banner1.jpg


August 26, 2009

DNA A Match

Prensa Libre is reporting that a DNA test has come back showing a positive match between Loyda Elizabeth Rodríguez Morales and the child adopted as Karen Abigail. That child obviously being Anyely Liseth Hernández. Don't get hung up on the sentences. It honestly seemed too weird to say a DNA match came back positive between someone and her daughter.

If I put together a few pieces, and since I know that this will come up.... My guess is that this is the court ordered test of Loyda, matching to the DNA sample that was taken as part of the failed DNA test for "Karen Abigail".

Many emotions come to mind right now as I type this. I'm not sure I want to vocalize them right now.

Here is the story: http://www.prensalibre.com/pl/2009/agosto/26/337945.html.

As Walter Cronkite used to sign off, "That's the way it is".

Posted by Kevin at August 26, 2009 09:02 PM
Comments

wow. scary in so many ways.

Posted by: mommy at August 26, 2009 09:48 PM

The papers in Guate are reporting that with the results of a positive DNA match between Loyda Elizabeth and her daughter Anyeli, the annulment procedure can continue.

The Positive DNA match was what was needed for the Annulment of the adoption to be recognized.

Link: http://www.elperiodico.com.gt/es/20090827/pais/111673/

Posted by: Marie at August 27, 2009 08:32 AM

Kevin,

What the news does not say is that there are very high probabilities (95%) that the woman who presented the girl and who is not the mother of the girl, is her aunt. That could mean a lot of things, but together with the four different versions that the parents of the girl had given of how their daughter was stolen, increases the suspect that there was collusion of the relatives of the girl and the intermediary.

What it is abundantly clear is that none of the lawyers and much less the director of Primavera, had something to do with the form that this girl came into the system and that the initial assumption that both were related, and therefore, that she was an abandoned girl, is well grounded.

I am sorry for the Missouri family, because once it is established that the adoption, the visa and the citizenship were granted to a girl that does not exist, the child will be brought back to Guatemala. I only hope that all the authorities, as well as the relatives of the girl, take into consideration the best interest of the child, in every decision they take.

Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at August 27, 2009 10:11 AM

I fear that this case is the tip of the iceberg in terms of DNA fraud. Very sad for all...and potentially indicative of a larger conspiracy.

Posted by: karenms1 at August 27, 2009 12:05 PM

Kevin,

So did the parents in Missouri finally agree to give a dNA sample or did the Guatemalan authorities rely on the DNA profile after all?

Posted by: anon at August 27, 2009 12:31 PM

Please help me follow this story.A woman in GT stated her child was kidnapped. Her DNA matches the DNA of an adopted child in Mo. The adoption documentation of the Mo.AP's has some other women listed as the mother.
?'s
Did the AP's in Mo. provide a sample for the DNA test?
Is everone convinced this second DNA test is valid?
What is U.S. law regarding a fraudulant adoption? Must the Mo. surrender the child?

Thanks

Posted by: Henry at August 27, 2009 12:50 PM

Here is your translation. Mostly thanks to Google's translation facility. Best, CHeryl

A DNA test has confirmed the relationship between a woman and a girl that was adopted.

The DNA report presented to the Sixth Court of Criminal Trial confirms that the woman is the mother of the girl that disappeared when she was 2 ½ years old.

The report was conducted by the National Institute of Forensic Sciences (INACIF) and is part of an early test against five lawyers that have been accused of participating in adoption anomalies.

The investigations indicate that the child was adopted by an American couple residing in the United States Missouri.

The mother’s story is that her daughter was kidnapped in 2006 when her daughter was playing in the courtyard of their home in Villa Hermosa, San Miguel Petapa.

Susana, I would think they would also DNA test the aunt in question to see if her profile matches the profile of the "related woman." Are they going to do that?

Posted by: cheryl at August 27, 2009 12:57 PM

karenms1,
I do not understand your comment, since there was no DNA fraud in this case. The original DNA did not match, but it was not a fraudulent test.

Posted by: k at August 27, 2009 01:25 PM

Karenms,

This is not a case of DNA fraud. The original DNA test came back negative...no fraud. The subsequent test of the "real" BM matched the original test of the child...no fraud. The genetic markers show a close familial relationship of the BM and the woman who purported to be the BM at the time of relinquishment again...no fraud.

Posted by: soon2bdad at August 27, 2009 01:28 PM

It is extremely sad for all involved. Especially for the child.

Susana and Kevin,

We would all really appreciate your help in figuring out what is going on here.

The alleged "aunt" is on the mother's side or the father's side? I would think they would know from the DNA profile whether the related woman was on the mother's side or the father's side. Then the question is how many aunts are on each side. Are we in a position to narrow it down to one related woman at this point?

Does Guatemalan law enable them to require the alleged woman or women to provide DNA samples?

If I'm missing something, we have a few possibilities here:
1) a female relative kidnapped Anyely,
2) one of the biological parents, without the consent of the other biological parent, decided to put Anyely up for adoption and persuaded the female relative to pose as the mother.
3) both of the biological parents decided to put Anyely up for adoption and persuaded the female relative to pose as the mother.

Now, if 3 is the situation, then would the US send the child back? OK, granted, the name on the visa is wrong and the mother was "married" at the time, but the intent of both parents in case 3 would be to put the child up for adoption.

Look, I know I'm speaking hypothetically when I listed the three possible scenarios above. But I think a lot of people would be interested in understanding how the law works in various situations. Well at least I'm interested in knowing.

I think that the individuals that will be called to testify will end up saying lots of ugly things about each other. There are going to be lots and lots of accusations back and forth. Incredibly sad.

Best, Cheryl

Posted by: cheryl at August 27, 2009 02:01 PM

susana said:

I am sorry for the Missouri family, because once it is established that the adoption, the visa and the citizenship were granted to a girl that does not exist, the child will be brought back to Guatemala.

i ask: can they REALLY make the family return the child to Guatemala. I'm not looking to argue moral obligations, I just want to know if the family has a choice in the matter. thank you.

Posted by: mommy at August 27, 2009 02:21 PM

Cheryl,

Why is it that one scenario you you didn't mention is the simple one - this child was abducted from in front of her house just like her mother said?

I know VERY little "inside info"... In the past, when Susana mentioned this family relationship in the failed DNA test, I suggested the possibility that a relative could have been behind the kidnapping. Susana didn't elaborate why, but didn't think that was possible. Of course, no offense intended Susana, but you also wrote many times that the child in MO was not Anyeli and that now appears to be incorrect.

At this point, I think we need to accept one fact - a kidnapped child made it through the abandonment process and was adopted by a US family. That is what we know.

