April 7, 2008
On April 1, 2008, the US fully implemented the Hague Adopton Convention (Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption). This has turned out to be the cruelest April Fool's joke ever perpetrated on members of the adoption triad. Here's why:
Agencies have had to apply for Hague accreditation under the authority of the US Central Authority for Intercountry Adoption, which is the Departmenmt of State (DOS). The DOS has delegated the accreditation process and function to two entities, the state of Colorado's Department of Human Services and the Council on Accreditation (COA). The latter has been responsible for the vast majority of accreditations. It has already been shown elsewhere that the lengthy Hague implementation process indulged in by the US was heavily influenced by the interests of the adoption industry and its lobbying groups such as the Joint Council on International Children's Services (JCICS), and the National Council for Adoption (NCFA) at the expense of addressing the concerns and voices of the actual members of the adoption triad. So the rules for Hague implementation in the US basically paid lip service to input from members of the adoption triad and heavily favored maintaining the status quo and current business model in regards to intercountry adoption. Now, even though the public and members of the adoption community were allowed comment and input in the accreditation process, it must be noted that the majority of the board of the COA are either members of the adoption industry or people with strong ties to the adoption industry (see http://www.coanet.org/Files/BoardMembers.pdf ). Additionally, the COA's list of sponsors and supporters is even more heavily weighted towards members of the adoption industry or those with ties to the adoption industry (see http://www.coanet.org/front3/page.cfm?sect=12 ). Yet the COA has the audacity to claim credibility and integrity as two of its cornerstones. April Fools! I could aslo say, "follow he money."
Well, this past weekend, as I looked at the latest updated list of Hague accredited agencies, what should I find among the good, the bad and the ugly? Adoption Choice, Inc. has been granted a two year accreditation. I was dismayed, but not surprised or shocked. So, last night, I sent the following E-mail entitled, "How Can This Be?" to Katherine Monahan, Mikkido Stebbing and Gerry Fuller at the DOS and to Richard Klarberg, president of the COA:
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is with great dismay and astonishment that I looked at the most recent list of Hague-accredited agencies and saw that the agency my family used, Adoption Choice, Inc. of Milwaukee, WI, has earned a two year accreditation.
May I remind you all that this is the agency responsible for the illegal Mexican adoption of our daughter in 1998. This is the agency whose contracted employees for their Mexican adoption program all were convicted and served time in federal prison in 2000 (US v. Mario Reyes, Arlene Lieberman and Arlene Reingold), while the agency claimed innocence and refused to take responsibility and be held accountable for the actions of its employees, which is allegedly addressed in the Hague regulations.
May I also remind you that this is the agency that never offered a refund, assistance or an apology for the 6 year adoption nightmare they put us through at double the original costs--one that gave us a daughter whose true identity and genetic background has been intentionally stolen from her and is likely lost forever.
You should also be aware that according to this agency's own website, viewed minutes ago, they appear to engage in umbrella-ing under another agency for their Vietnam program, which is illegal according to the Vietnamese authorities.
I know that other victims of bad adoption agencies are equally dismayed that many of these agencies are now Hague-accredited and join me in the realization that the accreditation process, Hague implementation and Hague enforcement have little, if any meaning and credibility for us and for those who know us and our stories in the adoption community. It certainly looks like the concerns I expressed last year about the COA's ties to the adoption industry through its board and donors were quite valid.
I am trying to understand the reasoning behind the accreditation of agencies with many years of documented offenses, illegal behavior, and specious ethics. I hope you will be able to explain this to me, and let me know if there is any possibility of accreditation being rescinded.
Thank you for your prompt attention.
David Kruchkow
www.adoptionagencychecklist.com
I guess I'm left to see what falls from the trees I'm trying to shake. I'll let you know.
