There were two articles in Irish publications this week that referenced UNICEF’s report on Vietnamese adoptions.
The irishtimes.com article states:
The final report from the UN body, released yesterday, also found that “the level and nature of inter-country adoptions from Vietnam are essentially influenced by foreign demand.
It also called into question the manner by which many children came to be adoptable through abdonment.
The Independant.ie followed with a similar thread in its article, Vietnam Adoptions Suffer a Major Setback.
As of this post,we’ve been unable to find a copy of the report. Please let us and our readers know if you have access to the report.
50 Responses
I found a summary of the draft report here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21410009/Iss-Draft. However, I still cannot locate either the draft or final full report.
The key points of the draft summary are:
1. Intercountry adoptions from Vietnam are essentially demand driven.
2. The circumstances under which babies become “adoptable” are invariably unclear and disturbing.
3. The intercountry adoption system is grounded in a remarkably unhealthy relationship between agencies and specific residential facilities.
4. Governments and Central Authorities of “receiving countries” – collectively at least, and individually in certain instances – have not effectively committed themselves to applying the basic principles of the Hague Convention 1993, or the recommendations of the Special Commission on the treaty’s practical operation, in their dealings with Vietnam.
5. Vietnam’s desire for rapid accession to the THC-93 constitutes a highly positive perspective.
The full ISS report is now on the website of the Irish Dept of Health & Children (http://www.omc.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=357)
While I believe there are many issues with adoptions in Vietnam, UNICEF has a pointed agenda to stop international adoptions. Their position is that children should grow up in their country of origin no matter what the circumstances. I no longer support UNICEF because of this blanket agenda that in no way serves the best interest of children. Therefore, I take any report issued by that organization as suspect and automatically tainted.
Does anyone have any documentable proof that UNICEF is fundamentally against inter country adoption?
UNICEF’s position on international adoption can be found here: http://www.unicef.org/media/media_41918.html.
Your statement that UNICEF is against intercountry adoption simply is not true. UNICEF believes, as I do, that intercountry adoption should be used when all other available alternatives have been exhausted. They state, “Inter-country adoption is one of a range of care options which may be open to children, and for individual children who cannot be placed in a permanent family setting in their countries of origin, it may indeed be the best solution. In each case, the best interests of the individual child must be the guiding principle in making a decision regarding adoption.”
UNICEF’s position on their media page is the one they’re happy to quote to the world.
Reading from other UNICEF’s documents (see links below) the ‘permanent family setting’ has been widened to any other alternative ‘care setting’ as long as it is in the country of origin.
UNICEF is against intercountry adoption – and that is a fact.
And as an aside – the main author of the UNICEF digest is also one of the (independent?) authors of the ISS report.
Link to UNICEF digest –
http://www.unicef-irc.org/cgi-bin/unicef/Lunga.sql?ProductID=102
Link to guidance note –
http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/resources_1461.html
PDF-link to guidance note –
Guidance note Intercountry adoption
http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/Guidance_note_Intercountry_adoption.pdf
That may be what they put in writing, but UNICEF has been one of the loudest voices in tightening and advocating stopping international adoptions. If you read the end of their report, as all their rhetoric states, if the parents had the money, they could take care of their children. Well, duh. That’s probably the main reason for adoptions in all countries. They are not for foreign adoptions and that taints their reports.
It was the Vietnamese who commissioned UNICEF to do the report in order to help them identify areas in the adoption system where changes are needed. Many adoptive parents can relate to the findings particularly those surrounding abandonment and humanitarian aid. These concerns are not new to the Irish Adoption Board and their Mediation Agency. The same issues arose with MY Linh Soland. It will be interesting to see what their response will be.
From the ISS report;
“If a child is abandoned on the street, at a pagoda, near a SPC, etc., ordinarily very few details are left. The absence of information surrounding the child’s origins is an enormous obstacle for ensuring ethical adoptions in Viet Nam. Given that a high proportion of abandoned children are adopted, it is essential that the verification process of the child’s origins is well regulated . Without a comprehensive verification process, children may be labelled abandoned when in fact their “abandonment†has been induced by third parties”
The report states what I have come to believe…there really is no way to adopt an abandoned infant ethically. There is no way to determine if that child has been trafficked or not. So, the only way to ethically adopt a child is if verified birth family relinquish the child and fully understand the child is to be adopted internationally.