What we don't know... Who did the kidnapping? Who knew about it? Did those involved in the final adoption have any knowledge of this, or reason to believe there may have been foul play? Big questions indeed.

At this point, I think it is wrong to jump to any conclusions on the above questions. But it is also equally, or more, wrong to continue to try find "excuses" for how a kidnapped child made it to the US. I have seen cases in the past where kidnapping claims were made but evidence seemed to point elsewhere - such as if her DNA was used at a test. Nothing was reported, etc. In this case, that does not appear to be what happened.

As shocked as we alll are I think it is time to face facts - a kidnnapped child was adopted. I wrote years ago that it had happened. At least at that time I knew of kidnapped kids were placed for adoption. So now we know that at leats got through the process. We can't deny this or try to rationalize it. It happened!

I'm not saying who is to blame, should be arrested, etc. But let's not deny what the tragic end result was.

Paz,

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at August 27, 2009 02:33 PM

to all:

1.) I don't know if the MO family submittted to a DNA test. My guess is that Loyda's sample was tested against the failed DNA test sample. So my guess is that they did not but I don't know
2.) As for what happens, I don't think ANYONE can speculate on what might happen. If the child's adoptive family chooses to fight, I don't think there is any legal precedence to look at for guidance.
3.) My hope would be for all parties to come together as adults, joined in their mutual love of this little angel, and see if there is any way to keep lawyers and governments out of it. I think that could be the best thing for all parties involved.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at August 27, 2009 02:43 PM

I'm sure that Karen Abigail is not the only "kidnapped child" that made it through the abandonment system and I'm sure many will question the kids who already went through the process as to if they were "kidnapped" as well. But the kids that were already adopted and in the United States right now went through the legal abandonment process when the DNA did not match or the "birthmother" disappeared. Should we of let these kids live their lives in a city orphanage because there could be a chance someone took them? Most abandonment cases that I know take at least a year if not more to complete. I know alot of these birthmothers live in villages far off with no money or a way to make it to the city and I feel horrible for them but again...these kids still needed families and homes right?

Posted by: Terri at August 27, 2009 03:36 PM

One of my personal concerns is that my when my sons are older they will ask how I know that their adoptions were done "the right way" and that they weren't kidnapped. While I plan on looking for the my sons' birthmothers, what about redoing my sons' side of the DNA tests? I assume that one of the common ways of creating fraudulant DNA test is to substitute another mother & child for the samples. If that is the case, my sons' results wouldn't match those taken in Guatemala...correct?

Posted by: KO at August 27, 2009 03:53 PM

Kevin,

You said, "why is it that one scenario you didn't mention is the simple one--this child was abducted from in front of her house just like her mother said?"

I must be missing something here. I thought the failed DNA test showed that the woman was a close relative. The people in Missouri from my understanding have refused to do a DNA test. So I would have thought that they were using the child's profile from the failed DNA test.

I'm sure you have sources of information that I have not seen.

Best, Cheryl

Posted by: cheryl at August 27, 2009 04:05 PM

The DNA samples were taken of Loyda Elizabeth Rodrìguez Morales, at the 6th. court during a hearing, where three different samples were taken: blood by the INACIF (State Forensics Institute), mouth swabs by the Forensic Anthropology Institute and by the defense of Enriqueta Noriega, the director of Primavera. The results of that test were matched to the previous DNA results and they prove that the girl is Loyda's daughter but also that both are related to the woman who went as her mother to the first DNA test, which indicates that it was not a kidnapping, but a relinquishment by an aunt, probably because the girl had a father and in order to relinquish her for adopton, she had to be a child of a single parent and that is why they had to change her identity.

The Ministerio Publico should have investigate that in the first place, instead of building a case against me, which seems to be their goal, as the MP agent Oscar Amìlcar Rivas Morales has told everybody, that he will not rest until he puts me in jail. I am being charged with “traffic of persons in an irregular adoption” “conspiracy” and “use of false documents”. I will have to attend a hearing on September 11th. , to give a deposition. The judge will decide at the end of the hearing if she dismisses all the charges, or upholds all or some of the charges, sending me to jail or leaving me free on bail. Since I have not done anything wrong, I have no fear, even after I saw what the same judge did to Enriqueta Noriega, the director of Primavera, who has been in jail for three months, charged with the same felonies, except for conspiracy.
Primavera sheltered and placed for adoption a girl that was abandoned, who was neither claimed by her mother during the abandonment process nor during the adoption process, and who went to the verification interview at the PGN last year, and nobody identified her as her daughter. We just did what the law states for a case like hers. If the parents of Anyeli want her back, they will have to follow the legal steps to make it happen. We will not be in their way, as all we always have wanted is the best for this lovely girl that we knew as Karen Abigail.


Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at August 27, 2009 04:16 PM

I know these ?'s have been answered before but I need to refresh myself so I can talk to some concerned family members about all this.
Can someone clarify something for me. Was there an origianl dna test taken before the abandoment process? Because of this not matching it then went into the abandoment process? I thought in abandoment process there were no dna test done because there were no parents to match to and the child had to be determined by the courts to be an orphan. Can this process be done by a 3rd party then the child given to an orphanage/lawyer to start the adoption process.
All things I have been asked and I want to have the most correct answers to give.
thanks for the help

Posted by: Cathie at August 27, 2009 04:17 PM

Thanks to Guatadopt and Kevin for such candor. These are hard times and I am convinced that things are going to get worse. Norma Cruz and the women who have gone on hunger protest are principled women and this is just the first of the current cases (3 in total). Let's remember, Ana Escobar (who was reunited with her daughter Ester) also worked with Norma Cruz and clearly that was child kidnapping. And, Norma Cruz is a woman who does not take risks of chasing down flimsy cases (and bringing international attention)--so, we all have to wait and watch on these adoption nullifications as they proceed through civil court in Guatemala (they may or may not be anulled). And yes, there is no legal precedent from previous cases of adoption fraud/kidnapping (including notorious Cambodia)of the US Government forcibly removing a child from the US because visa fraud (child sales/kidnapping) occured. **There have been a number of cases that have come to light, mind you** However, under the Hague Convention the US is required to collaborate with other party states when fraud/illegal activities need to be investigated related to child sales and kidnapping. So, we will see. Arguably this particular case went through pre-Hague Convention. So...we must wait and watch to see exactly what each government will do and it is clear that something must be done in terms of righting a wrong. I mean, can you imagine knowing that your daughter was kidnapped--identifying where she is in another country--and then being told TOUGH LUCK because you are too poor to access legal assistance and fight this on an international scale....not ok. On the other hand...there has to be a reasonable answer here as a child's health and well-being on a psychological level is at stake here.

Again, thanks Kevin for your candor. I appreciate your willingness to call out Susana's conveniently changing story. We all need to remember that she represents a particular set of constituents (adoption attorneys) and some of them are implicated in this case.

