Comments on: Is it ever okay to lie?

By: Jenn

Jenn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:05:15 +0000

Just wanted to add that I can’t believe an agency would talk down about the Embassy, talk about biting the hand that feeds you! Worse yet, telling people what to and NOT to say…once again, word gets out about that and your sure to have your license being re-considered!

We were lucky that our facilitator explained that we just answer the questions, present any other concerns we might have, to not get scared as the whole sitting behind glass and paper tray for documents is a bit un-nerving, and it would all be good. She was right, once you get past the whole setting, both gentleman that interviewed me were very down to business but by no means mean or rude.

By: Jenn

Jenn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:59:40 +0000

Not good to lie, the truth will eventually come out and bite you in the you know what….besides it’s not nice! Think about it, how do you feel when someone lies to you? How do you think the people working in Vietnamese Adoptions feel when people lie about their personal issues (be it same-sex partners, financial status, etc.) or being given false answers in a Visa interview? The rules are the rules…if you don’t like the rules, find a different game to play with rules you can follow.

True story: a mom brags how her children would be on welfare and state insurance, told about how her accountant re-did all her documents to make it look like she was financially within the guidlines expected of her, her social worker allowed her to give pictures from a magazine for nursery pics (they co-sleep and she was afraid it would limit her adoption choices), and how she got away with all of it. Well, the facilitator got wind of this and decided to stop the adoption of an older waiting child with this gal.

It may get you what you want now and even maybe a couple more times, but in the end no good comes of it.

Also, a side note since this is Vietnamese adoption related talk: if you are in an Asian country, understand that it is perfectly acceptable to “stretch the truth” there. It is not uncommon for them to pretty much lie to you just to make you happy…they would rather you be happy (only to be disappointed later) than to lose face with you right then and there. Many times they will give you what I would call a best case scenario response to something truly with the hopes that it will happen, but knowing the odds of such are slim. You won’t likely run into this as most of the people you deal with will have either been dealing with Americans for years and understand our differences and point of view on this matter (especially in business), or they themselves have lived in America or another country with similar views on lying. If you happen to be dealing with someone who is new to working with Americans, understand it is culturally ingrained into them and it doesn’t just dissappear overnight just as our cultural habits would not be so easy to change.

In the end though, it is up to every parent, just as much as it is every agency, to tell the truth as is expected.

By: Ginger

Ginger — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 02:26:21 +0000

I was asked only two questions during my interview. 1) Was I asked for any additional money during the adoption. I had not been asked to pay any additional fees other than the the visa fee which had clearly been outlined before I left for Vietnam. 2) How as a single I could parent 3 children. I did not think this question was entirely appropriate, but I told the interviewer that I was very organized, had good help and good children. I used the same social worker for all 3 adoptions and never felf the need to lie. would never think to lie about anything.

By: Mary

Mary — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:17:50 +0000

I have thought a lot about these issues - rules and how they operate and their application. The issue comes up more frequently these days in the context of the re-opening of adoptions in VietNam and the information that flows from the listserves. While I have spoken about some of these questions with other parents - I have not posted on these issues. In part because there seems to be so much to deal with that it is hard to know where to begin.

So thank you so much to the individual who started this blog.

I should preface this by saying that I am both an adoptive mother and an adoptee (domestic). I have no doubt that my views on these issues are informed at least to some extent by my life as an adoptee.
I have no difficulty with there being rules for international adoption. I do have difficulty with the fact that it is very clear that rules are far from uniform and most certainly are not uniformly applied. Some of these rules are tough - and some even have the appearance of unfairness. However. For the most part these rules have been developed in the context of professionals in adoption work and international adoption work - and they are aimed at ensuring best practices when it comes to adoption. Because in the end, after all the talking is done, there should be only one concern. Is the rule or practise in the best interest of the children? Because adoption is not about finding children for families. It must be about finding families for children. They are entitled to have rules established that go some measure towards ensuring the best possible placement for them. In this context I have no difficulty with rules that stipulate that there must be a certain length of time between adoptions (a year, two years). I have no diifciulty with rules that say that adoptions must be put on hold in the event of a pregnancy. I have no difficulty with rules that say that parents may not adopt biologically unrelated children at the same time. Folks with experience in adoption and international adoption have developed these rules over time - because they represent best practice.

