UPDATE April 16, 2007
By the name of Manual of Good Practices is known an absurd and illegal interpretation of the adoptions laws of the country, presented by the Vice president of Guatemala Eduardo Stein, with the intention of changing the whole process of adoptions in Guatemala, beginning with suspending all processes of adoption and leaving to the Secretary of Social Welfare the power to decide who can adopt the children whose processes were interrupted. Stein claims that it will be enforced while Congress passes Hague compliant legislation. We find hard to believe that the Vice president ignores that the Executive has very limited legislative powers, and that none of them enables him to pass and to try to enforce so called manuals while the Congress passes real laws.
Nobody is obligated to obey an order that is not based on a law. That is what our Constitution says and that is what we are going to remind our Vice President, and everybody else who tries to enforce the Manual.
Eleven million quetzals (roughly US$1,500,000.00) b according to the newspaper Siglo Veintiuno in its edition of April 5, 2007, will be supplied by the Executive for the implementation of the Manual of Good Practices. The Manual is NOT a law. It is not even dignified with the signature of any officer. It cannot be enforced. Therefore, any transfer of funds to enforce the illegal measures of the Manual is illegal too, and we will make use of the legal actions, against those who do it. For a government on its way out, it would be a very bad decision to make such a mistake that would cause them a lot of trouble when they are no longer in power. Although it is too early to predict who is going to be the next president, it is easy to see that the current government made very few friends and a lot of enemies, so their chances to stay in power are very slim.
For those who are adopting a child from Guatemala, or thinking of adopting one, do not worry. There are laws in our country and even if the Vice president ignores them or pretends to ignore them, we are poised to make use of all the legal actions to prevent the Manual from devastating the lives of those children that the State of Guatemala. neglects and remembers their existence only to harm them, under the pretense of protecting their rights.
The support of the Manual of Good Practices and of the law proposal known as the Ortega Law by the US DOS is puzzling, since both violate our Constitution and our legal system, and would make adoptions impossible. We do not believe that the US DOS, in their effort to eliminate what they perceive as problems in the current system, support knowingly, changes in the system that would make the process of adoption an interminable maze, without making any provisions for the care of the children, that would result in the death or abandonment of those very same children they claim to try to protect. Thousands of adoptions are the living proof that our adoptions system works and that even with the scrutiny and the investigations made by the PGN and the US embassy, the number of adoptions continues to increase, giving to those children the chance of a better life.
It is also a proven fact that the Office of Social Work of the Wife of the President, - also known as SOSEP - has not invested any of its abundant resources in orphanages or in any kind of care for the abandoned children. When the foreign dignitaries come to Guatemala and want to visit orphanages, they are taken to the Hogar Rafael Ayau, which is totally private, administered by Christian Orthodox Nuns, who do a wonderful job with the children they have.. When Casa Alegria, a hogar given on a silver plate to Wendy de Berger by Buckner International Resources and UNICEF, was closed down due to the bad conditions of the place, its approximately fifty children were transferred, in very bad shape, to the Hogar Rafael Ayau and some other also private orphanages, according to its directors.
The Guatemalan authorities do not do a thing for the needy children, but when private individuals and entities do it, they attack their work saying that it is lucrative. When the State refuses to fulfill its obligations to provide for the abandoned and orphaned children, it looses all rights to criticize what it is being done to remedy their lack of social services and orphanages. The State collects taxes. Private individuals collect fees. The name is different, but the meaning is the same. The State has no right to demand that private people work for free, because the difference between work and slavery is the payment. And the fact that children are adopted does not make the services provided any less worthy of reimbursement as the work that anybody else does, including the bureaucratic work.
In Congress, different proposals are being discussed. On April 11, 2007 was presented to Congress a new and different proposal of International Adoptions Law, with the support of four political parties that total an amount of 85 congressmen of the 158 congressmen. The proposal has the number 3635 and currently it is at the Committee of Legislation and Constitutional Points for its study and opinion. The link is http://www.congreso.gob.gt/archivos/iniciativas/registro3635.pdf This proposal follows the guidelines of the Hague Convention and makes it very difficult for mothers to relinquish their children, having to undergo a series of interviews with psychologists, social workers and bureaucrats of the central authority and declaring before a judge their intention to place their child for adoption. At the same time, it makes it difficult for singles to adopt, because it allows only married couples and any other cases will be decided by the central authority. The good thing about this proposal is that it does not appoint as central authority either the PGN or the Secretary of Social Welfare and that the office of the wife of the president would have nothing to do with it. The central authority would be an autonomous entity, whose board of directors would be seven delegates of the following: one for each of the three powers, one for the PGN, one for the Secretary of Social Welfare, one for the Human Rights Office, one for the Guatemalan Bar Association and one for the Guatemalan Medical Association. Even though we still have to see if that combination of different people with different agendas can agree on anything, we hope that if this proposal is approved, they agree that their personal and institutional interests should be put aside for the benefit of the children they have to protect.