Posted by: karenms1 at August 27, 2009 04:35 PM

If the child was abandond why was there a DNA test at the begining? Who was it done on, the aunt??I thought if a child was going through the abandonment process they were just left. Were all the children that were said to be stolen abandond on the adoption paper work?? new mom and just trying to figure all this out.

Posted by: jo05 at August 27, 2009 04:38 PM

Karen...To be clear, I have not suggested that Susana has changed her story in any way. I've also stated that I don't believe Susana would have knowingly been involved in the adoption of a kidnapped child. I've stated that I believe the real shame was that the system operated in a such a way that it could have happened. Let's remember that Susana pushed to force Loyda into this DNA test. Either it was a legal CYA or she honestly thought it would not come back a match. Reason for that, I speculate, being this family relationship thing.

Cheryl, I have no info you have note seen. And I see nothing you are missing. But, the fact that the person who posed as her mother may have been "family" does not negate that the child was kidnapped. Assuming it is true, it certainly seems like an important fact for investigators to utilize...

KO - yes, if you had your child tested and it matches the DNA on file, then according to all accounts seen thus far, it would show he could not have been kidnapped.

Cathie & jo05 - As I understand it, this adoption started out as a relinquishment case not affiliated with Susana/Primavera. The DNA test was done and came back a mismatch. The PAPs then turned to Susana for help moving it through the abandonment process. The child was declared abandoned and thus the adoption was finalized without a DNA test. Hope that clears it up.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at August 27, 2009 06:45 PM

Kevin, do you know with whom this case started out with? Anyone here know?

Posted by: simplyme at August 27, 2009 07:11 PM

This is so sad, so troubling, for so many reasons, including all those children who were legitimately relinquished but are now stuck in the system because of the suspicion of corruption.

Like one of the above commenters noted, I have not followed this case closely, so forgive me for asking questions that may seem obvious. But,

--If this was a standard abandonment, rather than a relinquishment by the birth mother, what would have been the motive in stealing this baby? Stealing her to put her in an orphanage? Or is the allegation that the orphanage itself was corrupt and involved in trafficking?

--Was it not a red flag when the DNA test showing that the person relinquising the child was not her biological mother but was a close relative? Again, forgive me if this has already been covered, but that reeks of corruption from the get go no?

I am not not trying to diminish the horror of this crime that was committed, just trying to make sense of it and wondering if, perhaps, there is more to it than a straightforward kidnapping. Not that it would mitigate it, but I just would like to understand.

I want to thank you Keven for putting all this out there for us. It's troubling indeed, but information is utimately power.

Finally, I have not commented a lot on these threads but I did want to comment on a comment made on one of the prior posts by the adoptive parents of the child (was her name hazel?) whose parents detected fraud before completing the adoption and invested a great deal of expense and time to see the story through, even if it meant losing her -- it's all being worked out.

Of course, I respect and admire these parents a great deal. However, I resist the assumption/ suggestion that they were the only ones who saw fraud and didn't go along. From what I read about their case, it was pretty obvious that all was not right, simply by the way the lawyer spoke and was unable and uninterested in clearing up discrepancies. Just wanted to say that contrary to what the mother implied in a prior comment, I think many of us here on this board would have done the same thing.

Fact is, many of us have cases that have no discrepancies -- at least no big apparent discrepancies -- and no lawyers urging us to look the other way. Many of us have cases where everything checked out from the very beginning, to the very end, when the final birth mother interview was added as an additional requirement. There is such a thing as legitimate adoption in Guatemala, and I daresay, the vast majority were legit. This is not to take away from the pressure that poverty creates, and the role it plays in children being reliquished. Guatemalan adoptions are nothing if not complex. However, this does not constitute fraud.

I think we all as adoptive parents need to follow this case and ask the tough questions. But we all also need to avoid the temptation of looking suspiciously on every Guatemalan/American child here in the U.S. No, 10,000 legit cases can not compensate for one (or more) kidnappings, but we can't throw the baby out with the bath water so to speak.

This is important to me, as the mother of an adopted two year old girl, and also as someone who has so many friends stuck in the system.

Posted by: somanyquestions at August 27, 2009 08:43 PM

Karen,

I really hope that the new process prevents this kind of thing from happening. It seems like the assumption is that if the profit motive is taken out of the process, then these things won't happen. But I'm sorry to say, I think there are criminals who will find ways of making a buck. Wouldn't it make sense to have a 3rd DNA test performed when the child arrives at the destination country and performed under the supervision of the destination country's government officials? Preferably the 3rd DNA test would be done very soon on arrival.

Best, Cheryl

Posted by: cheryl at August 27, 2009 08:45 PM

kevin or ???
were the other 2 adoptions in question abandonment cases also , or did a mother sign until the end?

Posted by: jo05 at August 27, 2009 09:12 PM

Somanyquestions:

I'll try to give you a synopsis of this case as I have been following this case very closely.

On November 2006, Loyda reported her daughter missing from her front courtyard of her home. A police report was filed at that time and over the course of nearly 3 years, Loyda has been searching for her daughter. Loyda participated in a hunger strike last year to bring attention to her case and this year participated in the hunger strike in "name". After searching through files she identified her daughter through a picture of Karen Abigail that was adopted out to a couple in MIssouri. the child has been in the US since December 2008.

The story of what happened to the child goes something like this: the child shows up at an hogar with a woman posing to be her mother to be relinquished. As a relinquishment, the child and "mother" undergo DNA testing and fail the testing. Per Kevin's comment, the PAPs persued Susana and asked her to take on the case, per Susana Luara (in a previous thread) took on the case that no one else would.

The child was then processed as an abandonment through the courts in Escuintla. The judge who ordered the abandonment decree is now under investigation for unethical actions in his declarations of abandonments.

The hogar attorney has been in jail for trafficking of human beings (Susana commented on that in this thread) for 3 months. I imagine she is there pending trial. There are other attorneys, I believe the news paper stated 5 attorneys in total that were being investigated.

DNA tests were conducted on Loyda and tested against the DNA originally taken (the test that rendered a failed maternal match). Susana suggests that due to the genetic markers that the person posing as the birthmother could have been a relative of Loyda's and offers up the suggestion that perhaps Loyda and her sister orchestrated the entire thing -- which doesn't make sense why then would Loyda go through so much trouble for so many years if her intent was always to give up her child?

The family in Missouri had refused to cooperate and hired an attorney. Susana even stated that the family refused to take her calls. Susana was also adamant that the child in Missouri was not Anyeli. as it turns out, she was incorrect. The DNA test confirm that the child in Missouri is in fact Anyeli.

