Mirror of Justice

First Time Adoption – Answers To 8 Frequently Asked Questions

July 19th, 2009 at 06:18pm Under Adoption Law

Anyone thinking of adopting for the first time will have many questions and concerns. Adopting is not a simple process and much consideration and deliberation is necessary. It is a very serious matter and not to be taken lightly. There is much more to adopting a child – it is not like shopping for a car; a child is a precious gift. The following is a list of common questions that those wishing to adopt for the first time might ask:-
1. In North America, who is able to adopt? Potential adoptive parents should meet the criteria set by an adoption agency or a non-profit making adoption organisation. Then they can adopt.
2. How long is the process for adopting a child? This can vary and usually depends on the type of adoption that is chosen, and the period can be anything up to a year or even many years in some cases. This also depends on the child’s needs and also what the adopting parents are looking for in a child. If they are willing to spend more time and money in the search for their ideal, then this can be a deciding factor on how long an adoption takes.
3. What is the cost of adopting a child? This all depends on what the adopting parents are looking for in a child, and the criteria they have set for themselves. A public adoption usually doesn’t involve any cost. When adopting through s private agency or a foreign adoption, the costs can vary and can go up to about $35,000.
4. How does the adoption process operate? Every adoption is individual so the time it takes can vary. It may also depends on which province or state is involved in the adoption, as they each come under their own government jurisdiction; they each keep their own rules and regulations for adoption.
5. Is one able to adopt from another province or state? Every province or state has their own laws and regulations which need to be adhered to, and some areas are very strict compared to others.
6. Can one adopt a child from abroad? It is possible to adopt a child from another country. In North America, many Americans choose to adopt a foreign child from countries like china, Colombia, Ethiopia, Russia, Vietnam and many others. The adoption criteria for the country where the child is being adopted must be met before the parents can adopt.
7. What are sources are available for first time adoption? Detailed information can be found from many individuals, groups and organisations who have the resources. People usually like to ask a friend or someone they know who has already adopted, before making their first appointment to see a Social Worker or someone else locally who deals with child welfare. There are also adoptive parent’s support groups which people can attend to help in the decision making. The Internet provides lots of useful information regarding adoption, including names of adoption associations and contact details of who they can approach.
8. One a person has collated enough information regarding first-time adoption where does one begin? Once individuals have decided on what is the best type of adoption for them, an adoption plan needs to be drawn up. This is so the adopting parents know what goals to aim for, and also it serves as a backup plan if things don’t quite work out the first time.
Those proceeding with a first-time adoption will have many questions that need answering and they will find some of those answers here. The relevant people must be contacted so that if they have any more questions that haven’t be answered, or they have more at a later date, they can find out all they need for the all important decision.

Adoption and The Workplace

July 19th, 2009 at 12:18pm Under Adoption Law

Barb and Maxine work for a large corporation whose profit for the last quarter was $400 million. Both women are new moms, currently at home caring for their children. Barb will be at home for 52 weeks and will receive 85% of her regular salary. Maxine, on the other hand, is able to stay home for only 35 weeks during which she receives 55% of her usual salary. What’s the difference? Barb is a biological mother; Maxine is an adoptive mother.

Both the Federal Government and the employer are treating these women differently, based on the way they have chosen to build their families. Their employer, like many organizations, “tops up” the payments received from Employment Insurance so that employees receive full (or near full) salaries while they are off work1. In Maxine’s case, however, their employer does not extend the benefit to adoptive parents.

The Federal Government pays Employment Insurance (EI) benefits to provide financial assistance to new parents (currently 55% of average insurable earnings to a maximum of $413 / week). Maternity benefits are payable to biological mothers for a maximum of 15 weeks. Parental benefits are payable to parents (biological or adoptive) for a maximum of 35 weeks. Thus biological parents are eligible for 50 weeks of employment insurance while adoptive parents hit the maximum at only 35 weeks. One adoptive parent is mounting a Charter of Rights challenge on this very issue in the E.I. Legislation.2

Biological parents are provided with EI benefits over a one- year period comprised of:

a) 2 week disqualification period (i.e. no EI payments) and

b) 15 weeks of maternity benefits; and

c) 35 weeks of parental benefits

Total: 52 weeks

Many employers also pay top-up wage compensation to their employees for the two-week E.I. disqualification period by topping up their wage to between 85% and 100% of their normal salary (i.e. the employer pays all of this benefit during the first two weeks). For the next 15 weeks, the top-up reduces by the amount of the E.I. maternity benefits (described above). Some employers also top-up the employees’ salary for the full 35 weeks of parental benefits as well3.

As a result of complaints we received about how adopting parents were treated in the workplace, Sunrise conducted a limited and informal poll of its clients to see how widespread the differential treatment of adoptive and biological parents by employers is, and we were stunned by the responses. Many of our clients reported situations in which a biological parent receives top up payments, while an adoptive parent is refused. Here are some examples of what we heard:

Government of British Columbia: The B.C. Provincial Government is one of least discriminatory employers we heard about. It offers a top-up to both biological and adoptive parents (to its unionized and non-unionized employees.) It also offers adoptive parents a ” Pre-Placement Adoptive Leave.” This leave allows adoptive parents to attend pre-placement visits for their homestudy or to complete legal requirements for the adoption while collecting 85% of their regular salary.