The proposal 3635 states that it would become effective in two parts. The organization and implementation of the Central Authority would be in October and the rest of the law would become effective in March 2008, more or less when the United States becomes bound by the Hague. Its implementation is estimated in ten million quetzals, none of which would go for the support of the children, but at least a million less than the partial and illegal implementation of the Manual of Good Practices,
We know that it is going to take a lot more than our good wishes to get a proposal that would effectively protect the rights of the birthmothers, the adoptive parents and the children in need of a family. But compared to the Ortega Law, this new proposal is much better and gives us hope that the Congress is taking seriously its obligation to pass a Hague compliant law that would allow adoptions to continue. For that only reason, we would not oppose it, although we do not discard the possibility of raising constitutional challenges against certain parts of it, especially the part about the limits to adoptions by singles.
Another good point of the proposal 3635 is that any adoption started before the new law becomes effective, would be finalized according to the old laws. And those laws do not include any Manual of Good Practices, that is for sure. We just need Mr. Stein to fully understand it before he gets himself in trouble.
We can make a difference in the life of a child. Follow your heart and do it. We are here to help you.
Comments
But isn't the best thing for the children to stay in Guatemala with their biological families or other Guatemalans willing to adopt?
Aren't you making money from US adoptions as are lots of American agencies? Seems to me the ones that want to keep things the same have the most to lose....
Posted by: kathy | April 17, 2007 09:41 AM
Thank you for your diligent work. My wife and I
just returned from visiting our baby boy on 4/16/07, while we were there we signed our POA and it was registered with the courts on 4/13/07.
Moving forward can we expect to have our adoption follow the same path that has taken place up until now or will we be on a roller coaster ride.
Thank you so much,
Paul and Iris C.
Posted by: Paul C. | April 17, 2007 11:26 AM
Thanks for everything you do for all of us adoptive parents. It is good to know that we have strong support and leaders who will correct a terrible process that will hurt so many.
And to Kathy who responded first, yes, it would be great if the children could stay in their country. But look at the statistics and the horror stories of what happens to children who are left with distant relatives. A large majority of them cannot support their own families, never mind have another mouth to feed. The kids are often looked down upon, and have no rights....
Posted by: Karen | April 17, 2007 01:29 PM
We adopted our daughter from Guatemala and are in process with the adoption of our son. God bless the ADA in all they do. For the comment that children should be adopted in Guatemala or stay with their families, that is always an option and is one right now. If the children available for international adoption had a family member who wanted to care for them and was able, they would, and some Guatemalans adopt, but few. I have friends who are native Guatemalans and have told me it is rare to adopt outside of family lines. Children needs homes and love, and birthmothers need support and options. Thank you ADA for helping to protect the children and the woman who place them. God bless them all.
Posted by: Lisa | April 17, 2007 01:31 PM
Kathy, on the surface your comments make sense but it's a much deeper issue. Please do due diligence and research the real and entire situation before making such negative and defamatory comments.
Posted by: Tina | April 17, 2007 01:52 PM
Thank you Susana, love reading your updates.
I agree with Kathy that the children would be better off with their own families. Sadly 4000 plus children were adopted from guatemala last year. Where are all the families??? I would think they were not able to adopt or the children would be with them. I think the dig about money making was a little off the mark. This isn't a secret that agency are making money doing what they do. Don't we ALL take a paycheck home? I wonder when Kathy takes her check home, does she make dreams come true for others she's helping??? Doubt it!!!
Posted by: Steven | April 17, 2007 03:49 PM
Kathy,
Your comments about people who assist with finding families for children though adoption making money are just so wrong! Please ask people who actually facilitate adoption and you will find that none of us are getting wealthy. It is very expensive to care for the children, keep families supported, comply with state and international regulations, and continue to provide humantarian aid to the children and families who are left in the foreign countries, either by choice or circumstances. I can promise you that for every dollar we "profit" today, there are 2-3 dollars that will go out to support our "cause," which is to care for the children in need, tomorrow. Adoption is only one aspect of what we do. Please get the facts and recomment from a knowledgable position! I am offended that you trivialize my and so many other's life's work in this manner!!
Posted by: Deidre | April 17, 2007 03:59 PM
From our own State Department. Add to this that nearly 40 in every 1,000 children born die in infancy and one can see the "graveness" of the US shutting down adoptions.
Anti-adoption forces like to throw out that "1 in every 1,000 children born are adopted internationally." Where is the public "out-cry" for the fact that 40 times the number of children exit the country of Guatemala via DEATH than what international adoption assists???? What is the Guatemalan Executive Branch doing to fight this disgrace?? NOTHING!
So, why in the world would 4-5,000 adoptions bother them??
From the US State Dept:
The distribution of income and wealth remains highly skewed. The wealthiest 10% of the population receives almost one-half of all income; the top 20% receives two-thirds of all income. As a result, about 80% of the population lives in poverty, and two-thirds of that number--or 7.6 million people--live in extreme poverty. Guatemala's social development indicators, such as infant mortality and illiteracy, are among the worst in the hemisphere.
