Precedent Set In International Custody Case

A U.S. Congressman says a Brazilian court has ordered a 9-year-old who has lived there for the last five years to be handed over to his father and returned to New Jersey.

U.S. Rep. Chris Smith says a court meeting in a closed session Wednesday in Rio de Janeiro ruled 3-0 that the Sean Goldman should be handed over to his father, David, at a U.S. Embassy on Friday.

Goldman has been trying to have his son returned since his wife took the child to her native Brazil in 2004, saying she's be back in two weeks. She divorced him there, remarried, and then died in childbirth last year.

Her Brazilian husband argued that he should have custody.

A federal court on Wednesday agreed with Goldman that the boy belongs in New Jersey under an international treaty governing cross-border child abductions.

This occurred because of international treaties that demand cooperation in child custody cases...NOW, if the U.S. would just abide by the same treaties regarding kidnapped Guatemalan and Indian children living here.

One Man's Sorrow - Another's Pleasure?

Yesterday, I posted that, sadly, financial problems are causing more Taiwanese families to self destruct.  The state of the economy here at home and worldwide is placing a strain on individuals and families in many ways from losing their jobs, their homes and for some their chidlren.  It is nothing short of tragic when people are so desperate that they are forced to hand over their flesh and blood offspring.

Now, perhaps it is just me.  Perhaps I am unfairly reading "tone" into a blog post. I am sure, it was unintended.  Tou decide.

Please read: "Number of Chinese kids Up for Adoption on the Rise" at Babble, a popular parenting site.

For me, the tone of this post sounds upbeat about this news. More babies. Goody!


I find it interesting that it neglects to mention the major point made in the announcement of this increase by Taiwan Child Welfare

“Nearly 90 percent of the parents who phoned the Child Welfare League Foundation to ask about putting their children up for adoption between 2003-2008 did so due to financial problems, foundation spokesman Chen Ya-hui said, citing statistics compiled by the foundation.

“The number of phone calls made to the foundation for this purpose posed a significant 55 percent rise over the past five years, increasing from 495 cases in 2003 to 770 in 2008, according to Chen.

“For the first 10 months of this year, the foundation accepted 511 phone calls on the issue, an average of 1.7 calls daily, the statistics show.

“Eighty-seven percent of those who made the calls did so because of financial difficulties, representing a remarkable surge from 50 percent in January 2008 to 96 percent in September of the same year, with the percentage reaching 100 percent in January, March and June 2009, according to Chen.”

The omission of that crucial part of this story — the tragedy causes families to need to lose their children — very telling.That's what the story out of Taiwan was all about and yet all this bog post has to say about it is that there are more babies "available" for adoption!

Reaping the spoils of family destruction and loss puts a vulture-like spin on adoption.

I have always recognized that infertility is a grievous loss. But we have also lost and so too are these families. How can you "cure" your loss at the expense of another's?  Or does their poverty justify it?

It almost makes me wonder if people lose all of their compassion when they lose their ability to procreate.


I wonder too if people in need of organ transplants sit around wishing for plane crashes or other diasters that will leave people dead swith lots of "spare parts"?  Some TV medical dramas suggest those who care people in such need do.

What do you think?

Merry Christmas

"...because there was no room for them in the inn."  Luke 2:7

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. 

[4] So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. [5] He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. [6] While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, [7] and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.

• Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth, four days journey north of Bethlehem.
• Mary was pregnant. A journey late in pregnancy is arduous for her. But if she stays in Nazareth she has to face scandal alone. 
• An arduous journey in winter; a pregnant teenage mom. 
  

Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child. While they were there, the time came for her to deliver her child. And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.  

Mary and Joseph came into town with Mary ready to deliver. We are told that Joseph went to Bethlehem to register for the census - as all had been ordered to do -  in his own town.

We are also told that Joseph was a descendant of King David, whose home town was Bethlehem. The authorities would want each person to return to the place they were already listed as having property or assets. This suggests that Joseph was born in Bethlehem and had family and assets there.

Arriving at Joseph's ancestral home, it is said that they found it already full of other family members who had arrived earlier. While the exact reason space was not made for a pregnant woman is unknown. Did the elder members of Joseph's family have priority?  Or were mary and Joseph chastised for her pregnancy and "early" delivery? Were they ashamed and not wanting to admit the truth?  Perhaps they were even too ashamed to go to any of his relatives.