BB
So abandoned children are left in orphanges? That makes no sense. If you stop the high fees to officials, etc., and regulate the monies spent for care and administration costs, it would alleviate, if not eliminate, stolen children. If there is not money to be made at it, those who do it will stop. It’s the unregulated aspect of the monies that causes the problems.
PJ,
The report states that adoption in Vietnam is demand driven….if no one were willing to adopt young abandoned infants…there would not be so many.
BB
This has been shown to be true. In provinces where there is no adoption, abandonment rates are much lower.
Nicki – Where did you get this info – I would like to read that. Thanks.
I got the info from a variety of sources both in the US and in VN. Not print media. Unfortunately I have nothing to pass along to you by way of reference.
They are demand driven because there is money to be made at it.
But PJ is also correct — children are genuinely abandoned in Vietnam (Holt had its abandonment/relinquishment stats on its website; it probably still does). Shouldn’t we instead be talking about how to stop the practices that led to false or staged abandonments, which means federal legislation aimed at agency practices on our side and more legislation aimed at agencies and orphanages on the Vietnamese side?
Mary,
We can’t even regulate what goes on in our own country with 52 different states with varying regulations…how are you going to regulate what adoption agencies do in foreign countries?
BB
BB, I recognize the difficulties and the lack of political will, but that just can’t be an excuse for inaction or acceptance of the status quo. I don’t know enough about domestic adoption to comment, but international adoption should and must be regulated by the federal government. Otherwise, we will continue to have situations like Vietnam, where children who genuinely need families are either indistinguishable from children whose histories have been fabricated , or far worse, the children who need families most are left behind.
Mary,
I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t believe that the US government has the authority to regulate how companies or agencies conduct business in foreign countries…maybe someone else who reads this blog can enlightened us…..?
BB
I’m not a lawyer either. However the Hague Convention provides the USG with regulatory oversight that includes, in part, how agencies conduct business in foreign countries. If agencies do not conduct themselves in the ways in which they were approved and agreed under their Hague accreditation, they can lose that accreditation even if their misconduct occurs in a non-Hague country.
You are right that agencies that are NOT accredited are pretty unstoppable. There is almost nothing the USG can do, in those cases. The burden is on local and state level regulatory systems.
Does anyone know why the US can’t regulate how much adoptions cost or how much money agencies are allowed to send overseas? Certainly other countries do so. What if, rather than a $10,000 tax credit, the US government set up a federal regulation that agencies cannot, ever, charge more than $6000 for an adoption? The result for APs would be the same as the tax credit: far more reasonable costs. But if agencies can’t take our money in the first place, they can’t send it overseas to disappear in a dark hole.
Mary,
I did a little reading…..
The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of constitutional acts of Congress, constitutional treaties ratified by Congress, constitutional regulations promulgated by the executive branch, and case law originating from the federal judiciary.
The Constitution and federal law are the supreme law of the land, thus circumscribing state and territorial laws in the fifty U.S. states and in the territories. In the unique dual-sovereign system of American federalism (actually tripartite when one includes Indian reservations), states are the plenary sovereigns, while the federal sovereign possesses only the limited supreme authority enumerated in the Constitution. Thus, most U.S. law (especially the actual “living law” of contract, tort, criminal, and family law experienced by the majority of citizens on a day-to-day basis) consists primarily of state law, which can and does vary greatly from one state to the next.
So, it appears that the Federal government is limited by the Constitution and each State regulates Adoption laws such as access to Adoption Records, Who Must Consent to an Adoption and When Parties to an Adoption (Who May Adopt, Who May Place, Who May be Adopted),Putative Fathers (Registries, Paternity), Regulation of Adoption Expenses, Infant Safe Haven Laws and Use of Advertising & Facilitators.
