When the US Embassy in HaNoi announced the new I600 procedures in late October, effective November 16, 2007, it created an unexpected and frustrating delay for many PAP’s who thought they were just weeks away from traveling to Vietnam to complete their adoption. To think you are nearly at the end of your wait and then find out that in fact two months has been added to the timeline is simply heartbreaking. It is understandable therefore, that some PAP’s are becoming increasingly impatient with the Embassy as they near the 60 day mark and continue to wait on their I600 approval. Some have channeled those frustrations into action and have drafted a petition to push for “extra, temporary manpower” to address the “backlog” of I600 petitions.
I understand the frustration and the need to do something. (In fact, when we had difficulties with the US government during our Cambodian adoption, we too turned to a petition.) But I have concerns that the wording of this petition is somewhat misleading. While no doubt the Embassy is extremely busy working to process the large number of I600 applications that were filed in November and December, they are not actually behind in their processing. In fact, a handful of applications were approved in only three weeks and a number of others submitted between November 16-20 were approved in the last two weeks. So it would seem that the Embassy is keeping within their 60-day parameters. And while it appears the average processing time was over 50 days, the Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year holidays were all observed during that time – which not only closed down the Embassy for three working days but probably also meant that some of the staff took additional vacation time thereby leaving the Embassy with less staff than usual. (As frustrating as it is for the waiting PAP, the Embassy is probably no different than the average American workplace where productivity slows during the holidays.)
My point is not to say that American PAP’s should be afraid to speak up or that the US Embassy doesn’t need additional staff. (They very well may, I don’t know.) But rather my point is that I think PAP’s tend to have somewhat unrealistic expectations in their desire to bring their referred child home as quickly as possible. And while no one wants a child to live in an orphanage one day longer than necessary, the fact is it takes time to properly investigate each and every case to be certain every child is in fact a legal orphan. And from what we understand, the US Embassy is making an effort to do a thorough investigation of each and every petition. I share in the sadness and frustration of my PAP friends who anxiously check their emails daily waiting for their I600 approval. But I also have to admit a great deal of respect for the Embassy too. It would have been easier to continue processing paperwork as before, leaving dozens of PAP’s “stuck” in Vietnam for weeks or months while they wait on an investigation living in a hotel with their newly adopted child. Or they could have just turned a blind eye to the unethical behaviors and troubling paperwork issues they were seeing. Or, they could have shut the entire program down and washed their hands of the whole thing as happened in Cambodia. But they didn’t. Instead they chose to do what the felt was best for the children, and for American families.
Certainly we hope that the process will be refined to the point where I600 petitions can be processed in a matter of weeks instead of months. Or that agencies will be prepared to submit the necessary paperwork earlier in the process such that the wait is concurrent with the wait for Vietnam’s approval and does not cause additional delays. But in the meantime I’d like to suggest that PAP’s adjust their expectations. Include the full 60 days in your estimated timelines, and remember the Embassy said this was an “approximate” timeframe – meaning it may take less time, but it may also take more.
I don’t mean to be disheartening or to minimize the difficulty of waiting an additional two months for your child. But let’s try to remember our primary goal: ethical adoptions from Vietnam. Whether we mean to or not, having unrealistic expectations can put pressure on our agencies and those they work with and even on our government to cut corners or push things through which could result in unethical practices that harm our children and their Vietnamese families. We say we want the very best for our children — but are we willing to put our needs and expectations aside to make that happen?
31 Responses
I took part in organizing that petition and speaking for myself and a number of other PAP’s who also helped, I want to make it very clear that WE SUPPORT ETHICAL ADOPTIONS. PERIOD. We support the work the Embassy staff is doing and as stated in the cover letter and email we sent to PAPs, friends and family with the petition link, that we believe the new process is a GOOD STEP for adoptions in Vietnam. The petition is NOT about changing or arguing against the new process, it is about our concern that USCIS is not staffed properly to adjust to the new protocol. Two different issues. The Embassy does appear to be keeping in their timeline for some families, but I know of several who have already gone past the 60 day mark without a word, and as far as they and their agencies know, there is nothing wrong with their paperwork.
My husband and I do not have a problem with an extended wait so that our paperwork and the background of our child can be investigated well- we have, from the start, been hyper concerned our process be as ethical and by the book as possible. But with any new process comes the potential for chaos and backlog. We heard that things were piling up and staffing was short and decided to make our concerns known. When the announcement of the new process and the motivation behind it was made public, we, along with a group of other PAP’s sent a message of support to the office in Hanoi for the change, which was acknowledged and appreciated.