So this did not start off as an abandonment. It started off as a relinquishment that failed the DNA match requirement. I would imagine that since the DNA required a photograph that the authorities have DNA and photo identification, and cedula of the person that posed as the birthmother -- in other words: they can find that person. therefore, the mystery of if it was Loyda's sister or not can be discovered quite easily I would imagine.

Now that the identity of the child has been confirmed, the next step is to annul the adoption. Per Susana once that is done, the basis for the visa and citizenship is invalid so the logical step would be for the child to be returned to Guatemala. Since there is no historical presidence for that, none of us know what is going to happen.

Posted by: Ana01 at August 27, 2009 10:53 PM

To answer a few questions:

jo05-Yes the other kidnapping cases were also issued COAs (certificate of abandonement). The biomothers did not sign until the end, they have been looking for their child for years. The woman who posed as the biomother in the Anyeli case when the FIRST DNA test came back negative, disappeared. As reported, the Judge in Escuintla who issued these COAs and is under investigation due to issuing so many COAs with anomalies.

Others- Just from simple observation over the years on these forums, it was not unusual to see cases who had a negative DNA result turn into an abandonement case, as told by the PAPs. The usual storyline was given that a relative relinquished the child, hence the results. No family would come forward and then the case would go the abandonement route, a lengthy procedure. There could be many other reasons for this of course, distance from the capital (have you ever wondered how an illerate girl with no money and lives very far away...gets to the capital into an attorney's office?), new boyfriend, moved away due to work, death, etc. I agree that it is a red flag with a negative DNA test that should not be overlooked by a Judge, especially when the docs were faked and there was awareness of mothers searching for their missing children.

One can argue in the defense that the "aunt" (as told by Susana Luarca herself) took the child unbeknowst to the biomother, that is a kidnapping in my book.

The deeper question for folks to ponder is that if it is true what is being towed as what happened that the sister of Loyda relinquished the child because Loyda was married...THEN,,,WHY DID LOYDA FILE A MISSING CHILD REPORT WITH THE PNC WHEN THE CHILD WENT MISSING AND HAS BEEN SEARCHING FOR YEARS???!!!

Loyda has stayed true in her search for her daughter since the day she went missing. Same as the other mothers at the hunger strike and same as the other mothers who are STILL searching for their missing children. Women have been ignored by police departments and that deters many from coming forward.It is a simple fact of reality in Guate.

There have been other kidnapped kids, just google them or search our own archives on this site.
We EXTENSIVELY covered and discussed the Galicia sisters kidnapping who were referred to PAPs all the while, being kidnapped children. Luckily, two of the sister were returned to their mother, sadly Enma is still missing.

You may want to google other cases to read up on this:
Mildred Alvarado,
Ana Escobar,
Ricardo Borz (Osmin Ricardo Tobar Ramirez) and his brother Jeffrey,
Enma Galicia,
Marlen Sofia Diaz Borrayo,
Pablo son of Elivia Ramírez Caño,
Manuel de Jesus son of Marta Lidia Barrientos,
Kimberly Xiomara Pineda Albizurez (or Siomara Arbizurez),
There are many more, just google
child trafficking Guatemala or kidnappings masked as adoption.

Time is of the essence in all kidnapping cases, it is a shame that so much resistance and uncooperative tactics were seen in these cases. Usually families of kidnapped kids get poured with compassion, it is very sad to see that these mothers received none.

Posted by: marie at August 28, 2009 05:38 AM

Hmmm...wouldn't just looking at the Cedula or the Negative DNA test that the Lab did and has the photo of the woman who relinquished Anyeli put
to rest if it was her aunt or not.
I am sure many of us would like this to be made public.

Posted by: marie at August 28, 2009 08:43 AM

This is so sad for everyone it make me sick. So none of these children that have been stolen have had a relinquishment they have all been declared abandond??? I was under the impression someone posed as a BM and signed until the end a nd the dna was false. Thanks for any info!
Newtothis

Posted by: newtothis at August 28, 2009 09:22 AM

karenms1 wrote: We all need to remember that she [Susana Luarca] represents a particular set of constituents (adoption attorneys) and some of them are implicated in this case.

My response: Perhaps it's just semantics, but I don't think it's accurate to suggest that Susana "represents" the views of "adoption attorneys," particularly when Susana comments about the specifics of this case. It would be equally inaccurate to suggest that karenms1 "represents" the views of U.S. social workers, or that Kevin "represents" the views of PAPs and APs.

karenms1 wrote: I fear that this case is the tip of the iceberg in terms of DNA fraud [and] I am convinced that things are going to get worse.

My response: I don't think it's going to get much worse than it is right now.

The iceberg analogy may be apt. At the risk of being overly colorful, it may be that the totality of intercountry adoptions from Guatemala is the "ocean," those who have navigated the adoption process (or are still trying to) took the Titanic, and kidnappings (and other instances of gross corruption) are the "iceberg" that brought the Titanic down.

But, with respect, the idea that things are going to get worse seems a little dramatic to me. I mean, the ship has already sunk, and we know it could have been prevented, right? What's going to happen now that's worse than that?

At this point, uncovering past instances of corruption, to carry the iceberg analogy through, is akin to investigating why the ship sunk. The iceberg alone was not the cause. After all, the iceberg could have been avoided had any one of a number of things happened. Other causes must also be investigated, and we should not lose sight of the ocean and the ship in our current focus on the iceberg.

And investigating kidnappings and alleged anomalies in on-going adoptions is kinda like sending out a life boat to find survivors. We hope and we pray and we might even get a little lucky, but we know damage has been done and the odds get longer with each passing day.

Finally, as I'm sure karenms1 would agree, we didn't and shouldn't stop travelling dangerous waters because the Titanic sunk. Children continue to need the safe port of permanency.

Posted by: Chip at August 28, 2009 10:23 AM

Just to give some context about Guatemala (and I believe all APs will understand about the complications of processes here...). You don't file a report just because. Starting a process like these mothers did is horrowing, confusing and expensive. You can bet the police first wondered if they had sold their children. You can be sure that people were not nice to them and questioned them. Also, Guatemalans are aware of the dangers of starting any process that implicates people that are more powerful than you. They knew they were going against an established system. I assure you that even people who can afford it, think hard before starting processes simply because it is hard, painful, and often fruitless. They know the odds are against them and that they will be questioned over and over, held suspect until the end (she gave the child to her sister to relinquish her, she sold her, changed her mind, made up a story about kidnapping, etc. etc.). Who engages in such a fight anywhere? Who engages in such a fight in a country where impunity has been rampant through history? Any parent who is slightly familiar with Guatemalan realities -who has stepped beyond the official story told by those who had a lot to gain from keeping the old system- will realize that many of the "theories" thrown to discredit these women are quite far-fetched.

