It has taken me quite a while to absorb the implications of Torry Hansen shocking behaviour towards her adopted son Artyom Savelyev. And even now I do not quite know what to make of it all. It throws up so many of the issues of international adoption and provides no answers. It cracks open the flaws,exposes the weaknesses of this complex non perfect system and offers up questsions in their multitude.
As my universtity lecturer Kit used to ask 'How could this be?'
This is a story of the fraility of the human condition. It has touched the hearts of the world because we can all see ourselves in Torry Hansen and yet we all despise that part of ourselves. I doubt if there is one parent in history who has not, at one stage or another, wanted to walk away, but you don't. Parenthood is a committment no matter how you come by it. It is a committment for life for you and for your child and this is non negotiable. Well that is how it is supposed to be. But life does not always happen the way it is supposed to be. In a perfect world Artyom would not be needing a family, Hansen would not be looking across the world for a child, and she certainly would not be offering that poor child the same fate he has already experienced at the weakness of his birthparents. Disruption in adoption happens, possibly more often then anyone would like to acknowledge, but the dissolving of the family should be with respect, gentleness, kindness and honour.
What is so shocking in this case is that Hansen chose to be disrespectful and cruel. Not only to poor Artyom who we can only assume was doing his best in very difficult circumstances, but to world as a whole and to adoption and Russia in particular.
With complete disregard for anyone but herself she has caused an international row, put the chance of a better life for thousands of deprived children at risk, and left a sour taste in the mouth of millions.
At the root of international adoption are the principles of honour and shame - we try to bring honour to shameful circumstances. Then along comes Torry Hansen who with complete disregard turns the cart and brings shame upon shame. Shame on you.
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
Wednesday, 3 February 2010
With all the best intentions....
Yes, I am signed up to the Beyond Consequences Parenting course but life kind of gets in the way and I have yet to start. My apologies for those who were anticipating my blogs as well as to Heather - but I will start this week so please keep a look out for how parenting a child with slight RAD can be improved!
It has been a very incouraging January as the inter-county adoption community came together to fight against the DCSF consultation to charge for their services. The jury is still out but many strong arguments have been put forward by the stake holders in international adoption as well as individual parents whose experience of the DCSF (always get that wrong...somehow the fact that schools comes before families is pretty indicitive of their policies) brings their blood to the boil. I pray that they see sense and decide that there are better ways to boost the government coffers then milking the handful of inter-country adopters.
Yes, only 200'applications for adoption' were recieved by the DCSF last year - they do not issue actual figures of children coming home - so we are not talking about a lot of people. I chatted to an adopter from Ireland last night and she was shocked that the UK adopt such a small amount of children from overseas. Ireland adopts around 2000 children a year. One of the reasons she was explaining to me was that you cannot adopt domestically in Ireland - she was saying that she looks longingly over the sea and thinks how easy it is in the UK. Well I put her right on that one, domestic adoption is also fraught in this country as verified by another woman I spoke to who is adopting from Russia. She has been in the domestic system for 8 years and never succeeded in adopting - well it almost happened twice - but ooops they found another family, and oh that child wasn't actually available for adoption. The more I hear of these stories the more I want to write the book/make the movie!
Haven't even mentioned the horrific situation in Haiti - next blog.
It has been a very incouraging January as the inter-county adoption community came together to fight against the DCSF consultation to charge for their services. The jury is still out but many strong arguments have been put forward by the stake holders in international adoption as well as individual parents whose experience of the DCSF (always get that wrong...somehow the fact that schools comes before families is pretty indicitive of their policies) brings their blood to the boil. I pray that they see sense and decide that there are better ways to boost the government coffers then milking the handful of inter-country adopters.
