Thursday, December 2, 2010

UN finds irregularities in Guatemalan adoptions--no surprise there

Lorraine
People who want a child--someone else's child--will stop at nothing to get one, apparently, even when the illegal practices are brought to light. The Associated Press is reporting that a United Nations anti-corruption commission has found irregularities in Guatemala's adoption program despite government efforts to prevent fraudulent adoptions.
The International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala reports numerous cases of Guatemalan children handed over to foreigners
who were then listed as their "foster parents" to circumvent a ban on international adoptions. The commission didn't say how many such cases occurred among the 393 children adopted since 2008, when Guatemala enacted a more stringent adoption law.

Why were Guatemalan adoptions suspended? We have previously reported on the wide spread corruption in Guatemala: A government report concluded that the Guatemalan army stole at least 333 children and sold them for adoption in other countries during the Central American nation's 36-year civil war. Many of those children ended up in the United States, as well as Sweden, Italy and France, said the report's author and lead investigator.

The number of corrupt adoptions during the period in the government report--333--involving stolen children came from examining a mere 672 adoptions between between 1977-89, the time of peak adoptions from that country. Those numbers mean that roughly half of all adoptions examined during that period involved stolen children sold through state-run agencies. So the 333 number has got to be the mere tip of the iceberg. The common way to fake a child's identity was with faked birth certificates. During the country's protracted civil war, about 45,000 people disappeared from 1960 to 1996, about 5,000 of which were children.

It makes me ill to know that I know two single women who adopted children from Guatemala during this period. Fortunately for me, they are distant acquaintances that I do not often have contact with because I don't know how I could refrain from asking if they were aware of the reports that mothers were killed so their children would be available to be adopted...how these children were turned over to government-sponsored agencies to be adopted abroad. I suppose conversation would come to an end. But why, I want to know, are people so stupidly "innocent" about how they children they get came to be available? Read over at Pound Pup Legacy about the corruption all over the world, if you have any doubts.


With the new law, the ban on foreign adoptions was lifted in June.
 
When will this end? --lorraine 
______________ 
For more information see: Guatemalan Army Stole Kids for Adoption

And if you are ordering this CD as a gift for yourself or anyone, please don't hesitate to click right here.

13 comments:

Von said...

Is there no end to it and no end to the way adopters can ignore and leave themselves ignorant of the true situation?

Linda said...

@ Von- the only situation they care about is getting their hands on a kid.

TrixieD said...

"@ Von- the only situation they care about is getting their hands on a kid."

You myopic view on life both sickens and saddens me. While I do feel deep empathy for you because of a decision that you either made and now regret or because of something you were forced to do, I cannot remain silent while you spew this vitriol towards adoptive mothers and fathers and continue to make your gross generalizations.

While I do not condone the actions of those who would willingly adopt a child under questionable circumstances, you absolutely cannot assume that every "adopter" is an inherently evil baby-snatcher.

There are many people who have the general idea that any woman who would surrender their child for adoption is a promiscuous, selfish woman who could not be bothered with the responsibility of being a mother. Or worse. Those notions are unacceptable also. How would you feel if someone started a blog under that awful premise?

Intolerance - from either side - is not the right way to get the kind of reform necessary to protect the interests of the CHILDREN.

Sandy said...

Trixie D,

You did read the post these commentors are commenting on didn't you? Children stolen and placed for adoption and in some cases the mother killed to obtain the baby. Anyone with half a brain could tell there was massive corruption happening in Guat...no country has that many infants to meet the supply when before they didn't...

And I highly doubt Linda made the decision or was forced to surrender herself for adoption because I am pretty sure she could not speak at birth...

Lorraine Dusky said...

Trixie D:

Von is an adoptee. Does that change your perception>

Anonymous said...

Our daughter has a very dear friend who was adopted from Guatemala and celebrates a 1995 birth date.
While adoptions were suspended, this girl was in foster care in Guatemala for a long time, her US 'Mom' visited her, sent things to her and paid for her foster care. She bonded with this girl just like Mrs. Borshay bonded with Cha Jung Hee (and then adopted the girl she named Deann Borshay). Her Mom has no idea that anything inappropriate let alone criminal was on her path to motherhood by international adoption. She is one of the most nurturing, loving, and wise women I know - yet also possibly blinded by her wish to parent.
Sometimes when I see this friend, I can't help but think she is older than other girls celebrating their birthday that year, she may have parents grieving her disappearance, will she want to find them. At the same time her Mom is a good source of information on being a good mom to teens - I respect her judgment and ask her opinion.
Did she ever think her daughter may have been kidnapped? Never, we used an ethical agency and met "her foster parents."