Troy
guatadopt
Posted by: Troy | April 17, 2007 04:25 PM
Kathy, I agree with Tina that you obviously have not done your research before making such a hurtful comment. You obviously don't have anything invested in Guatemala.
Posted by: Laurie | April 17, 2007 05:13 PM
Susana,
Thank you for the update and hard work. My wife and I are waiting for our INS so any positive updates are great and help.
Thank you
Posted by: Bradley | April 17, 2007 05:23 PM
Susana, I am so deeply concerned about Guatemala eliminating prospective single adoptive parents. There are many of us who are single and provide loving and stable homes. I hope we will not become inelible to adopt in the future.
Posted by: Debbie | April 17, 2007 09:06 PM
Susana, thank you for the ADA's work and keeping us updated. We greatly appreciate it.
Kathy, your comment shows that you are extremely naive and misinformed about adoptions in Guatemala. If these children's bilogical families WANTED to keep them, or if Guatemalan families WANTED to adopt them, there is nothing in the world stopping them from doing so!
Your comments about the money also indicate a lack of knowledge about reality. While it may seem that fees for Guate adoptions are high, it is because NOTHING is paid for by the government. In addition to hours of legal work, the attorney is legally responsible for the child's care, which lasts for months and months until the adoption goes through. That costs money! The agencies also have to pay their support staff a living wage. Agencies are flying staff to Guatemala on a regular basis to check on children. That costs money!
It's funny, no one criticizes the US adoption system. US foster care is horrific. Adoptive parents pay thousands of dollars for the birth mother's medical expenses with the risk of her changing her mind. A US domestic infant adoption of a newborn costs at least as much as Guatemalan adoption, if not more, and we DO have a government that provides social services.
The reality is that thousands of Guatemalan children need homes. American families are willing to provide these homes. A permanent, stable, loving home, as early as possible in life, is what is best for the children!
Wendy
Posted by: Wendy Faircloth | April 17, 2007 10:51 PM
Susana,
Like Debbie, am also concerned about the future of us singles being able to adopt. I have adopted 2 beautiful boys (7/2005 & 2/2006) and would love to add a little girl in a year or two... Please challenge that part of the proposal.
Posted by: Mayra | April 18, 2007 10:55 AM
Wendy, very well said. My husband and I have been dealing with people telling us how terrible we are adopting from Guatemala and not the US, but the US makes it so hard and impossible to adopt and not have the parents come back. My baby is in Guatemala and due to come home anyday (we are waiting pink) and he is just as important as an American Humans are equal no matter where you are born. I love my baby and now I am starting to love the country and hopefully will adopt from Guatemala again. Thanks everyone I am praying for the whole situation.
Posted by: Sarah | April 18, 2007 11:26 AM
Susana, Thank you once again for your update. It is always a comfort knowing that you are on our side. I am a single adoptive mother of an almost 3 year old daughter, Katie, who is smart as a whip. I often look at her and wonder what would of happened to her if her birthmother had not given her the ultimate gift of being adopted. Katie absorbs so much information, knowledge on a daily basis. Her little brain syapses go full force everyday, all day. What would she be like if she wasn't exposed to the resources she is now, the lack of nutrition alone might of been enough to slow that little brain down. What a waste that would of been!
To Kathy, Your comments show your lack of education on this subject. Maybe you should investigate things a little more before accusing Susana and other adoption professionals of being money hungry. You could also read up on how Guatemalans have basically been offered free services from attornies,etc. to adopt the orphaned children from their own country. Rarely does someone step up to the plate and do so. Why, wasn't it even President Berger's daughter who adopted from a foreign country, instead of one of the children from Guatemala. Check into the bias these children are shown from their own because of being mixed race. I am not saying that we are these childrens' saviors, but at the moment, we are almost all they have. The government has no plan to support these children if adoption is stopped. Who will provide food, shelter, and medical care for them? Who will protect them from the unspeakable crimes of the streets? I would really be curious about your answer to this.
Posted by: Lisa | April 18, 2007 01:56 PM
My comment is for Mary and all others who think that it is ALWAYS best for children to stay with their biological families. Although I agree that when possible this is the ideal scenario, the reality is that there are countless circumstances that often make placing a child for adoption a better choice. For instance, a friend of mine is Guatemalan and runs a "free" day care in one of the barrios in Guatemala, because infants and children were being left home all day (to be taken care of by 5 year old siblings) while mom worked. Many of the children and young people she cares for have faced not only abandonment, but rape and gang violence (not to mention there have been numerous murders in the neighborhood). There are many legitimate cases where children will be much better off not staying with the biological family. That being said, I am all for "fixing" the system and making sure everything is legal and above reproach. But I think it would be devastating and unfair if anyone in the midst of the process right now had their adoptions interrupted. Let's all pray for the best.
Posted by: Mary | April 18, 2007 02:15 PM