BB
David Smolin, Professor of Law at the Cumberland School of Law and well-known advocate for adoption reform would disagree. Here are a few of his professionally published comments, “Congress certainly possesses the authority to regulate and accredit all United States agencies involved in the immigration of children to the United States, given the Constitutional mandate for federal authority over immigration.” (page 174) He goes on to state, “The United States government should set limits as to permissible adoption fees and mandatory donations.” (page 178) Source: http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3679&context=expresso
That’s a lovely theory, but our government has a great deal of trouble implementing and enforcing policy. Did anyone see the 48 Hours last night about the adoptions in Samoa? After abducting and virtually selling 80 to 100 babies to American families under the guise of “adoptions,” our fabulous government struck a plea deal with the owners of the adoption agency and those who worked for them and gave them five years probation. That in no way sends the message that selling children will not be tolerated. Five years probation to make hundreds of thousands of dollars is not a bad deal to those with no morals. That speaks volumes about our countries ability to regulate and enforce adoption laws.
PJ,
As I was reading David Smolin’s comments the 48 Hours show on the adoptions in Samoa came on….it has all left me pretty depressed. I knew of that situation but I didn’t know the outcome of the trial.
I think every PAP considering IA should read the document that Mary linked to….it spells it all out in black and white.
BB
Regarding abandoned babies here in Vietnam (I’ve been living here for 6 1/2 years), my friends who work in hospitals (doctors and nurses) tell me that pregnant girls check into hospitals (they manage to give a name other their real name), give birth, and then leave, leaving the baby behind. This is constantly happening in the hospitals. While in a Western country there would be a simple pathway that would then shift such babies to an orphanage, here hospital staff themselves then usually ‘disperse’ the baby. Here it gets a little dicey: Sometimes the baby will got to a genuine ‘good home’ and sometimes the baby will go to a middleman who will then resell the baby, the baby ending up who knows where. I say resell because its always the case that when one person helps another (helps a couple get a baby that was abandoned at the hospital, for example) some cash will change hands. The necessary paperwork is always a hassle no matter what’s done or how its done, and it does requires a ‘facilitation fee’ or ‘commission’ or whatever one cares to call it – no matter what’s being done. What results is all the necessary paperwork. This is just the way its done here. Babies are genuinely abandoned at hospitals and this is what happens to them. Every aspect of every thing is so different than in the West.
The ‘Vietnam News’ English language newspaper printed a blurb saying recently that such a middleman was arrested for dealing in such babies obtained from hospital staff. No mention of hospital staff being charged. It is not felt that doctors should not be trying to find homes for the babies. And everyone DOES get a ‘commission’. You can’t get around it. That is life in VN. There actually is no ‘legal way’ (start to finish) that things can be done because laws are lacking, unclear, overlapping or disfunctional. It has always been the case that things happen through people – ‘relationships’. It’s the way of life here. With that, there is both the good and the bad.
So you are saying that even though there is falsification of paperwork and payoffs – the babies are still actually abandoned? That at least is a better picture than babies being outright stolen.
You asked whether ‘the babies’ are actually abandoned. I think you’re asking only about those babies which are adopted internationally. In answer, I’d say no, most are not abandoned. The VNese gov’t has a system in place whereby foreigners wanting a baby have to specify age and sex. Because this is a money-making thing for all VNese people involved, babies are located or acquired through individuals/agencies who serve as middleman between the foreigner and the VNese gov’t. Many of these babies don’t just happen to be available. While babies are being abandoned here regularly, they end up going in different directions (to orphanages, pagodas and individuals via hospital staff – although that is perhaps happening less right now). Foreigners want healthy babies and all of the VNese people involved do want to satisfy the foreigners. So, find them ‘a good one’. They will buy it if its not available through the preferred connection (and the staff working with adoptions at the Ministry of Justice surely each have their own preferred connections). But, ethically (look at Comment by BB, 2009-12-07 11:00:43), birth families are ‘relinquishing’ (selling) their babies because they are very poor and have other mouths to feed, and they’re surely being told that the baby’s going to experience ‘the good life’. This is all up front – its just not the value system of Westerners. So we have ‘relinquished’, ‘abandoned’, and ‘orphaned through the death of both parents’. That last one would satisfy the ethical qualms of any Westerner until they learn of the great feeling of extended family responsibility that VNese people do feel…
Nicki – I was still hoping you could provide the background info that led to your statement ” In provinces where there is no adoption, abandonment rates are much lower.” Not trying to be contrary just searching for as much info as I can as I investigate my child’s background. Feel free to email me privately. I think when I post a comment – you have the link to my email. But let me know if not.