Was Mary - like so many women who conceived "out of wedlock" after her - SHUNNED to protect Joseph's family - the House of David - from shame?

In any event, they came to an inn - a place of lodging. But again, because so many had come for the census their was no room left except in the barn.

Some renditions of the story conjure up images of the couple going from inn to inn only to have the owners barking at them to go away and slamming the door on this man of aristocratic lineage and his beautiful, expecting bride.

Wouldn't supporting all unwed mothers and bringing gifts to those who are homeless be wonderful and approriate Christmas tradition? 

Worse Than a Death

"I can truly tell you it was worse than a death because at least with a death you can closure you don't have to worry about where their at or think about where they are or how they are. And we always have to think about that."


Sounds very familiar to those of us who lost our children to adoption. We know this pain and angst. Those of us who carried out child for nine month. Felt it kick. Labored, birthed and knew out child carried our DNA. We know this all too well.


But the quote above was spoken by a woman who "knew" a set of twins for TWO WEEKS...twins that were totally unrelated to her.  Her input into their lives was payment.


Infertile, Scott and Amy Kehoe, purchased eggs and sperm and hired a human womb to carry the creation for them.


And imagine the nerve of the "surrogate" rent-a-womb canceled the contract when she dcvovered that
Amy Kehow has admitted to "being treated for an undiagnosed mental disorder.


This all happened in Michigan which does not recognize surrogacy,so the court ordered the twins returned to their non-biologically connected carrier mother, calling her their birth mother.


Oddly, as I am typing this Sarah Jessica Parker is on Letterman hawking her new movie.  She brought photos of her now 6-month old twins carried by a surrogate. She is saying that one of the twins and her son, age 7, look alike?  Were they produced with her genetic material? Her husband's. Did she birth her son?



No, I do not think biology is everything. I think buying genetic material and surrogacy are creepy and in most cases totally disregard the rights and future health concerns of the children being created.

Money Determines Adoption Losers and Winners

Financial woes are driving more people to consider placing a child, and to go through with that plan. This is true here in the U.S. and a sharp increase has also been reported in Taiwan.

More and more parents have considered putting their children up for adoption over the past five years, mainly because of financial difficulties, a child welfare foundation in Taiwan reported.

Nearly 90 percent of the parents who phoned the Child Welfare League Foundation to ask about putting their children up for adoption between 2003-2008 did so due to financial problems, foundation spokesman Chen Ya-hui said, citing statistics compiled by the foundation.

The number of phone calls made to the foundation for this purpose posed a significant 55 percent rise over the past five years, increasing from 495 cases in 2003 to 770 in 2008, according to Chen.
For the first 10 months of this year, the foundation accepted 511 phone calls on the issue, an average of 1.7 calls daily, the statistics show.

Eighty-seven percent of those who made the calls did so because of financial difficulties, representing a remarkable surge from 50 percent in January 2008 to 96 percent in September of the same year, with the percentage reaching 100 percent in January, March and June 2009, according to Chen.
According to data collected by the foundation, another reason for children being given up for adoption was because they were born to underage parents. About 23 percent of children put up for adoption had one parent under the age of 20, Chen said.

It is usually more difficult for sick children, those aged over 3 and children of drug-addicts to find suitable parents willing to adopt them, Chen added.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

Turn up the volume and enjoy!

"Find My Family" Reignites Old Cliches and Who's The Mother Battle Lines

I posted on Dec 7 about the ABC show "Find My Family" and pondered with others why adoptive parents felt it exploitive.

One adoptive mother has posted on Adopt-a-Tude an in depth reaction to the program - and to reunions in general - including why she feels it exploitive and much, much more.  It apparently is also being discussed at MotherLode, and one reviewer called the show "grotesque."

Here are some excerpts:

I understood too the longing: "I deserve to see where I came from." And sadly, as a single mom raising a daughter who's an only child, I've spent more than a few sleepless nights worrying whether my daughter will feel "alone in the world"—as more than one adoptee on the show articulated. In truth, the show made me long all the more for the possibility that my daughter might someday find and connect with her Chinese kin.

So, on the one hand, the show made me question again the wisdom of closed adoptions. The bottom line is blood relations are family. You don't cease being "family" just because you're not there. Adopted or not, we all have far-flung family members. Is there a draw there? The possibility for that sense of kindred connection? I'd be lying if I said no.....