Adoption is different. Our children have special needs in terms of not only transition and attachment but also in terms of their life journey as adoptees. The journey our children will take is not just the life walk of the adoptee it is also a journey as intercountry and transracial adoptees. Layer of complexity that bring great joy to life’s journey - but also challenges and difficulty and great loss. The rules exist for good reasons. (I am confident that there are good, wonderful parents who can make strong arguments in favour of exceptions - and I hear this clearly. But I return to the mantra - Our children have special needs and special needs mean special rules which we need to honour as parents)

As to the rules set out by VietNam. Here is my take for all the two cents its worth. VietNam has honoured us by bestowing on us the greatest possible privilege. They have entrusted us with the care of their most precious children. As a nation they are entitled to set rules with respect to the adoption of their children and they are entitled to have those rules followed. I may not agree with all those rules (In fact I don’t). This, however, is not the issue. The issue is bluntly whether the integrity of adoptions requires that such rules be followed. I believe integrity requires no less.

Phew - I have been wanting to say this for months and months.

Mary

By: Rachel

Rachel — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:05:30 +0000

I would be curious to know how many parents and/or social workers lie in home study reports. Whether for int’l or domestic adoptions. I think this is an area that has great potential for abuse with very little oversight. Yes, you need to show birth certificates to document your age, employment letters for income and felony checks. But what about other things that may mean the difference between being accepted into a specific program &/or agency? Religious beliefs, co-habitation, college education, sexual orientation, post-adoption child care plans and so many more. I think the tricky part here is that some people will agree that telling a little white lie or withholding a little bit of truth is sometimes OK, and others who believe it’s never OK. My belief is the latter, but of course like a lot of things in life there’s always a whole lot of grey areas.

Lying by agencies, agency representatives is never right. Period. Even if the truth is ugly, it needs to be told. ASAP and in a straightforward manner. Lying to Embassy workers is never right. It jepardizes all that people have worked so hard for…establishing an ethic adoption process. Oh and it’s probably a bit illegal on the part of the parents. I don’t know about anyone else, but I wouldn’t want the long arm of Uncle Sam to get p*ssed off at me!

I can’t imagine what goes through the minds of parents when their agency coaches them on what to say, or what not to say, during the visa interviews. MAJOR RED FLAG. It’s things like this that need to come out in the open. Parents need to tell their stories.

By: Jena

Jena — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:07:57 +0000

It would be interesting to know what the intent behind the law is….Is it to ensure stability for the adopted child, with the assumption that a marriage provides more stability than co-habitating? Which in the case of America, we know is not true. It would also be interesting to know the intent in the original language to know if the traslation is totally accurate. Because Ellen’s statement has validity, but doing so seems to contradict the spirit of the law, if not the letter.
I have to say, our Embassy experience, while not pleasant, was also not at all scary or intimidating. The interviewer was rude and brusque, but seemed to be doing his job. He asked several leading questions, but none of the ones I would have asked if I was trying to “catch” people. In fact, I have since thought about writing a letter of the questions in my post of “10 things to ask your agency”. Maybe they just need my help…..HA!

By: Nicki

Nicki — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 16:55:00 +0000

This is a great post, a difficult topic to discuss. I expect there won’t be many comments because I witnessed so much lying in Vietnam by both agencies and PAPs that it seems almost the norm and yet people know its wrong. Probably few people will post about how they lied and think the means justified the end. I wish they would becuase then I might believe it It blows my mind to see how many agencies coach their families to lie to the Embassy. My experience was that agencies who do unethical things will have families who have a harder time at the Embassy. That difficult time may not have to do with a particular family or even their particular case, unfortunately. But you can bet it has to do with a particular agency. Their job is pretty straight forward - only allow legitimate orphans to be adopted into the country in a legitimate way. If you are adopting under these criteria, there is no need to lie, right?

