Local woman’s effort to adopt orphan stalls
By Brian Morelli
Iowa City Press-Citizen
Brendler officially adopted Madison, who turns 1 today, through what is called a Vietnamese “Giving and Receiving Ceremony” on Oct. 26, 2007. Pre-approved for the adoption by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security before Brendler left Oct. 24, the U.S. State Department has refused to issue Madison a visa because discrepancies turned up in how she was found.
…
“The only basis we have to regulate adoption in a foreign country is at the point when the parent gets the visa,” said Ann Estin, a University of Iowa law professor who studies international adoptions. “There are countries that are pretty abusive. It’s not a surprising thing to hear if the facts can’t be established, the visa would not be issued.”
“The State Department has to have a broader set of concerns,” she said. “This is a risky and complicated business.”
9 Responses
Why not mention the part of the article detailing the rushed, sloppy interviews conducted by the US Embassy personnel through interpreters?
The article is linked so people can read the entire thing themselves. I pulled out the two quotes that were based in fact.
Fact? The second quote is purely the opinion of a law professor not in possesion of any of the facts in this particular case. I’m just disappointed to see these repeated examples of your bias on what you claim to be a site promoting integrity.
You may wish to consider reporting both sides of the story or none at all. Integrity begins at home.
It occurs to me that this concept of a presumption of wrongdoing and a requirement to show solid proof otherwise is essentially a case of guilty-until-proven-innocent. These families may have a case to make regarding a violation of several Constitutional rights.
Greg, I know I make an easy target, but let’s not shoot the messenger here. The fact I was referring to is that the United States’ only means of regulating American adoptions overseas is the issuance (or refusal to issue) of a visa. It may be that the investigation done by embassy personnel was sloppy, or it may be that the witnesses changed their stories because it was fabricated to begin with and they couldn’t keep the details straight. I am not in a position to say either way. And as I stated, the entire article was linked, people are free to read it for themselves and form their own opinions free of any bias, real or otherwise.
Greg – in order for a NOID to be issued, there has to be far more than a simple presumption of wrong-doing. Ethica has an interesting article about the difficulties in issuing a NOID that you might find helpful:
http://www.ethicanet.org/INSpaperPR.pdf
Greg,
Constitutional protections of “innocence until proven guilty” apply to criminal actions in US local, state and federal courts. They do not apply (generally speaking) to civil or administrative procedures. These families have not been accused of a crime. I feel for them, but, I want to point out that there is no constitutional right to adopt a child from overseas. (I say this as both an attorney and the mother of a child adopted from Viet Nam, so, I DO understand what is at stake for these families.) Adopting a child from overseas, the USCIS is granting parents a privilege, not a right. And the USCIS is not accusing the parents of any wrong doing – it is the agencies and the facilitators whose actions are being questions by the US government.
Thanks for linking that article. A major thing that stood out for me is it took the Embassy more than a MONTH to issue the NOID. That is wrong IMO, it reminds me of the family that spent more than a month in the country without a NOID but without a Visa either waiting for the embassy to “find something”. They need to do their job, but it needs to be fair and I hope they did not base their entire NOID on an interview with a poor farmer over a baby they had found a year prior. Imagine how disconcerting it must have been for them to be questioned by American Embassy workers. Plus who knows, maybe the child was really one of their children or someone they knew and they were “abandoning” the baby. I am sure that would cause some inconsistencies in answers.
I really hope that all of this results in people holding their agencies accountable for ensuring the children are entering the orphanages legitimately and I equally hope people start standing up and holding the Embassy accountable for their end of all of this. Holding families virtual hostages for weeks on end while they search for a discrepancy in paperwork is not their job. I am not saying there aren’t most likely legitimate NOIDs out there, but 26 in a matter of months….I highly doubt they are ALL legit-if they were they would not be eventually overturned. The Embassy has a responsibility to us as American Citizens just as the Agencies have a responsibility to us as paying customers.
Tracy AP x 2
Tracy – I hear what you’re saying. But if the Embassy rushed a NOID with little evidence wouldn’t they be taking major heat for that too? Which is worse? To take the time to investigate and be very sure or to rush to a judgment on a very serious issue with far reaching implications? Of course its awful if a family has to wait to hear such news but right now the Embassy is taking 60 days for most I600 applications so I think a month to hear about a NOID is pretty reasonable, all things considered.
To me, rushing a NOID vs. taking a month to issue one when a family is in country is equally troubling. No one wants to receive a NOID at all, much less one that may have been rushed. And certainly, waiting in Vietnam in a kind of limbo must be very trying, if not traumatic for the families involved.
Situations like this are why I am profoundly grateful that the Embassy has changed the I-600 procedure. I like that there is a set guideline of 60 days for investigations and decisions. I like that hopefully, in this new situation, no one is in country and facing a NOID.
Does anyone know if any adoptions have been processed and completed yet entirely under the new procedure? If so, is that going well?