Posted by: Mariale at August 28, 2009 10:50 AM

Terri wrote:

"But the kids that were already adopted and in the United States right now went through the legal abandonment process when the DNA did not match or the "birthmother" disappeared. Should we of let these kids live their lives in a city orphanage because there could be a chance someone took them? Most abandonment cases that I know take at least a year if not more to complete. I know alot of these birthmothers live in villages far off with no money or a way to make it to the city and I feel horrible for them but again...these kids still needed families and homes right?"

The thing is, these kids didn't need families and homes. THEY HAD FAMILIES AND HOMES. Imagine how you would feel if someone kidnapped your child, placed them in orphanage, and then said, well s/he was in an orphanage, so the person who adopted him/her doesn't have to even let you see your child again.

I thank Marie and Ana and others for consistently reminding us that a mother's love for a child is not lessened because of her citizenship or socioeconomic status.

Posted by: M.E. at August 28, 2009 11:05 AM

Since there are so many “experts” in this case, I will offer the version that is based on documents and evidence that I have received from the court who has the case. Feel free to prove me wrong, but please do not do it based on your assumptions, but on evidence, as everything I will say is based on official documents, copies of which were provided by the Sixth Criminal court.

On November 4th, 2006, Dayner Orlando Hernández filed a Police report stating that his wife went up to the roof the day before, around 4:30 p.m. to hang clothes to dry and when she came down ten minutes later, their daughter Anyely Liseth Hernandez Rodriguez was gone and that nobody gave him any information about her whereabouts.

On April 2007, the Police investigator who had the case died of asphyxia and the original file of the missing Anyeli disappeared. The Public Ministry sent several summons to Dayner, who did not show up.

On September 26, 2008 , Loyda gave a deposition at the MP, where she told the version that she was coming back from the market with her baby in arms and let go the hand of Anyeli to unlock the gate of the house where she rented a room, and then Anyeli took off and she saw when a woman took her and put her into a cab and took off. Loyda also said that a police car took her to search the area but the cab was gone so she filed a Police report that does not form part of the file nor has been ever mentioned, so it is possible that it does not exist.

Karen Abigail was relinquished for adoption by a woman named Felicita Antonia López Garcia, on January 12th., 2007 when she signed an act giving custody of the girl to a foster mother named Veronica. A MO couple accepted Karen to adopt her and the adoption process started. It has been admitted by the intermediary in her deposition in court, that he paid thirty thousand quetzales to the woman who brought the case to him and that he saw when she divided the money with the birthmother and other women who came with them. After arguing the lack of the ID of the midwife as an excuse for not doing the DNA, six months later, the DNA was finally done in July 2007, and when the results were known, it was 0.00% for probability of maternity.

When the adoption by relinquishment was no longer possible, the MO couple asked for Primavera’s help, as they were very attached to the girl and still wanted to do adopt her. They felt that they had been fooled by the agency and by the intermediary who must have known that her documents were not right. Since the foster mother could not support her any longer and she was not being paid and nobody claimed Karen, the director of Primavera admitted her at the hogar and a process of abandonment was initiated as a way to restore the rights of a child whose rights were violated, as it was the case of this girl who nobody claimed and for all we knew, was abandoned. The denounce was filed at the Minors Court, Primavera paid for ads in the newspapers with pictures of Karen that I took and developed myself, so any doubts casted by some posters that the pictures were of another girl, are groundless and malicious. The ad also stated that it was a two year old girl, which was enough to call the attention of her parents if they were really looking for her.

In the abandonment processes, the PGN does the investigation , not the hogar and it is the PGN who recommends the ruling that almost always, the Judge follows to the letter. The hogar has no way to control the outcome of the process. If for instance, as woman shows up at the court and proves to be the mother with her cedula matching the birth certificate of the child, the judge gives her the child right there, without even doing a DNA test. In this case, everything proved that Karen was an abandoned girl that nobody claimed, therefore her abandonment was ruled by the court and the Primavera director was ordered to place Karen for adoption, as fast as possible, as a way to restore her rights that were violated by the abandonment. The most logical choice was to place her with the MO couple, who loved her and had remained committed to Karen.

A new process of adoption was started in December 2007, which was finalized in October 2008, the adoption was recorded, new birth certificates were issued and Karen traveled to the US on December 9th., 2008.

Felicita, whose DNA test excluded her as Karen’s mother but whose genetic profile has 95% probability of being the girl’s aunt, so it was a fair assumption based on evidence that Karen was being relinquished by a close relative, as sometimes happens when the real mother is underage, married, deceased or has her own agenda.

During 2008, Loyda identified as her daughter a girl named Dulce Maria among the pictures of the registration forms of adoption processes at the CNA and it was until March 24, 2009 that she identified Karen Abigail as her daughter, who went twice at the PGN for the verification interviews and was not identified by Loyda as her daughter either.

The DNA done to Loyda on August 11, 2009, was requested three times by the attorney of the Primavera Director, because the court kept refusing to do it based on technicalities, and it must be noted that Loyda agreed to it until it was ordered by the court, and now that we know that she is the mother but also that she is related to the woman who relinquished her, we want to see the District Attorney spending some time in trying to locate the woman who falsely recorded the birth of Anyeli as Karen and the child as her own and prosecute her, as well as anybody else who was implicated in the creation of the false identity of this girl and to investigate if the parents of Anyely were in collusion with them or not. Definitely, none of the people related with the second adoption had anything to do with the illegal way the girl Anyely named as Karen, came into the system and to incarcerate the director of Primavera to use that loss of freedom later as an excuse to take away the children at the hogar, has been very unfair and very detrimental for the children.

Primavera supported Karen for over a year, did an abandonment process and and then adoption process. It charged the MO couple only half of the normal fee, because the first half of the fee was paid by them to the unscrupulous intermediary, so it was not the financial incentive what motivated those of us who worked in her second adoption, but the desire to give a family to an abandoned girl.

Best regards,
Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at August 28, 2009 01:25 PM

>>

That's the part that's totally disturbing to me. The PAP's turned to someone to help continue the adoption, rather than insist that someone find the girls real mother?

That's awful.

Posted by: GDSinPA at August 28, 2009 01:28 PM

Marie, your assertion would only be reliable if we assumed the person posing as the birthmother actually showed her real cedula. Plus, I'd think that cedula would have to show whatever "karen Abigail" had for a last name. If they were smart, those last names would have been whatever they had listed on a false cedula.

Elsehere... There was one case as I recall where they claim DNA was falsified. That someone at the DNA lab sent in a sample for someone other than the child being adopted (so that it could match with a birthmom). I can't recall which case that was...