Please do not assume that because we started a petition we are only focused on rushing through and whining about the wait. Just because we do not write articles or are as publicly known as others does not mean we are not concerned, active or even inexperienced in the adoption world.
yours respectfully.
I would be very interested in talking to any families who have gone beyond the 60 day mark. Please put them in touch with me.
I will certainly direct them to this post (there are 2 that I heard of) but it will be up to them to contact you. Thanks.
Thanks, I appreciate it.
Kerry, I apologize that you feel I implied the writers of the petition don’t care about ethics – that was NOT my intent. And in fact, I believe you do because you stated that clearly in your petition. My point was that we have to be careful about the (unintended)message we are sending when we complain about the amount of time an investigation takes. Unfortunately, PAP’s have gotten a reputation in the media and with our gov’t of being more concerned about getting our little babies FAST than about how ethically our adoptions are completed. You and I know that the vast majority of PAP’s do indeed care about ethics. And if indeed the embassy is going over the 60 days without any notice as to why, I think that should be addressed. I had not heard of anyone – but I invite them to email or post on VVAI – we want to give a voice to every PAP, especially those who are in need of our support. As I said in my post however, I think we need to keep in mind that the last 60 days have been unusual in the number of holidays (and thus vacation time) and even if the embassy were fully staffed I would expect things to take longer.
However, let me say Kerry, if we can verify that the embassy is in need of more staffing, I will happily lead the letter writing campaign to get the funding necessary to get the job done.
Christina,
I appreciate your response. Please know that this petition was not thrown together due to ‘impatience’. Several of us spent 2 weeks weighing the pros and cons, contacting a number of people who work within the adoption community to ask their opinion, etc. We
even notified Mr. Valverde prior to sending it out and assured him that we supported the new process and that we would make it clear in our distribution that neither he nor any other CIS workers should be contacted by individuals. He responded graciously and was supportive and sympathetic to our concerns.
I understand that the reputation of some PAPs is as you stated above, but I also believe there are more than not who are cooperative, patient and supportive of the work our government does in terms of processing our adoptions. I believe that workers in the offices of CIS know that, too.
I have heard of 2 families who stated they had gone beyond the 60 days; it’s possible that one was at 59 or so. As I commented to Nicki I will direct them to her but it’s up to them to make contact.
Lastly, I think that before you published your post you could have contacted me directly to voice your concerns by responding to the email I forwarded to VVAI notifying your group of the petition.
I would have been happy to fill you in.
All the best.
Kerry
Kerry,
I apologize for not contacting you directly. The reason I didn’t was that your petition was not intended to be the focus of my post – clearly I failed in that regard. My intent was to focus on the Expectations of all PAP’s – the petition was just the springboard for that discussion. But regardless, I should have emailed you first to let you know what I’d be posting – and I’m sorry I didn’t.
It’s okay Christina. We are all hoping for the same thing- that the process becomes more transparent and smooth, and that the best interest of the children is always the priority.
take care,
Kerry
I have to say, it is soooo refreshing to finally read someone touch on the very real issue of how our US government offices conduct their business. I am a PAP, waiting for Visa approval and I unequivocally agree with investigations, and whatever time it takes to ensure things are done ethically for all involved. NO QUESTION.. But let me be clear, we still have rights as citizens of the United States to question and be informed about the processing of our applications. I am increasingly concerned, as I have received very strong warnings from the adoption agency I have employed, to not even “think about contacting CIS”, as it might makes things worse, or delay things even further. “It might draw further attention to your case,” etc, etc, are the comments that I have received when I have expressed an interest to contact CIS on my own behalf, to inquire about my own case status. Can you see my concern?? The utter lack of information has undoubtedly created a panic amongst us PAPS, and may I be so bold as to state that what the US government is doing is absolutely right for an ethical adoption and for the children we bring into our lives, but it is absolutely not fair to the waiting families, relatives, and PAPS whom have invested so much. We do have rights. We have a right to know ANY INFORMATION RELATING TO OUR CASES. We are not asking for the impossible. Most of us have only one question. How long? Or, how much longer? I do not have a problem with the timeline by the way. You could tell me another year just to be sure. But, please, please, please, keep me informed if it going to be not a year, or 6o day, or whatever the number is. This process is very common with all immigrant family petitions by the way. My husband became a US resident, and the process was just as unfair. No timeline was given, no one had any information during the process, as to how much longer, etc. He had his work hanging in the balance also, and could not leave the US until his residency Visa was granted. Do you know how difficult it is to earn a living with NO IDEA as to how long you will go without work, until the US government decides to write you a letter, or contact you?? There are offices filled with people working on cases. Can’t they come up with a structured way to treat waiting families with more dignity and respect? Petitions are our only way to advocate for ourselves. Who else is going to do it? The US Government is not perfect. They still need to be held accountable.