Yes, only 200'applications for adoption' were recieved by the DCSF last year - they do not issue actual figures of children coming home - so we are not talking about a lot of people. I chatted to an adopter from Ireland last night and she was shocked that the UK adopt such a small amount of children from overseas. Ireland adopts around 2000 children a year. One of the reasons she was explaining to me was that you cannot adopt domestically in Ireland - she was saying that she looks longingly over the sea and thinks how easy it is in the UK. Well I put her right on that one, domestic adoption is also fraught in this country as verified by another woman I spoke to who is adopting from Russia. She has been in the domestic system for 8 years and never succeeded in adopting - well it almost happened twice - but ooops they found another family, and oh that child wasn't actually available for adoption. The more I hear of these stories the more I want to write the book/make the movie!
Haven't even mentioned the horrific situation in Haiti - next blog.
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
New Parenting Classes for adoptive parents
I am very excited to be signed up to join Heather Forbes and her Beyond Consequences on-line parenting classes.
Heather's Love approach to dealing with children with early trauma is the only method that makes sense to me. The basis is that babies who do not have the safely and security of a permenant primary carer fall in to a fear pattern when they are faced with stress - and this fear is played out in poor behaviour. So it is not punishment that they need but to feel safe and secure. It is not an easy parenting method as it often goes against instinct but it is very effective - not only in solving the immediate situation but in the long term of creating a safe and secure world for these children.
I will be blogging about the course and my experiences with dealing with my dahling son who has slight RAD and therefore poses challenging behaviours (for example getting up at 1.20 last night and going downstairs and putting on a video and then REFUSING to go back to bed, ending with tantrums, crying, hitting, swearing and lots and lots of foot stamping!)
I hope you will enjoy the journey as much as me, I will be posting every week over the next 10 weeks and if you would like to find out more about Beyond Consequences please check out the website
http://www.beyondconsequences.com.
Heather's Love approach to dealing with children with early trauma is the only method that makes sense to me. The basis is that babies who do not have the safely and security of a permenant primary carer fall in to a fear pattern when they are faced with stress - and this fear is played out in poor behaviour. So it is not punishment that they need but to feel safe and secure. It is not an easy parenting method as it often goes against instinct but it is very effective - not only in solving the immediate situation but in the long term of creating a safe and secure world for these children.
I will be blogging about the course and my experiences with dealing with my dahling son who has slight RAD and therefore poses challenging behaviours (for example getting up at 1.20 last night and going downstairs and putting on a video and then REFUSING to go back to bed, ending with tantrums, crying, hitting, swearing and lots and lots of foot stamping!)
I hope you will enjoy the journey as much as me, I will be posting every week over the next 10 weeks and if you would like to find out more about Beyond Consequences please check out the website
http://www.beyondconsequences.com.
Friday, 1 January 2010
US Governments findings
17 December 2009
Internationally Adopted Children Are Thriving, Study Shows
By Jeffrey Thomas, Staff Writer, America.gov
Washington — Even as the latest figures show a continuing multi-year decline in the number of U.S. children adopted from other countries, a U.S. government survey released in November finds that most of these international adoptees are in good health and fare well on measures of social and emotional well-being. They get a lot of attention from their parents and generally do well in school.
The survey, Adoption USA, was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services between April 2007 and June 2008 and is nationally representative. Information was drawn from more than 90,000 children who represent the nation’s 73.8 million children, including the 1.8 million who are adopted. Some key findings include:
• 87 percent of adopted children have parents who said they would “definitely” make the same decision to adopt their child, knowing everything that they now know about their child.
• More than nine out of 10 adopted children ages 5 and older have parents who perceived their child’s feelings towards the adoption as “positive” or “mostly positive.”
• Almost nine out of 10 adopted children ages 6 and older exhibit positive social behaviors.
• 85 percent of internationally adopted children have parents who reported their relationship with their child as very warm and close. In addition, 42 percent had parents who reported the relationship as “better than ever expected,” with only 15 percent reporting the relationship as “more difficult” than they expected.
http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2009/December/200912171352251CJsamohT0.1063196.html
Internationally Adopted Children Are Thriving, Study Shows
By Jeffrey Thomas, Staff Writer, America.gov
Washington — Even as the latest figures show a continuing multi-year decline in the number of U.S. children adopted from other countries, a U.S. government survey released in November finds that most of these international adoptees are in good health and fare well on measures of social and emotional well-being. They get a lot of attention from their parents and generally do well in school.