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at August 28, 2009 01:28 PM

Good point Kevin, but how about the photo, both on the "fake" cedula and the one taken the day of the DNA that resulted in a negative result.
The photo would show the woman who attended that lab with the child, that is what I was referring to.

Posted by: marie at August 28, 2009 02:07 PM

Thank you Susana for clarifying this. I am sure it is much appreciated by all the readers.

As you see, so many are wrought with worry and the media is our only source of info, it is easy to play armchair detective with so many scenarios missing and so many conflicting issues.

It is such a sad situation for all parties involved. Please continue to keep us posted.

Posted by: marie at August 28, 2009 02:15 PM

The abandonment process is the legal way to give the parents who have been separated of their children against their will, the chance to recover them, but they must come to the court, as some indigenous women have done, women who did not read and write and who did not speak Spanish, but they found help in an office that defends the indigenous women. If they could come all the way from Alta Verapaz to Escuintla, surely Loyda and Dayner could also come, but they were under the belief that another child was their daughter and when they realized that they were wrong, they reviewed the forms again and found a girl that looked just like heir daughter. I insisted in a DNA since the beginning but neither the Ministerio Publico nor the judge knew much about the DNA, so they were set in bringing back the child to be tested at the same time. I had to prove them that it is not necessary to test the girl again, as we already have her genetic profile and it was until we convinced the judge that she agreed to allow it. I also insisted in an investigation about the way the child disappeared because it is fishy that the story keeps changing.

According to the new Adoptions Law, all children, those who are relinquished ad thosewho are found abandoned must go through this process, so it is not a back door process to legalize an otherwise illegal adoption. The judge has the power to rule that the child is adoptable so there is nothing wrong with the Escuintla judge rulings. That he was accused by the DA does not men that he is guilty or that the abandonments are illegal, because they are not. I have been accused too in this process and I know that I have not done anything illegal and that the district attorney agents who are after me are doing it because someone is set to put me in jail. I am afraid for my life, because if I go to jail anything can happen there. A few months ago a woman was executed in jail, with the complicity of the director and the deputy director. During half an hour the woman screamed while she was eaten to death, and nobody came to her rescue. Every bone in her body was broken, somebody told me. Not much later the director and the deputy director were shot to death.


It is the duty of the parents who have lost a child to do everything they can to find their child. It is not the duty of the court or the hogar to find the parents of the child, much less of the adoptive parents who have seen their adoption process derailed by a negative DNA, that jeopardizes the adoption of a child that in their hearts they already love as their daughter or son.

Yes, it is awful all the problems that this is causing, because right now, innocent people are in jail and children who were well cared at Primavera were taken away and the real culprits are not even investigated.

Best regards,
Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at August 28, 2009 04:37 PM

all I have to say is...how can anyone wonder for a nanosecond why all the remaining notarial adoption cases are in long and drawn-out investigations???

this is a train wreck we have seen coming for many, many years...and *our kids* are the ones who pay the price, with suspicion (by themselves and everyone else) of the legitimacy of their adoptions.

it makes me want to go out and punch a wall!! :-((

Lisa

Posted by: Lisa at August 28, 2009 04:53 PM

Loyda should be able to ID her own sister/mother from the photo Marie is referring to. Has this been done?

Posted by: Terri C at August 28, 2009 05:37 PM

I don't see how the US could decide anything other than a return.

Posted by: lisa at August 28, 2009 11:30 PM

Lisa,

I don't understand your comment. The long investigations are in most cases, totally unnecessary. To prevent the children from joining their families, because their cases are investigated - in the bottom of a drawer - is not in the best interest of the children. And that is what the section of the childhood and adolescence of the PGN is doing, and when they run out of excuses to delay the cases, they pass them to the Ministerio Publico (MP) to continue the so-called-investigations, and if they can, to start the accusations, where they build cases around people, not looking for the truth, but how to discredit adoptions.

The list of the potential magistrates for the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals is being put together by a commission, and Norma Cruz is part of it. Her argument to disqualify people from being appointed is to say that they have done "anomalous adoptions". According to the responses of the accused by her, she will be facing several charges for defamation. I filed charges against her that I will resubmit shortly, also for defamation. One thing is to support women who need support and other - very different - is to attack people in order to further her own agenda.

The way adoptions are being criminalized, even in an adoption friendly website such as Guatadopt, is very reprehensible. For that reason, when I see that people who are adopting and should know that and adoption done in the notarial way is a voluntary mater, not a criminal case, accept and even support the criminalization of the processes of adoptions, I have to say that it is wrong to accept that. And that it is even worse to say “we saw it coming”. We have been fighting day in and day out against those who have been trying to shut adoptions down and if we are being chased like criminals is because they are afraid that we may win again, like we did in 2003. Or maybe they want us to pay for what we did back then, because thanks to our successful constitutional challenge of the Hague Convention, over twenty thousand children were adopted since 2003 and live with loving families in the US and other countries. I am not sorry that we did it, only sorry that people with so much power think that children should die in their countries of origin, instead of living prosperous lives in the countries of their adoptive parents and are closing the doors to stop adoptions, worldwide. God protect us all.

Best regards,
Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at August 29, 2009 03:34 PM

Simplyme: this case originally was a mainstreet adoption services case which SL tookover ; see the missing children original bulletins. She was at that time named "Dulce.

Why is no one blaming them?

Also do we have proof that the DNA "could Be an Aunt? Sounds contrived for they attys benefit.

I have a sister who is more foe then friend;even if a sister were involved, it does not automaticly implicate this childs
Mother.

This child deserves to go home.

Children adapt, I'm praying for the Aps to step up and do the right thing.

Posted by: Pat at August 30, 2009 12:57 AM

I am wondering how long this abandonment process took?

Posted by: anon at August 30, 2009 11:31 PM

Simplyme:

I've tried to answer you twice, I don't understand why it won't post, Mainstreet adption service started this adoption "dropped" the case and Susana Laurca picked it up.

Posted by: Pat Salenti at August 31, 2009 01:17 PM

Before I start, I want to say that one kidnapping is horrible and we all want future adoptions to be legitimate adoptions.

Since our children will be asking questions, I think that we APs and PAPs will want to get an idea of the extent that international adoption played a part in the disappearance of children. Since children/people disappear for a number of reasons, especially in third world countries, one way to estimate this is to compare the "disappearancef" rates before and after internatioanal adoptions stopped.

Posted by: anonymous at August 31, 2009 03:26 PM

I haven't been on-line for a little while. That's why nothing has come up.

Pat - I know that the original website said Dulce came from Main Street. I do not believe that this is the same Dulce. That is in NO WAY to be a statement of confidence in Main Street. I'm just saying that I don't think it was the same child. If you know this from something more than that original site, please say so.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at August 31, 2009 04:16 PM

The picture posted on Precious dot org, was the same child posted in the bulletin. That picture was posted by Mainstreet in late November 2006. Use the waybackmachine.