I would like to echo Kerry’s comments, and add a few of my own. I think that the writers of VVAI have totally missed the point of the petition. The point was NOT to say that we, the signers or writers of the petition, disagree with the I600 policy. I, personally, am in FULL support of the new policy. The point of the petition was to do something, anything, to help get children home with their families. I don’t think that anyone imagines that this petition is going to dramatically affect the way the USCIS processes I600s. But in the world of international adoption, where you have little to no control over what is happening with your own process, you want to grasp at straws and feel like you are doing something to move closer to the day when you can meet your child. What the VVAI writer is missing is that we are all on the same side, working for the same thing–safe and ethical adoptions. What I find interesting is that the writers of this post assume that the petition was produced by people who are willing to put ethics aside in order to bring their children home. If that is assumed then, again, the point of the petition has been sorely missed. We all have the right to express our opinions, whether that be in the form of a petition or on a blog, and we all want to support each other in whatever ways we can. I, personally, signed this petiton in support of the many families who were very unfairly caught up in the policy change and are still waiting for visa approval. If I were in this situation I would want others to do the same for me. Signing the petition is a gesture of support and I would encourage everyone to sign it. Timeliness and ethics do not have to collide. Let’s hope the CIS can work in a timely manner so these families can complete their long journeys to their children.
Sincerely,
Anne
If anyone understands the goals and gestures related to petitions, it is I – like I mentioned, we used them more than once to communicate with CIS (then INS) when Cambodian adoptions were shut down. I absolutely think petitions have a place and can make a REAL difference in the way things proceed. And it is for that reason I felt the need to post because while I believe the writers (and signers) of the petition had only the best intentions and DO want ethical adoptions, I am concerned that the way the petition is written (and who it is directed to) may send an unintended message that PAP’s are impatient and demanding.
Timelines and ethics do not have to collide – but they often do.
Anyone could explain for me the ‘unbelievable’ delay such as
“- Dec. 20: Our DETERMINATION OF ORPHAN STATUS approval letter was written (’cause the date is on the letter, dontcha’ know?). —– Jan. 4: We received our approval via email, with the DETERMINATION OF ORPHAN STATUS as an attachment. ”
What did happen with one ‘click to send’ from Dec. 20 to Jan. 04?
Please give me a reason!
Angie, can you explain your post? I don’t understand what you are trying to ask, and I’d like to. Thanks!
I think she’s asking why her approval was dated Dec 20 and why she then did not receive it until Jan 4.
Actually, she is quoting what I wrote about our I600 approval timeline on my blog. It is a direct quote (though obviously not cited as such), but yes, I think she is asking why the disparity in time between Dec. 20 and Jan. 4.
I plan on writing a post to clear up a lot of this when we get back from Vietnam and have a little more time. The reason for the “unbelievable” delay in this case is that December 20th was the date the applicaion cleared USCIS and January 4th is the date it cleared the DoS. This is a multi-agency process, something most PAPs or agencies don’t seem to know (probably because of the lack of info from the gov’t about it). Anyway, the attachment of the approval is from USCIS and the approval email itself (body of the email) is the State Dept approval. Hope that clarifies that.