In 2009 the number of Adoptions from TN was 40 . In 2007 when all countries were still adopting that number was close to 200.
Una – Not sure if your comment was in response to my comment but your figures don’t represent abandonment rates only adoption rates.. I am interested in reading the background info that Nicki must have read.
Hi Jennifer
The abandonment rate for TN in 2009 was 42 infants in 2007 it was closer to 200+. However I have to point out that a “Relinquishment Law” has never exsisted.
Where are you getting these figures? I’d love to have more info. Thanks.
And if you look at the realities of it all, there are approximately 45 million children without families worldwide. It makes me cry that so many of us who would gladly, lovingly provide the nurture and support these children need are denied the ability to adopt. It’s beyond a crazy world. It’s a ridiculous one.
Hmm – I’m not sure there are anywhere close to 45 million children without families worldwide. Where is that figure derived from?
here’s a quote from Unicef:
“UNICEF estimates the number of orphans at approximately 210 million.”
However, there are many other organizations that offer a much lower number. The 45 million (approximate) number is from several sources, including SOS foundation. The US government predicts at least 44 million orphans by 2010 (and we’re there in a few days).
I think you are missing the point of my post. The ISS Report stated that adoptions from Vietnam were demand driven. The US Report found that many children who were adopted as abandoned were not actually abandoned. The figures I gave were for TN where all the children were said to be abandoned. Think…… nearly 200 in 2007 yet when the US and Ireland stop adopting from here that number drops to just 42 abandonments for 2009 of those 42 40 have been adopted.
That is an estimated number of orphans (children who have lost 1 or more parent) but it is not anywhere close to the number of children without families (ie Adoptable). I think the clear distinction should be made. It’s important in a forum like this (adoption-related) as it gives people a false impression that there are far more adoptable children out there than there truly are.
Likewise, from what I’ve read, the truly available children are by and large over the age of 7. There are a very small number (relative to this conversation) of infants or toddlers available for adoption domestically or internationally.
That’s why I used the conservative number of 45 million rather than the UNICEF number of 200+. The 44 millionish range is what is, according to the US government, the number of children with no parents. Why is the age relevant? I would adopt an older child as would many others. That’s one of the issues with countries such as Vietnam. Why not allow adoptions of children who have been in orphanges for a period of time and are obviously available for adoption? We’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
44 million is grossly inflated and does not reflect children available for adoption. The actual number of infants and toddlers available for adoption falls below the 1 million mark. The number of children available for adoption falls below the 20 million mark. These studies, if not already available, should be released soon by UNICEF.
Age is relevant – very relevant -because the VAST majority of children adopted by US families are infants and toddlers. The VAST majority of children used to market adoption are infants and toddlers. This creates an illusion that the vast majority of those available for adoption are infants and toddlers. And it also draws in families who may only want to adopt infants and toddlers with a false perception that it is easy, fast or highly desirable to adopt an infant or toddler as “there are so many orphans in need of a home”. The adoption of infants and toddlers should not be seen as “typical” but you have to admit, in the US it is exactly typical. When you say you are adopting, there is a strong perception that it will be an infant. This is a perception that needs to be changed. So the age of actual children available for adoption is relevant to changing that perception.
I agree that in an ideal world there would be a way to easily segregate the corrupt from the needed. I’m not sure age is necessarily a perfect measure in Vietnam. I have worked with families who had VERY corrupt adoptions of MUCH older children who HAD been in an orphanage for awhile. While I think you cut down your odds, sadly you don’t eliminate them.