The survey, Adoption USA, was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services between April 2007 and June 2008 and is nationally representative. Information was drawn from more than 90,000 children who represent the nation’s 73.8 million children, including the 1.8 million who are adopted. Some key findings include:
• 87 percent of adopted children have parents who said they would “definitely” make the same decision to adopt their child, knowing everything that they now know about their child.
• More than nine out of 10 adopted children ages 5 and older have parents who perceived their child’s feelings towards the adoption as “positive” or “mostly positive.”
• Almost nine out of 10 adopted children ages 6 and older exhibit positive social behaviors.
• 85 percent of internationally adopted children have parents who reported their relationship with their child as very warm and close. In addition, 42 percent had parents who reported the relationship as “better than ever expected,” with only 15 percent reporting the relationship as “more difficult” than they expected.
http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2009/December/200912171352251CJsamohT0.1063196.html
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
Consultation on DCSF charging for their services
What I should be doing right now is filling in the Consultation on the DCSF wanting to charge £1775 for their services for processing a Certificate of Eligibility - it's difficult though to keep a lid on my feelings.
Since when I ask do government departments start charging for their services? Is that not what we paid tax for??
Does the Defense Department charge families for bringing back the bodies of their loved ones? Why not? A dead soldier is no longer any use for the goverment and thus bringing back the body is solely 'in the interests of the family'. I don't mean to be flippant but according to the DCFS consultation this "charge is being introduced because it is a service for the prospective adopter, rather than the child, as the child is usually unknown at the application stage". Such double standards are being used. The whole emphasis on an inter-country adoption is in 'the best interests of the child' and here when it suits them it is suddenly 'in the interests of the parents'.
And here I would like to throw in the IVF card. IVF on NHS is a postcode lottery - but if you qualify and thousands do - then your treatment - to create an unknown child - is paid for to the tune of £7000.
Oh yes, the government will pay for you to bring a child into the world through medical science but will charge you for taking in one of the children already in the world who no one can look after. To me this makes no sense. No common sense and no 'green' sense either.
But the DCSF will put in the charge in September - it has been decided and there is no strong opposition. It will not improve their service and it will put off some prospective families. The result is that a child somewhere in this world, unknown, will not find a loving family, will grow up in an institution, and will be inadequately prepared for adult life. Well done DCSF, I hope you are proud of yourself.
Since when I ask do government departments start charging for their services? Is that not what we paid tax for??
Does the Defense Department charge families for bringing back the bodies of their loved ones? Why not? A dead soldier is no longer any use for the goverment and thus bringing back the body is solely 'in the interests of the family'. I don't mean to be flippant but according to the DCFS consultation this "charge is being introduced because it is a service for the prospective adopter, rather than the child, as the child is usually unknown at the application stage". Such double standards are being used. The whole emphasis on an inter-country adoption is in 'the best interests of the child' and here when it suits them it is suddenly 'in the interests of the parents'.
And here I would like to throw in the IVF card. IVF on NHS is a postcode lottery - but if you qualify and thousands do - then your treatment - to create an unknown child - is paid for to the tune of £7000.
Oh yes, the government will pay for you to bring a child into the world through medical science but will charge you for taking in one of the children already in the world who no one can look after. To me this makes no sense. No common sense and no 'green' sense either.
But the DCSF will put in the charge in September - it has been decided and there is no strong opposition. It will not improve their service and it will put off some prospective families. The result is that a child somewhere in this world, unknown, will not find a loving family, will grow up in an institution, and will be inadequately prepared for adult life. Well done DCSF, I hope you are proud of yourself.
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Open Adoption
I have just listened to a fascinating Radio 4 programme about Open Adoption and not surprising there is now talk that open adoption and letter contact with birthparents may actually be detrimental to the child.