In the meantime, as much as I feel sympathetic to the pain articulated by the adult adoptees and birth mothers in Find My Family, I'm also an adoptive parent and—I’m human. So while I understand the deep-seated need to discover the connection and sense of belonging that comes from blood ties, from the sense of having been molded from the same clay, there is another part of me, in my head, in my heart, that feels there are things about Find My Family that are one-sided, superficial, and potentially exploitative....

Lisa then she goes into the old cliches that parenting "is about being there, day in and day out, year in and year out, through the good, the bad, the sick, the rebellious, and ugly" yada yada.  DNA is cast aside and the "babysitter" cliche dragged back out.   She concludes with: "when the Find My Family hosts and adoptees kept saying, "That's your mother" and "We found your mother" and "We found your family"—as if these adoptees were still orphaned and alone in the world—I couldn't help but cringe.....The bottom line for me is that, as an adoptive parent, the show made me feel incredibly invisible [emphasis added]."

The flowing is my reply. I encourage you to read her post in full and add your own comments.

Lisa,

I appreciate your articulate honesty. What I get the sense of, as I read your reactions, is a huge dichotomy - a conflicting duality of feelings.

You say you understand and agree with the AAC statement and feel the pain of loss and the need to connect of adoptees, yet… you feel left out, as if a reunion would cast you aside as a babysitter...a not an uncommon concern of adoptive parents, albeit an irrational fear.

I have been involved in thousands of reunions and read about a thousand more over the past 30 years.  As for the “statistical results” you long to see, they are all over the place, like any interpersonal relationships, prime example being marriage. Are marriages good or bad? Are married people happy, content or not? Is marriage stable, secure and faithful? The answer, of course, is that some are and some aren't, and there are all degrees of happiness and contentment and all kinds of arrangements within the framework of marriage.

Reunions, like any other relationships, are as unique as the people in them.

Adoptive parents are not included in reunions because it is not about them! You no more belong at your daughter's reunion than you do on her honeymoon! Interestingly, however, the one episode I saw - the one with Ashley who finds a brother and sister - they DO show her siblings visiting her at her adoptive parents home. This is as it should be. These are now extended family members and should be welcomed as any other extended family.

Lisa, it is not the sweat equity which makes you feel angry - it is your fear and your insecurity that blood really is thicker than water. It’s your insecurity that this child is NOT blood related to you as you would like her to be; did not come from your body and does not have your DNA. These are YOUR issues and ones you need help to overcome so that you do not inflict them on your child and create feelings of indebtedness and gratitude on top of those you already recognize: the abandonment and identity issues.

What troubles you the most was the show referring to the original mothers and father and siblings of the adoptees as what they ARE: mother, father, sisters and brothers. We need no more fight for such linguistic titles as we need to fight over the children themselves. To truly love an adopted child is to love, accept and embrace fully all of her kin. That’s what they are and the fact of her adoption does not re-write that biological truth of kinship no more than it changed her hair color.  Have the confidence to believe that the "sweat equity" you put by in by virtue of being able to "be there” in ways that your child’s original mother was not, is shared by your daughter.

A mother is always a mother – even if one subsequently acquires a step-mother or if your mother dies. She is still your mother. She may be loved dearly or not. Some people feel far more attachment to a step-parent than their biological parent. Neither distance nor death, nor time apart, erase or change that reality.  They are mother and father…but adoptive (or step) parents can still be Mommy and Daddy!

Lisa, many mothers love more than just the one child and our children have aunts, uncles and grandparents that they love without taking anything away from Mom and Dad. Why would her having yet other RELATIVES in her life be any different? Unless an adoptive parent has been abusive - emotionally or physically - they have nothing to fear when their adult child reunites.  No more to fear than when that adult child marries!

I pray you find help to deal with your not uncommon insecurities so that you can give your little girl the gift of not feeling guilty about loving all the people that created and love and care for her.  Adoptees – like children of divorce- need Not to feel in a loyalty bind but allowed to love all of their parents because love is not finite but abundant and a renewable resource.

PS Despite the costs of adoption, neither sweat nor financial equity makes being  motherhood about ownerdhip. Read or re-read Kahil Gibran's "Your Children"