Posted by: Pat at August 31, 2009 05:24 PM

I've not posted in a long time, but I have to comment. There were many flaws within the notorial system no question about that. It started out innocent enough with the best interest of the children at heart, until greed corrupted certain individuals and way too many loop holes were being found. I don't object one bit to the changes that are needed. Only that they verify the pipeline families cases and move them forward. I pray they can find a new and better system to once again allow children needing families. Until then, we need to do what we can to support transition families and all the other families who have their children home.
This is where I have a problem with what I continue to read day in and out. Guatemala isn't the only country to face this problem of corruption. It's nearly everywhere, including some cases here within our own country. I'm also not disagreeing that even one case it too many. However, Susana has one extremely good point and I've felt this way for a long, long time. I can say that my children have NEVER questioned illegitimate or inappropriate behaviors regarding their adoptions and neither has anyone I met. The questions come with more personal tones such as "tell me" about this or that. If you call something "bad" long enough... it will be bad. This is what continues to happen here constantly. We can handle truths of cases of corruption coming forward but constant speculation is ridiculous. And shame on those of you who cast the shadow of doubt on so many.
I'm absolutely in firm belief that we should support the birth mother's whose children were in fact kidnapped. There stories need to be told without a doubt. What has happened is sickening and sad. I feel for the adoptive parents just as much. Not to mention how my heart breaks for the children involved!
I guess this comes down to me almost wanting to remove myself from this site because I'm so sick of hearing about "Guatemalan Adoptions" being corrupt. Because their not. We continue to cast this shadow by feeding into it, instead of sticking to the truth of what we know. One lost child in the system is too many... but I beam with pride when I say my child was born in Guatemala! You all should too.

Posted by: Carol at September 1, 2009 12:58 PM

"It is the duty of the parents who have lost a child to do everything they can to find their child. It is not the duty of the court or the hogar to find the parents of the child..."

I think this is the part that really gets me, and I just cannot get my head around it. In the US, if someone was caught trying to pose as a child's mother and give that child up for an adoption, that woman would instantly be in jail, and there would be an all out search by everyone involved, and indeed the community at large, to try to find the real family. When a child here is obviously separated from her parent(s), it is NOT the responsibility of a private person to put a few ads in some papers and hope for the best. That's what happens when we find a lost dog, not a lost child. And if the parents couldn't be found, then most certainly it would be the courts who would decide where that child should go and into whose custody, not the private person that discovered the child nor the person to whom the impersonator was trying to release the child to. This is what I just cannot comprehend. How can a child be so obviously separated from her family and not reported to the police, not cross checked against missing person records, not investigated thoroughly at that time? How can a child just be assumed abandoned and taken into the custody of the first attorney willing to do so and then put up for adoption? I really, genuinely just cannot understand this aspect of this case.

Posted by: scrunchie at September 1, 2009 01:24 PM

Kevin, Can you tell us why you do not believe it is the same Dulce? Knowing the first persons that had anything to do with this case would be helpful. Anyone know for sure ?

Posted by: simplyme at September 1, 2009 07:40 PM

Scrunchie,

The court asked the Unit of Missing Persons of the National Civil Police, to inform if there was a missing person report of the child and their response was negative. The PGN did the investigation of the case and came back empty handed. The hogar only takes care of the child, and pays for the ads because nobody else does it. In this case NOBODY claimed this child for over two years. Not at the court that had no other choice but to rule her adoptable, not at the CNA registration forms of adoptions in process and not at the verification interviews that took place for the benefit of those mothers who were looking for their children. The woman who was posing as a mother denies any involvement and the District Attorney believes her, no more questions asked. If you would see the file of this case you would realize that this is not a legal issue but a political issue to eliminate adoptions for good.

Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at September 1, 2009 08:52 PM

Susana,
Could it be that no one claimed this child because her identity had been changed ? In all reality,she was claimed through photo recognition,and not with the name Karen.
As far as the court not having any choice but to rule her adoptable,if the court knew she had a failed DNA,they should never have made that call,period.
Of course theres a mega large file on this case,files are huge for "normal" adoptions,this is a kidnapping,trafficking...case,I can imagine how big it is,anything short of that would mean it is not being looked into with a fine tooth comb,as it should have been from the start.Im sure the file will grow.
This is almost unbelievable.who ever is responsible,no matter how many,I hope justice is served.

Posted by: simplyme at September 1, 2009 11:30 PM

Carol,

I posted that even one kidnapping is horrible. I also totally agree with everything that you said.

There are people who are posting that one kidnapping (ok maybe we know about several) means that the corruption was "wide spread." People disappear for lots of reasons. Instead of speculating, lets see whether the number of missing children changes a lot now that the old system has stopped.

Posted by: anonymous at September 2, 2009 12:41 PM

As a seasoned parent of 5 adopted children, and as one who totally stand behind this international event to stand with these mothers who lost their children due to alleged deception or coercion, I just hope that this event will stay focused on what DID happen, and not on those who bravely ask the tough questions of accountability. The children are the true victims in these alleged cases of corruption. The ones who are NOT victims are those who made the choice to participate. And, it matters not what level of knowledge those involved did have at any given point in the process. Everyone processing adoptions had a moral responsibility, and anyone who handled funds had a fiduciary responsibility to know the origin of the children. After all, it was them, (the agency or attorney hired by families), who chose the in-country contacts to conduct the business of adoption with.

Also, let's not forget the US system who did not, and does not hold those who process cases with adoption services, accountable for their actions. That seems to have been left to private litigation now. There is a huge gap between state regulations and federal laws that do not cover the offering of a child for the purpose of adoption who is not a true orphan. The child trafficking laws in the US vaguely cover sexual exportation and slavery, (as best I can tell from what I have read). So who are agencies accountable to when the referral is made of a child who's parent did not make a permanent adoption plan? Who is protecting the children, and who is protecting the families? All states are different, and some have very strong regulations when it comes to agency standards, while others clearly do not. Do we really want a once a year visit over a cup of coffee with nice music playing in the background, and neat looking files to set the standards for agency licensing?

