JCICS today released their Standards of Practice for Intercountry Adoption in Vietnam, as well as a Summary of the Standards, written by JCICS President and CEO, Tom DiFilipo. According to the JCICS website: “licensed adoption service providers must confirm their status as a Joint Council Vietnam Standards of Practice signatory no later than close-of-business on Monday, February 25, 2008”.
© 2026 Voices for Vietnam Adoption Integrity
JCICS Standards of Practice Released
© 2026 Voices for Vietnam Adoption Integrity. Created with ❤ using WordPress and Kubio
4 Responses
What does this mean exactly for us? Is this a new type of MOU?
Jessica, this is something written/organized by JCICS which stands for the Joint Council on International Childrens Services – it’s basically an organization that most Adoption Service Providers (agencies) belong to. I believe their hope is to show the US and VN gov’ts that the agencies can regulate themselves and thereby reduce the need for more regulation when the Agreement is revised/signed. But read the JCICS president’s summary for more info.
I’m off for a week’s vacation now… but I hope to read lots of good discussion on this issue when I get back!
To my untrained eye, most of this document looks like what many of us have wanted. While I would love to have seen some more explicit language as it pertained to “in country staff” and monies changing hands, I am pleased. A few of the sections cover situations that were present in both of my adoptions.
I would love to hear from those more knowledgeable about how strictly or liberally this can be interpreted by ASPs (Hey, funny how Adoption Service Provider can also be mistaken for a type of snake … or maybe not so funny) especially the responsibility that ASPs have for the actions of their employees and high value volunteers.
I also wonder if the declaration of fees with common language will cause a rise in fees or concerns about “fee-fixing.”
But generally, I feel better about the preservation of all information of waiting children and transparency/ethical practices of the process because now agencies will be more accountable rather than being able to pass the buck with a simple “I don’t know’ or “Not in our domain” response.
Thank you to Ethica, Pear, VVAI, and any AP or PAP who used their voice in this effort. We will all benefit from this even though some might have hoped for more.
I just went back to look at the additions that Ethica had been asking for. I realize now what things are missing in this document that could have been there. I encourage all readers of the JCICS document to read the Ethica letter to the JCICS and note some of the holes in the document. I guess I was so busy saying YES to the JCICS document that I lost sight of the whole.
Is there anyway to pressure the JCICS to add a few of the things that Ethica had proposed, especially as it pertains to transfer of monies and children coming into care? Or is this process done with some possible positive changes excluded from the mix?