By: ellen

ellen — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 01:54:01 +0000

If we expect honesty from all the other players in the process (agencies, facilitators, gov’t officials), then we should be honest too — for me, it’s that simple.
My husband and I disclosed his past alcoholism (he’s 15 years sober now) during homestudy when we didn’t need to as there was no rehab or DUI on record, but we were asked the question so we answered it honestly. We have no regrets about doing so, and if it had meant we were disqualified then we would have been very disappointed — but we would have known we had been as honest as possible with everyone, most of all with ourselves.
And actually if you read the quote from the decree above, it doesn’t state that a single person who co-habitates cannot adopt as a single person — it just says that if TWO people adopt together, they must be husband and wife. It doesn’t state anything about who you are living with, coincidentally. Perhaps there is more in the decree on that, but the above quote does not rule out someone in Angelina Jolie’s situation — it just says Brad cannot legally adopt with her. Oy, are we really talking about them again??

By: Jenny

Jenny — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 00:40:39 +0000

We did not lie but I think Angelina Jolie’s adoption basically smacks down the example. It isn’t like anyone doesn’t know that she is a couple and has other children with a man. And she was probably pregnant when starting her adoption as well. She turned around and re-adopted the kid as soon as they got home, and that isn’t suspect or breaking the rules?

We choose not to lie. Had nothing to lie about frankly.

And your statement that the US Consulate is only looking for errors and not there to “scare” adopters is not true in my case. We had a well admired facilitator, especially at the consulate, The US official, literally got up 3 times to talk on his cell phone during our interview. He then decided that we didn’t have a piece of paper and made us go through all of ours….until he miraculously “found” it after saying “it doesn’t look good” It was sitting on top of his pile. (it was their newspaper ad and we did not receive a copy of this ad until after everything was done with the adoption) Meanwhile, the stress had put the girls into meltdown and C and I into full on panic mode. That to me was BS. And C and I fully believe it was because our Congressman had spoken with him earlier in the day. So, being prepared isn’t terrible. (we weren’t coached or given any info on what will happen in the interview, just that a list of 10 questions will need to be answered.)

So there is my take.

By: Nina/SOS

Nina/SOS — Thu, 31 May 2007 18:46:41 +0000

You want my opinion. Here it is. I chose NOT to lie to my homestudy agency and ended up having to walk away from our referral. Why? I got pregnant. I told our placement agency as indicated in our contract and the placement agency response response was we could still adopt. Our agency did say we would be in and out of Vietnam before anyone would know (which made me uncomfortable), but there were no rules stating we could not adopt. Our children would have been 12 months apart. We would have brought our adopted child home in early May and expect our biological child in late September - 6 months apart. Our homestudy agency stopped the adoption stating we had too many major life events in too short of a period of time. Our contract with our homestudy agency also required us to notify them. The homestudy agency put a stop to the adoption. We fought. We asked for an exeption. It was not granted. We asked why. We were told it was “policy” and even our state would have an issue with it and we could risk having our children taken from our home. Noone knew for sure if this would happen, but the possibility was there. We “lost” more than our child. We also lost a substantial amount of money. By the time we are allowed to get on a waiting list again, we will have to re-do all of our dossier paperwork, imigration paperwork, and home study.

I should add that our home study AND immigration paperwork approved us to adopt more than one child. We were approved to adopt twins or siblings with minor and correctable medical issues.

I didn’t understand why we were approved to adopt more than one child, but we couldn’t adopt one child AND have a biological child.

My husband and I thought long and hard about continuing with the adoption. We were able to handle it financially and emotionally. We had the support of our family.

If I had to do it again with the same home study agency I would. I would choose NOT to lie. However, I would be darn sure I would pick a different home study agency that didn’t prohibit us from adopting in this situation.

Am I sorry we told the truth? Yes and No. I am glad we told the truth because it is the right thing to do. If I knew we wouldn’t have an issue once we got home with our adopted child, I probably would not have said something to the home study agency and continued with the adoption. Does this make me a bad person? Maybe, but I am still mourning the loss of our adopted child and wondering what if…..