Comments on: Still Waiting for An Official Announcement http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/ A collaborative blog advocating ethics in adoption Tue, 14 Oct 2008 20:56:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Mary http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1577 Mary Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:22:11 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1577 It's small point but the memo came from CIS, not DOS. According to the memo, the change was instituted by CIS in HCMC, which is effectively one person. So I'm a bit more doubtful that this process has been clearly and carefully thought out. Here's my thought -- Orphans First is a great and important idea. But CIS and DOS together managed to make a mess of it. They tried to implement it on three days' notice; Ethica spoke out very clearly against that. There was no way they ever had sufficient staff to make it work, so why didn't they look for more? Now CIS has apparently implemented a policy several days ago, but haven't gotten around to notifying PAPs or explaining it yet. Would it be so difficult for these two agencies, with personnel who should be considerably experienced, to work with groups like Ethica to come up with effective policies, and then use their experience and common sense to implement these policies in effective ways? It’s small point but the memo came from CIS, not DOS. According to the memo, the change was instituted by CIS in HCMC, which is effectively one person. So I’m a bit more doubtful that this process has been clearly and carefully thought out.

Here’s my thought — Orphans First is a great and important idea. But CIS and DOS together managed to make a mess of it. They tried to implement it on three days’ notice; Ethica spoke out very clearly against that. There was no way they ever had sufficient staff to make it work, so why didn’t they look for more? Now CIS has apparently implemented a policy several days ago, but haven’t gotten around to notifying PAPs or explaining it yet.

Would it be so difficult for these two agencies, with personnel who should be considerably experienced, to work with groups like Ethica to come up with effective policies, and then use their experience and common sense to implement these policies in effective ways?

]]> By: shad http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1576 shad Sun, 06 Apr 2008 14:02:55 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1576 Penny, you may be right. The thing is we don't know. The fact that they would implement such a policy without saying why, is a$$ poor. The fact that they would implement the policy and effect peoples lives before even publicly announcing the policy is even more a$$ poor. Our government's behavior is certainly unethical, and should be criminal. At some point you have to look at what people do, and stop listening to what they say. Sure, the US has said they want adoptions to continue in Vietnam. But, they haven't done anything in the last 6 months to suggest that they are really trying to make this happen. In fact, it has been the exact opposite. They have done nothing but make it difficult for families to adopt from Vietnam. For whatever reason, the government or some individual in the government doesn't want Vietnam adoption to continue. I don't follow other countires, but it appears from what I have seen they don't want international adoption as whole to continue either. Maybe they have good reasons. Maybe they have more information than me and they are doing the right thing. But, the fact that they have not shared any of this information is inexcusable. The fact they have implemented this new DNA requirement without any sensitivity to families and children with pending cases is inexplicable. Not only is it wrong, it is downright mean. Penny, you may be right. The thing is we don’t know. The fact that they would implement such a policy without saying why, is a$$ poor. The fact that they would implement the policy and effect peoples lives before even publicly announcing the policy is even more a$$ poor. Our government’s behavior is certainly unethical, and should be criminal.

At some point you have to look at what people do, and stop listening to what they say. Sure, the US has said they want adoptions to continue in Vietnam. But, they haven’t done anything in the last 6 months to suggest that they are really trying to make this happen. In fact, it has been the exact opposite. They have done nothing but make it difficult for families to adopt from Vietnam.

For whatever reason, the government or some individual in the government doesn’t want Vietnam adoption to continue. I don’t follow other countires, but it appears from what I have seen they don’t want international adoption as whole to continue either. Maybe they have good reasons. Maybe they have more information than me and they are doing the right thing. But, the fact that they have not shared any of this information is inexcusable. The fact they have implemented this new DNA requirement without any sensitivity to families and children with pending cases is inexplicable. Not only is it wrong, it is downright mean.

]]> By: Penny http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1575 Penny Sun, 06 Apr 2008 12:09:30 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1575 Since DNA testing is part of the MOU Article 9(b) and was not implemented until now my thoughts would be that something must be showing up that the DOS believes warrents implementing the testing. With the relinquishment of the twins by 2 different first mothers, or the same first mother using 2 different names, I can see how DOS would think that the testing is needed...goodness only knows how many more cases are out there that we don't have a clue about. While I do think that the requirement may backfire and only cause more children to be anonomously abandoned (or listed as anonomously abandoned) rather then relinquished, I believe that this isn't something that the DOS just popped off the top of their heads...I have to believe that they do have good cause to believe that the testing is needed. Penny Since DNA testing is part of the MOU Article 9(b) and was
not implemented until now my thoughts would be that
something must be showing up that the DOS believes warrents implementing the testing. With the relinquishment of the twins by 2 different first mothers, or the same first mother using 2 different names, I can see how DOS would think that the testing is needed…goodness only knows how many more cases are out there that we don’t have a clue about. While I do think that the requirement may backfire and only cause more children to be anonomously abandoned (or listed as anonomously abandoned) rather then relinquished, I believe that this isn’t something that the DOS just popped off the top of their heads…I have to believe that they do have good cause to believe that the testing is needed.

Penny

]]> By: jenn http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1569 jenn Sat, 05 Apr 2008 19:56:32 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1569 How about this idea....start this DNA testing idea for children with finding or birthdates after May or even June 1st, 2008? This way the orphanages and birth moms MAY be prepared for the change, and current orphans won't be affected by this crazy new rule. How about this idea….start this DNA testing idea for children with finding or birthdates after May or even June 1st, 2008? This way the orphanages and birth moms MAY be prepared for the change, and current orphans won’t be affected by this crazy new rule.

]]> By: Mary http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1568 Mary Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:27:46 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1568 I just don't understand. If CIS is trying to cut down on the percentage of abandonments, this whole idea makes no sense. If the new process means that only infants with an identified parent have to undergo DNA testing, it will mean more abandonments. If it means that no abandoned children are eligible for adoption in the US, what about the children who are legitimately abandoned -- according to HOLT, about 50% of the children they work with who are eligible for adoption?? I just don’t understand. If CIS is trying to cut down on the percentage of abandonments, this whole idea makes no sense. If the new process means that only infants with an identified parent have to undergo DNA testing, it will mean more abandonments. If it means that no abandoned children are eligible for adoption in the US, what about the children who are legitimately abandoned — according to HOLT, about 50% of the children they work with who are eligible for adoption??

]]> By: Jen http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1567 Jen Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:30:55 +0000 http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2008/04/04/still-waiting-for-an-official-announcement/#comment-1567 How about this for conjecture? Babies that are abandoned and subsequently "found" will no longer be eligible for US adoptions???? Nothing about that memo makes sense if you pause to think about how most of the children become available for adoption. How about this for conjecture? Babies that are abandoned and subsequently “found” will no longer be eligible for US adoptions???? Nothing about that memo makes sense if you pause to think about how most of the children become available for adoption.

]]>