Nicki – interestingly both the US Embassy report and the ISS report both state exactly the same thing †In provinces where there is no adoption, abandonment rates are much lower.â€. Neither of them actually attribute the ‘statement’ to anyone either. So did someone say it or are there facts to show this? Its just that I’m always wary of ‘facts’ that have no traceability.
Una – I am curious to know where you got your figures? I would love to see stats for each province – do you have the link?
There is no link Bella. Following the ISS Report I had a Vietnamese friend of ours contact the relevant authorities in Vietnam. They sent me on the statistics.
But they must have got the statistics from somewhere? They were I assume not plucked out of thin air? So somewhere there has to be a report or something similiar with those figures on it. I would love to see that. Otherwise they are just something that someone said that someone said?? I am not arguing with the figures but unless they exist somewhere on a report that can be seen by us then they are not verifiable and the statement is pointless.
Bella – I agree – I would like to see where this information comes from. Not that I necessarily doubt it – but I’d still like it verified. Things like this shouldn’t be stated as fact when there is no real back up information.
I’m sorry if this is totally obvious but which statistics are you both challenging? I’m having trouble following the thread….
Nicki –
I can only speak for me – but I was looking for the backup for this statement you made: “In provinces where there is no adoption, abandonment rates are much lower.”
Una offered some statistics from TN (which I assume to be Thai Nguyen) – “In 2009 the number of Adoptions from TN was 40 . In 2007 when all countries were still adopting that number was close to 200.”
I questioned Una about this because an adoption does not necessarily mean an abanondment and Una came back to state that “The abandonment rate for TN in 2009 was 42 infants in 2007 it was closer to 200+.”
I believe that Bella wanted to know where these statistics came from. Una stated that she got them from a Vietnamese friend.
I am not saying I doubt your statement Nicki – I just wanted to see the backup for my own clarification and to see if there was any mention of my child’s province. I worry a lot about the circumstances of my child’s background after hearing all these things. Facts would be so very helpful. If I were to find out there was something unethical about my child’s adoption I would want to take the necessary steps to rectify the situation.
Jennifer
Im sorry I have caused such anxiety. As I personally had no idea where to get these statistics from in Vn I asked my friend to do so on my behalf. I only asked for the provinces Irish Couples adopted from. I am not 100% sure who he asked but I think they came from the orphanages themselves or the local justice dept of each province. Ireland is a very small country and our adoption community even smaller. There were a huge number of referrals from TN in 2007 less in 2008 and only a small number in 2009. The drop was noticable to AP’s as the numbers from other provinces suddenly increased dramatically. All this only began after the US report in 2008. The “Relinquishment Law” in TN which was used to explain the number of abandonments never exsisted. This I do know and I had it confirmed by the Dept of Justice in TN. If you check article 68 and 69 which deals with Vietnamese adoption law there is no mention of such an abandonment law. I hope I have made things a little clearer.
Yesterday our government announced they will not pursue a new Treaty with Vietnam. Adoptions will be allowed when Vn become Hague compliant. You can check the Minister for children’s statement on the subject by just googling the website for The Office of the Minister for Children.
Vietnam adoption agreement suspended – decision based on ‘flawed’ ISS report – see links below
Press announcement OMC –
http://www.omc.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1226
Newspapers –
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0114/breaking76.htm
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0115/1224262377981.html
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/hundreds-of-parents-in-limbo-on-adoptions-2014999.html
http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/anger-as-government-bans-vietnam-adoptions-109751.html
Sorry Una but could you provide the link again in regards to adoption law etc… By the way you haven’t caused concern but I hate to see people posting what they state are facts but with no back up. Being honest I could post some ‘facts’ also and who is to say whether they are correct or not. As I said not trying to start an argument but if people are willing to state something as fact then they should be willing to provide the back-up.
David,
Do the research. Unicef is the leading voice in enacting laws prohibiting and restricting inter-country adoption. They politically say that keep children in their country of origin is in their best interest. And that adoption should be a last resort (often, including growing up in an orphanage).