I have called for strong federal laws that clearly state what is expected with regard to the way agencies handle receiving referrals and offering referrals to families, in order to protect the children in sending countries, and the families placing faith in the US system. I have not received the answers to these strong questions asked of the DOS. If Federal laws blanketed the US then every agency in every state would follow the same rules and regulations. That would be a starting point to protect families, and children. The corruption would be limited to the sending countries, and therefore much easier to track and document. This type of thing should never even come into question with a reputable US agency or attorney involved in international adoptions. It seems, that In Guatemala, (and other countries) some have worked undetected and in full cooperation of each other, and government offices, (in my humble opinion), to see cases through, that should have never been cases at all. Anyone who thinks the US Embassy is not aware of this, is kidding themselves, in my opinion. Some have done this for financial gain, and others, in a mode of self-justification that the children are better off leaving the poverty of Guatemala. Either way, corruption could not happen without all entities well aware of the possibility of cases being 'less then sound'. Clearly, there were stop-gaps in place that were ignored by everyone!

The COA and Hague regulations are at least a step in the right direction, but not all countries are Hague countries, and the concerns for continued corrupt practices are great. It is my opinion that direct language is needed in strong federal laws to govern the actions of those who handle the futures of children with no voice or choice in any sending country!

So to those who choose to see an event like this as compounding the problem! I am amazed! You should look to those who made decisions to walk the paths of corruption in adoptions! THEY are the ones who you should blame for compounding the problem! AP's and PAP's who are simply asking for accountability with in our own government are not to blame! Let me make it simple for you... if I speed in a school zone, I am going to get a ticket and will be held accountable for my choice to drive fast where I should have known not to, I will face action for my choice. But, as our federal and some state laws stand now, an agency can offer a family (who has in good faith paid them for adoption services), the referral of a child who is not an orphan, and face basically nothing more than a letter telling them to 'check better next time'! Again, I will say, this has got to stop! This must change. It is not rocket science! These are CHILDREN! There are many steps in the adoption process that would raise question to the origin of a child, yet in my own case, no one! not the attorney, facilitator,agency,DNA-lab, or the US Embassy,.... seemed know anything was wrong in my opinion, until after I was offered and accepted the referral, had fallen deeply in love with the child, and had US approval of the adoption! and that took several months! wow! how many idiots does it take to screw in a light bulb! I am guessing that about 15 people, possibly even more were involved in my case, and touched or read a document for my case, from the time I accepted the referral to the time I lost it, and no one saw a problem??! We NEED federal legislation to govern the US agencies. If that had been in place, we might not even be talking about a case like this. I am glad for a forum such as guatadopt.com, to stay informed and be aware of what has and will happen for Guat. adoptions!

The human pain associated with corruption in adoptions is great, and it is so sad that people need laws to make sure they don't do this the wrong way. There are enough true orphans in the world that really do need families, for this sort of thing to keep happening!
Elizabeth

Posted by: Elizabeth at September 2, 2009 01:50 PM

Scrunchie states: "How can a child be so obviously separated from her family and not reported to the police, not cross checked against missing person records, not investigated thoroughly at that time? How can a child just be assumed abandoned and taken into the custody of the first attorney willing to do so and then put up for adoption?"

Sad as it is, we are comparing a third world nation to our own. There is no social welfare system or anyone to care for the child while these investigations would take place. Is it right? No, but how do you change it and make a poor country function and give it's citizens and children rights and privledges like a prosperous one? There is no "online data base" to run a missing person report through that would connect with public records and court petitions like what would be available here...

Also with all the talk of corruption in regards to adoptions I would like to ask how many children have actually been reported stolen? Out of the THOUSANDS of adoptions done, how many cases could possibly be corrupt?? I think the number, if we assume every accusation is true, is still a small percentage of adoptions completed. Yes, one stolen child is too many, but no different than one stolen child here in our own country and it happens everyday an dthe media is pretty immune to it here..

Posted by: Norma at September 2, 2009 02:02 PM

Elizabeth,

Wonderfully stated! I agree,there needs to be more federal laws of accountability toward the US agencies and the attorneys they choose to represent the children and us, their clients who have put a huge amount of trust in their professionalism. If there are any such laws, I would like to know what they are exactly.

I want to thank guatadopt for this forum. I have read posts from PAPs & APs who have been or currently in a similar situation as my self, and it has brought me great comfort.

Posted by: ARS at September 2, 2009 08:03 PM

I have the same question as ARS, if anyone can post where PAPs and APs can find federal or state laws of accountability for agencies I would also like to know. Agencies should not be allowed to simply turn their backs when the children they 'represent' have suffered due to their negligence and lack of oversight of the attorneys they use in country. If there aren't any such laws, I for one would be interested in being a catalyst for change. Thank you.

Posted by: Dee at September 3, 2009 09:48 PM

From what has been reported in the papers, the same child's picture (that being Anyeli) appeared in numerous adoption files. One of those was a Dulce through Main Street. The child whose adoption was initiated through Main Street as Dulce, forgetting the picture, is not, from my understanding, Anyeli.

The presumption being made because of that original website was 100% logical. But you can't trust everything on the internet (funny thing for me to say).

Hope that helps and sorry it took so long to reply,

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

Posted by: Kevin at September 4, 2009 09:54 PM

There are recent developments in the case. The initial facilitator of the adoption of Karen Abigail Lopez Garcia, gave the DNA forms of the test with negative results to the District Attorney, and finally we were able to obtain a copy. The girl in the picture, who is Loyda's daughter, is NOT the same girl we knew as Karen Abigail. It is a completely different girl, who must be Anyeli Liseth, Loyda's daughter. That could explain why she did not recognize Karen Abigail neither at the newspaper pictures nor at the PGN where Karen Abigail was taken twice.

The analisys of the DNA results of mother and daughter in that test, done by a genetics laboratory, found that the woman posing as the mother is actually the aunt of the girl. If Loyda is looking for her daughter, she should start questioning her relatives.


I am still trying to figure out what was the purpose of taking a different girl and her aunt to the DNA test, unless the goal was to obtain a positive result and the aunt said that the child was her daughter. It took seven months for the facilitator to do the DNA test, which means that all that time, Loyda's daughter was with her aunt or at least, in a place where she could have access to her. It could be that Anyeli is still there, just waiting to be found, or that Loyda and her husband knew all this time where to find her.


Best regards.
Susana Luarca

Posted by: Susana Luarca at September 9, 2009 07:19 PM

Susana, are you saying that Loyda's daughter never made it out of Guatemala? That Anyeli was not adopted out to an American family?

Posted by: Dee at September 10, 2009 10:12 AM

Our adoption was not an abandonment. I don't visit this site very often as we trust our adoption was done by the book and legal in every way. How would we know if our adoption would be analyzed again? This thread scares me. If it is only abandonments that are being re-analyzed.....will they go on and look at ALL adoptions to see if there was something wrong with them? I would rather die than have our son returned to Guatemala. I would do what is best for him......I know I would......but returning him to a single mother with 3 other children to care for and she only makes 35q. a year making tortillas...and no hope of schooling........I just can't think of that.

Posted by: MLL at September 27, 2009 11:49 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?