Robin said...

Not related to topic at hand.

Lorraine,
Any news on when your new book will be available? I can't wait to read it.

withheld by request said...

It isn't part of the Adoption protocol to ensure those signing
consent or relinquishment papers are actually the parents of the child. US Courts routinely allow a signed sheet of paper without applying standards set by the rules of evidence to establish that the actual parents actually signed it. Oh, Yeah, and that they did so with full information and awareness.


It would seem a simple way to stem the pandemic of child trafficking.


Durham, NC -- Ask Sara Katsanis why she cares about safeguarding DNA samples and test results, and she won't mention privacy, identity theft, ordenials of health care coverage. Instead, she'll tell you about a woman who gave up adopting a Guatemalan child after discovering the child and the individuals claiming parentage weren't related. She'll even tell you other couples don't care and adopt anyway.At first glance, confronting adoption fraud - the practice where adults put unrelated children up for adoption - doesn't seem directly connected to genetics research. But for Katsanis, a genetics expert who seesthe potential for abuse of DNA, it's an easy fit. Now a research associate in the Institute for Genome Sciences & Policy (IGSP), Katsanis knew after completing her graduate degree that she wasn't destined to work at the bench, investigating the minutiae ofspecific genes in some tucked-away lab. She was far more interested in theusefulness of DNA and protecting it from misuse.

http://news.duke.edu/2010/11/dna.html

TrixieD said...

Hello,

@ Lorraine - No, it does not change my perspective. My comments weren't so much geared at this specific blog post, but the general feeling that I have been receiving from this site in general.

I came here to this site with the original intention of trying to gain some insight into my son's first mother's perspective, some help in navigating this sensitive situation I have found myself in, both for her sake and for mine. But the amount of blanket hatred I have found has been shocking.

@Sandy - did you not read my post? I do not condone children being stolen and placed for adoption in this way. I stated that. I do not appreciate your "half a brain" argument when you clearly did not do what you accuse me of.

Lorraine Dusky said...

Trixie D:
Many first mothers who post here were tricked or coerced into signing their surrender papers, or signed them feeling they had absolutely no choice due to circumstances, and have dealt with lifelong sorrow and grief and guilt.

You came to this site, as I recall, during the Grayson "Vaughn" Wyrembek transfer back to his father, who fought for three years to get him back from two people who should have surrendered him as soon as they knew a biological parent wanted his child. And they are still fighting Ben Wyrembek, the boy's father, and slandering his name on the Internet.

These kind of people--we call them adopters, they are not worthy parents but marauding, thieving people who want a child, anybody's child--for their own use and have no understanding of what it is like to be in our shoes, or to grow up and never know anyone who looks or acts like you. So the language was tough and I do not take back anything I said about Christy and Jason Vaughn, who blanketed their attempted child theft under the skin of "Christianity." In fact, nothing about how they have acted is spiritual. They made it necessary to create a huge emotional problem--to cut him in half--rather than let his real father claim his own child.

And your reaction was to comment with little sympathy or understanding of or point of view about this case--and just tell us we were bitter and angry and whatever else you said. You seem to display little understanding, as far as one can tell from your comments, of the feelings of the adopted people who write here who make up at least half of the people who post comments. They represent your child, or what it must be like to lose a child to adoption.

It is hell.

Lorraine Dusky said...

Robin: Oh, no news yet. The manuscript is finished, now it's looking for a home. It only went out to publishers about a week ago.

TrixieD said...

"You came to this site, as I recall, during the Grayson "Vaughn" Wyrembek transfer back to his father..."

I have no idea what you are referring to - I only found this site last Wednesday night and my first comment was on an article about adoption reform that did not mention any Grayson "Vaughn" Wyrembek. I do not know anything about that story than what you just mentioned in your reply.

So, my apologies, but I'm not sure what your point to me is?

Anonymous said...

If you would like a peek into the heart of people trying to adopt or who have adopted from Guatamala, take a look at these two horrifying threads from the Guatamala forum at Adoption.com. In my opinion, these threads should never be allowed to fade away quietly. They are a testament to what is wrong with adoption today. I was a first mother who spoke out against the immorality supported on these threads, and I am still haunted by them and the adopters who supported corruption and heartlessness, as long as it benefited them.

An adoptive "mother" wishing her child's mother would get pregnant and relinquish to her again: http://forums.adoption.com/guatemala-adoption/297900-who-else-secretly-wishing-biomom-would-get-pregnant-again.html

What would you do if you found out your child was kidnapped?: http://forums.adoption.com/guatemala-adoption/335004-what-would-you-do.html