I would also like to agree with what Kerry wrote. I have spoken with her numerous times and I know that this petition was NOT written in any effort to simply speed things up while ignoring the absolute importance of a full investigation and putting ethics aside. I feel that was a very strong statement to make and I couldn’t disagree with that notion more. There has been no secret to the fact that USCIS is overworked and understaffed and despite that, I have yet to hear one person argue that the new I600 process is a bad thing. We are simply saying that the USCIS was unprepared to roll out the new I600 system. Those exact remarks have been made by PAPs, APs, in country staff, and officials both here and in Vietnam. No one really knows how long the actual investigation part of the approval takes. It’s entirely possible that the reason the I600’s are taking up to (or over) 2 months to clear is because they are on an overworked staff members desk and just haven’t been looked at yet. Why does this become a matter of ethics and short cuts for our own personal benefit? I don’t understand why this petition to get our voices heard in an unobtrusive manner and is the topic of such a discussion. I happily signed the petition…along with 507 other people (so far). No ethics were compromised, no short cuts sought out…we are simply asking that our concerns and voices be heard too. Plain and Simple.
Jenn,
I wholeheartedly agree, and happily signed this petition, and have passed it along to everyone I know that is concerned. It is the only way to have our voices heard. The climate of Vietnam adoption is chilly at the moment. Yes, the main concern is the children. Yes, ethics are so important. So many questions, so much speculation, so little solid information. No wonder it’s getting increasingly colder. My blood runs cold when I read about the “web of corruption” that exists. My blood runs colder when I read judgments of opinions that need to be expressed, and deserve to be expressed. So, I ask the question that I am asked so often by friends and family members, as I await a Visa approval for my son born in Vietnam. If corruption exists (as this site seems to have unveiled) what happens to the children that have filled these orphanages? These numbers are in the thousands I pressume. These children are the ultimate and final victims of this corruption. If we (PAPS) walk away from questionable referrals of our own accord, and do not challenge the NOIDS, and appeal the decision of the US not to issue a Visa, what happens to these children? I highly doubt their birthmothers will come forward to re-claim their children after they apparantely “sold” them. Do these children deserve the cards they were dealt? I know one thing…they deserve loving homes, as all children that have suffered abuse, neglect, and have fallen victim to the immoral /inhumane acts of others. The US has a history in Vietnam for helping the plight of children who fell victims to World War II. This was operation “Baby Lift”. This was a brave and noble act. Was it questioned by others? Yes. Was it the right thing to do? Well, that depends on your own moral code. I am just wondering what other avenues we can take within our own government to justify helping these children whom are apparantely victims of this corruption that the adoption business has brought upon them? Yes, we can give money in aid, but ensuring the money reaches these children already seems to be hard to manage and in question. My question is this..what is so wrong with wanting to help these children (via adoption), even with the knowledge of how they came to be in these orphanages? Can we appeal on a different basis, to bring these children into the country? I understand we posses the power to stop child trafficking, by walking away. I understand agencies and facilitators stay in business because there is a demand. I am not advocating a continuation of the current system, that seems to be crumbling, but someone has to give a voice to the children left in the wake of the divide. Couldn’t there be a “statue of limitations” once these investigations yield questionable practices? If no relative steps forward after the investigation is over, but the way the child came to the orphanage is “fishy”, why does this child deserve to be needlessly left to a life in an orphanage. The conditions in these orphanages (from what I am reading) are questionable already. They won’t get better if we walk away. Why can’t we make another provision via our own government, and still allow adoption as a means to get the remaining children out of these circumstances and into a better situation, whether it be to a family in France, the US, or Ireland? Surely this warrents a crisis situation that deems intervention, especially if adoptions are shut down.
Is there anyone else that thinks about this??
I think the issue is this: the petition makes some assumptions without knowing the actual goings-on of that which they are petitioning that may make it a bit misguided.
For example, as far as I know no bottleneck exists on the USCIS level so initiating a petition directed at the USCIS would be a waste of resources. Likewise, as far as I know any hold up at the DoS level is not really related to staffing but investigations that the DoS feels are necessary for whatever reason.
I don’t think the process was initiated as flawlessly as it could have and should have been. I think there is room for improvement. I think staffing has always been a concern, even before these changes. I think the process isn’t nearly as transparent as parents deserve. I think what is needed here isn’t more staff (per se) but a clearer understanding of how the process works. I think the point of this article is that parents need to set more realistic expectations. One of the ways they can do this more easily is by understanding what to expect, of course! Right now there is a lot of guessing going on based on the patterns that PAPs are trying to decipher from other PAPs as they gain approval and travel. The problem with this is that guesses can sometimes be way off base. That, in turn, can set some really off base expectations. When those expectations don’t pan out, PAPs can feel pretty exasperated. All of this could be avoided by a clear understanding of what the process actually entails.
