrug* it could happen.

I'm not saying that any of these scenarios apply to the three woman who are doing the hunger strike. Everything I know at this point is hearsay, meaning that I didn't get it first hand from the alleged mothers, the adoptive parents, etc.. I feel I don't have enough reliable information in order to know.

But I also want to say that I definitely do believe that children have been kidnapped for the purpose of international adoption and I think it is horrible.

Steve had commented probably over a year ago that a lot of dead women's bodies were being found. After reading the new thread that states 98 percent of murders go unsolved, I'm much more concerned that children were being kidnapped, their mother's murdered, ... Steve, did Guatemala implement that DNA bank of samples from the dead bodies that you had mentioned?

Do Guatemalan officials or the Guatemalan attorneys for the cases have copies of those DNA profiles? It sounds like that information is with someone in Guatemala. The Guatemalan government definitely should have at least asked for copies of those DNA reports.

On another note: somewhere I got lost and thought the child was still in Guatemala. I had assumed that she would be tested again as a part of determining whether Lloyda was her biological mother.

Best, Cheryl

Steve, I'd like to chime in more. A few things keep me from it.

First is time. I started a new job a year ago and unlike my last one, I'm busy. No time during the day for adoption stuff. And as my kids get older, stay up later, etc., my #1 priorities are more consuming of my free time.

Second is how I think I can at this point add the most value to Guatadopt. Things have become sadly divisive and in my equally not so opinion, unecessarily so. While I could certainly add fuel to the fire as I have in the past, I think now by best service is to interject the middle road that attempts to respect all and clarify.

Today, I believe, Obama is sitting down for a beer with the friend from Harvard and the cop that arrested him. While obviously a PR stunt, I think it's a great idea. Many sides could learn mutual respect and understanding if not agreeance if they could do the same. Maybe then Gallo vs Bud could be the relevant debate...

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Again, Kevin, you show your mettle, and have your priorities straight. Well, the Guatadopt community's loss is your kids' gain!

We need more people to pull that kind of publicity stunt, instead of covert "other" stunts.

I'll buy the next time you come to Guatemala!

Cheryl;

Everything you say is great as long as that first assumption is correct: that the child is abandoned. But if a BM is trying to avoid shame or embarrassment, would she involve herself in the traumatic activities that these poor, and resolute women are doing?

The more likely scenario is in the answer to the question by anonk. That the lawyer, who maybe didn't know whether or not the BM was legit, etc, [see Casa Quivira interview by CNN] the dna comes back negative. No problem, the lawyer tells their client, (and funding source); we will move the child to a friendly jurisdiction and have the child declared abandoned. Maybe the lawyer knows that the child was abducted, maybe not. So the abandonment resolution comes out, and the adoption continues. The investigation for family is extremely cursory at best, and a show at worst. It is mainly a small photo in a couple of newspapers run once. If the family is mainly illiterate, it is unlikely that they, even if looking for their child, will see it.

Most children's Judges in Guatemala are extremely reticent to declare an abandonment. They will bend over backwards to place a child in that status in a home indefinitely, because they do not want to accidentally declare a child eligible for adoption who may have been trafficked. But there are some who declare quite a few.

Also, anonk: the hunger strike is asking for annulment, that is the legal step. Any judge who would consider granting that would start by requiring a DNA testing.

Re your other question: Yes, all agree that the photo evidence is not much to go on. That sort of implies that there just might be more evidence on which these arrests were based. It may be that Primavera only received "the stolen merchandise " after the fact, and unknowingly. But you may consider that the authorities in this case behaved at some level of decorum. Unless you buy the propaganda that Guatemalan authorities are subhuman idiots who cannot do anything right and only live to disrupt the well meaning child savers of the ADA. The MP and Police here have been made to look and feel like fools by the cavalier activities of the adoption lawyers. I am sure they jumped at the opportunity to act in a way that showed they could do something. It remains to be seen whether they acted correctly or not. My point in challenging some of Susana Luarca's comments is that the readers here are only getting one side when she speaks. As a trained attorney, she probably does not feel a need to state the reasoning and facts of the other side. That is why the jury in a trial hears from the Defense, and the prosecution. But there is no opposing attorney here, and so you are only hearing one side of the story.

Wondering what interview you keep referring to that involved the owners of Casa Quivira where they stated that they had a negative DNA match? Subsequently moving the child to a "freindly" jurisdiction to (I am assuming what you are suggesting)a COA. I would like to view that interview.

Mary, I use the CQ interviews to show where the Lawyers said they do not know anything about the veracity of the BM. That is why I inserted the parenthetical comment there. The rest of my sentence had nothing to do with CQ.

There was an AC360 interview, in Oct '07, in which the owner, and lawyer at Casa Quivira were questioned by Harris Whitbeck about the false address in the BM data in the dossier on record. I cannot find a transcript quickly, but they basically said they were not responsible for the veracity of details. I guess it sticks out in my mind as the first time I heard someone who is obviously in charge of the process "play dumb" in such a bold and forthright manner.

Here is a quote from a subsequent (3/10/2008) USA Today article with similar sentiments expressed:

..."I have nothing to do with documents. I don't touch documents," [CQ owner] Phillips said. "They want me to be responsible for
making sure the process is not fraudulent? I'm not equipped to do that. I have faith that the Guatemalan attorneys
did all they could to check it out."
Defense lawyers for Casa Quivira's attorney and notary, in turn, blamed birth mothers and others for fraud, telling
the judge at the Monday hearing that they can't be responsible for confirming that the documents they present are
legitimate.
But Solicitor General Mario Gordillo told the AP that somebody had to have walked the women through the process....

I forgot this in my prior post:

Susana implies that Pgn is not signing off on any cases at this point. I read of at least one person on Guatadopt who recently reported being out of PGN.

For those still waiting and hoping to get out of PGN, can someone with knowledge please let us know what the current status of PGN is?

Last I heard, it was operational and processing adoptions and that it was required to finish all the grandfathered cases.

Just would like clarity for those still waiting, as reading that PGN is not signing off on cases is heart wrenching when you are still in PGN waiting to get out. If it isn't true, and cases are being signed off, then folks should know this.

Steve,

I guess I wasn't clear enough in what I said. I'm talking in general, it cannot be assumed that because a woman alleges that her child was kidnapped, even in the event that she turns out to be the biological mother, that the child was kidnapped or that the adoption was illegal.

I wasn't speaking specificaly to these three cases. I simply don't know about these three cases. More than likely, a woman wouldn't go through all of that unless her child went missing. But still, it is possible that she would.

Based on the new thread, it looks like a new precedence is being set. That a child can be returned if the adoption was illegal.

Best, Cheryl

What does it mean if a Guat.court nullifies an adoption? Does that have any legal effect in the U.S.?

Can anyone require these parents to have a DNA test done on their children?

The situation seems to be: a women in Guatemala says her child was stolen. She sees a photo of a child in the U.S. and claims it is hers. Unless the AP's voluntarily agree to he test I don't see how this can ever move forward. I don't think any AP would voluntarily agree to a test unless they were agreeable to return the child. Why let them test your child if you have no plan to return him to Guatemala?
It's a real mess.

Comment by Henry at July 31, 2009 03:09 PM

Henry,
It's not clear to me that even if the adoptions are nullified in Guatemala that the APs could be forced to return the children. It would certainly involve a lot of legal wrangling before that happened, if it ever did. I read in recent cases in Samoa , where children were found to be kidnapped (I think the actual situation was that the parents were told that the children were being brought to the US to be educated and would be returned, but were really adopted by US families). In at least some of those cases, they resolved it by having those found guilty set up a $ fund to allow for open adoption /visitation.