This is one reason why potential parents may choose inernational adoption over domestic adoption because the idea of open adoption does not really make sense.
Is it in the child's best interest to have contact with someone who has physically, mentally or sexually abused them, or who has neglected them? The reason why these children have been removed from their parents in the first place is because the parents could not care for them, so what positive outcome will there be to 'force' contact with these people.
They mentioned in the programme that open adoption was suppose to reveal a truth about the child's life so that hidden mistruths will not be created. But because most children who are adopted have trauma in their lives, from the hands of those very people who are suppose to care for them and who are responsible for them being in care, and the conventional wisdom is open adoption - mistruths are being created and the truth is being hidden, covered up and fabricated.
I welcome the lastest comments and I am glad that there will now be a look into the practice of open adoption and at least reveal that it is not always in the best interest of the child.
This is one reason why potential parents may choose inernational adoption over domestic adoption because the idea of open adoption does not really make sense.
Is it in the child's best interest to have contact with someone who has physically, mentally or sexually abused them, or who has neglected them? The reason why these children have been removed from their parents in the first place is because the parents could not care for them, so what positive outcome will there be to 'force' contact with these people.
They mentioned in the programme that open adoption was suppose to reveal a truth about the child's life so that hidden mistruths will not be created. But because most children who are adopted have trauma in their lives, from the hands of those very people who are suppose to care for them and who are responsible for them being in care, and the conventional wisdom is open adoption - mistruths are being created and the truth is being hidden, covered up and fabricated.
I welcome the lastest comments and I am glad that there will now be a look into the practice of open adoption and at least reveal that it is not always in the best interest of the child.
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Children-in-need a commodity?
It seems that there is nothing as controversial as intercountry adoption.
I have been in this world for over 8 years now - as an adoptive parent, creator of adoption support group, as advocate. I have read everything I can get my hands on, spoken to hundreds of adoptive parents and dozens of adoptees, attended lectures, organised conferences etc etc. and even now I am still discovering the subtleties of international adoption.
And I have spoken many times to the media - and this is what I find so interesting. 'Hello I wonder if you can help me - I have been asked to write this article about international adoption for Friday and I want to know....
And that is it 2 days of research and then these 'journalists' think that they know everything.
The most popular and again latest comment is that children in need are purely a commodity for desperate infertile and "Those who disagree, should ask themselves why they are not willing to give the money they would spend on that child to the community the child comes from. The impact on that child and many others in their community would be far greater than removing them from their community and adopting the child."
I love these rediculous, grand, ignorant statements. How much money I wonder will be equivalent to the loving and nurturing of a child? How much does it cost to take a child who has no future and give them a chance to have a normal life? Why is it always about money and never about love? I would like to see an article about international adoption that talks purely about love. The love it takes to relinquish a child, the love a child needs to give to make them human, the love an adult has to bring up someone else's child. Now that is a story.
I have been in this world for over 8 years now - as an adoptive parent, creator of adoption support group, as advocate. I have read everything I can get my hands on, spoken to hundreds of adoptive parents and dozens of adoptees, attended lectures, organised conferences etc etc. and even now I am still discovering the subtleties of international adoption.
And I have spoken many times to the media - and this is what I find so interesting. 'Hello I wonder if you can help me - I have been asked to write this article about international adoption for Friday and I want to know....
And that is it 2 days of research and then these 'journalists' think that they know everything.
The most popular and again latest comment is that children in need are purely a commodity for desperate infertile and "Those who disagree, should ask themselves why they are not willing to give the money they would spend on that child to the community the child comes from. The impact on that child and many others in their community would be far greater than removing them from their community and adopting the child."
I love these rediculous, grand, ignorant statements. How much money I wonder will be equivalent to the loving and nurturing of a child? How much does it cost to take a child who has no future and give them a chance to have a normal life? Why is it always about money and never about love? I would like to see an article about international adoption that talks purely about love. The love it takes to relinquish a child, the love a child needs to give to make them human, the love an adult has to bring up someone else's child. Now that is a story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