For instance I think it would be helpful for parents to understand:
– what the relationship is between the USCIS and the DoS as it pertains to I600 processing
– what route does the I600 travel before approval is sent via email?
– does the USCIS or DoS plan to continue routine field investigations on all cases?
– will families be notified if a field investigation will be required?
– will families be notified if there is a concern which involves a more in-depth investigation than just the current cursory visits to orphanages? Or will they only be notified when a decision has been made?
– how will the USCIS and Embassy respond to situations in which the province requires that a family attend a G&R or lose their referral, even without I600 approval?
– in what order are applications processed? By province? By need? By referral date? By application date? Or a combination of these factors?
These are answers we will share when we have a clearer understanding of them ourselves. Like Chris, I am not opposed to petitions to exact change within our government. However, before a petition can be useful, a full understanding of what exactly we are petitioning needs to be sought out. And my fear about this specific petition is that its a bit misinformed and maybe asking for the wrong things from the wrong people.
Christina,
I find it disheartening you continue to find ways to put passionate, good people in the position to defend their passion and goodness.
Karen H.
Karen,
If you read my other comments (above) you know that was never my intention. I apologize for that impression. However I will not apologize for making people stop and think… while it often doesn’t feel like it, the truth is that as adoptive parents we have the most power of anyone in the “triad” of adoption – and we must be careful how we wield that power.
I am glad this post is here – I did not know about the petition, now I do. I have passed it onto the local groups here in NC. Maybe more people will sign it 🙂
Heather
[…] I wrote my last post, it was never my intention to malign the writers of the recent petition. I did not mean to give the […]
I did not sign the petition due to the wording that made me uncomfortable – and that was before I ever read about it on this blog. It seemed emotionally charged, rather than objective and helpful.
Sorry you feel that way Amy. But good to know. We took several weeks to process what we would say, got advice from various individuals and actually, were quite calm and attempted to keep emotions *out* of the wording, just be to the point. I guess the sound of it is interpreted differently person to person.
I see almost 1000 people have signed so far….. good!!!
I don’t understand why people are so hard on the families that just want their children home with them.
I think parents should do anything they can (within the legal limits) to bring home their children….
I, too, read the petition prior to it being posted here. I am a waiting parent myself but I could not sign it due to the wording and how I felt it comes across to USCIS. I understand and know that the authors of the petition wrote it with nothing but good intentions. However, without further information, I couldn’t bring myself to add my name and was surprised that others could (especially those not even involved in adoption – have they done research to really understand what they are requesting through the petition?). I haven’t heard first hand of anyone going beyond the 60 days processing. I also can’t say that staffing is the “problem” – how would we know that? Without that supporting information I couldn’t sign it. Again, this was prior to the post here and I was glad to see Christina address this since I share in the viewpoint of her initial post.
I am also a PAP, but did not feel that I could sign the petition. I know the authors are very concerned about ethical adoption and support the new I600 processing procedure and Kerry stated above that this was mentioned in a cover letter to PAPs, but I’m wondering why it also wasn’t stated in the petition so that it would be clear to CIS and DOS. I also don’t feel I have enough detailed information about what is really going on in the I600 process to petition CIS to do something differently. Laurie’s comment above about the process being a multi-agency process with both CIS and DOS involved just reinforced my feeling of being uneducated about the process (I haven’t read anywhere else that it is a multi-agency process). I hope the US Embassy’s quarterly meeting with ASP’s on Jan. 24th will present our agencies with detailed information on the new I600 process and that our agencies will pass this on to PAPs.
It was initially but advice we received suggested we keep it short. Clearly there are plenty of people who disagree with the petition’s wording and I respect that. Saying that, I do not apologize for participating it putting it together. It’s not perfect nor has it been presented formally to anyone as of yet. I want to make it clear that that this petition was not created in a rush, out of desperation or without thought. Clearly it is equally important for people who disagree with it to point out its flaws as it is for people who agree with it to point out what isn’t.
Wishing you all well- I’m stepping away from this discussion and site.
All the best.
Christina~ I just wanted to say that I appreciate your willingness to consistently speak your (very informed, logical and experienced) mind, even when it might not be what people want to hear. It’s so easy to be misunderstood in this world of words without body language and inflection, and you handle yourself with grace and humility. Thank you!
Thank you Laura for your kind words, they mean a lot to me.