Government of Canada: A federal civil servant, who is an adoptive parent, received 93% of her wage by top-up for 37 weeks. The real irony is that the Federal Government treats its adoptive parent employees better than most employers do, but discriminates against all adoptive parents with its EI policy!

Police: The RCMP (a federal government employer) offers both adopting and biological parents the top-up for 37 weeks. Other police forces in British Columbia (Municipal forces) generally do not pay the top-up to adoptive parents. (The municipal public force in Saanich, B.C., however, does pay the top-up for 37 weeks).

Municipalities: One adopting parent reported that the Municipality she worked for finally gave her the top-up right after she filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission.

Hospitals: Regional Health Districts are the employer for nurses in British Columbia. One adoptive parent reported that in his hospital, biological parents receive a top-up on the EI Maternity Benefit only. No one receives a top-up on the Parental Benefit. Since adoptive parents don’t qualify for maternity benefits, they don’t receive any top-up at all.

Universities: Universities do not seem to take a consistent approach in how they treat their employee parents. Adopting parents employed by universities told us about a wide variety of benefits payable to adopting parents. Often these were inconsistent, unusual, and at times discriminatory.

At the University of British Columbia, adopting parents get topped-up for 12 weeks, while biological mothers receive 20 weeks. At the University of Toronto, adopting parents receive 27 weeks of top-up, and biological mothers receive 3 weeks more. At Capilano College, parents on parental leave are topped-up to 80% of salary, and for parents on maternity leave to 90% of salary.

Professors at Simon Fraser University are the only employees we found who were treated absolutely identically whether they were biological or adoptive parents. To do this, the maternity benefits not paid to adoptive parents by EI are covered by the university. Kudos to SFU!

Schools: We heard from many teachers across the province. School Districts in British Columbia bargain separately with the teachers’ union (BCTF). As a result, adopting parents (who are also teachers) receive different benefits depending on where they work. For example, Surrey Teachers do receive the top-up of 95% of salary for the first 2 weeks, 70% for next 15 weeks and zero for the balance of parental leave. North Vancouver District teachers receive 95% for the first 2 weeks, but then 70% for only the next 10 weeks (while biological mothers receive it for the next 15 weeks). Most other school districts do not pay top-ups at all to teachers. There is no rational basis for treating teachers, who choose to create their families by adoption, differently. One parent was told that top-ups are not paid to adopting parents because the school district follows “Government of Canada rulings”. This doesn’t accord with our findings; all federal government departments that we heard from do top up adopting parents.

One adopting parent employed by the Coquitlam School Board was recently refused the top-up. When she told her employer that she was filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission, she immediately received a top-up.Falling Between the Cracks

Some adopting parents are in a catch-22 situation and the problem may not be resolved until a parent takes action. We heard from several British Columbia parents who reported that employers dodge responsibility by saying it is up to the union to ask for benefits through the collective bargaining process.

One city police department we heard from only offers the top-up to biological parents. A Port Moody police officer said, “I am a union member and was entitled to nothing under the collective agreement. However, we were in the middle of negotiating a new one, and I asked for a provision to be added. I was unsuccessful”.

Pursuant to Labour Relations legislation, unions are required to represent minority interests (like those of adopting parents). Failure to do so can lead to a complaint with the Labour Relations Board. Exercising that legal right against your Union, however, can be a scary prospect.

Another adoptive parent reported:

“I wasn’t sure if there are many others in the same boat as myself, and considering the extremely daunting task of applying for change in our organization (my employer is Vancouver Coastal Health), I have not bothered to try. I would have to put forth a motion to the union (membership = 40,000) and the union would then vote on whether or not to pursue this issue with the Health Authority and ultimately the Government. Another union colleague who adopted several years ago felt the same as I do now.”

Many adopting parents had similar experiences when they approached their union. They were told that nothing could be done. Studies in the USA show that less than 1% of eligible employees receive adoption employment benefits. No wonder adoptive parents can feel lost in big unions!What Can Be Done?

In a landmark 2002 study, 94% of respondents stated that adopting parents should receive the same benefits in the workplace as biological parents4. It is clear our society feels overwhelmingly that adopting and biological parents should be treated equally.

This doesn’t seem right. Large government employers (such as hospitals, health districts, municipalities and school boards) should not justify continuing to discriminate by claiming that the unions need to ask for it. They should take responsibility and end the discriminatory treatment.

Employers should treat parents equally, whether they give birth or adopt. If an employer pays an E.I. top-up to a biological parent, then the same compensation should be paid to an adopting parent. To not do so is discrimination. 6

The need for change is apparent and many parents expressed an interest in making that change happen. Unless adopting parents object, this discrimination will not end. One possibility is to file a complaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal.7 The most effective solution may be for adoptive parents to lobby their MLAs and MPs for legislative change. How about a law that simply says adopting parents and biological parents must be treated the same in any workplace. (After all 94% of society already thinks this is what should happen)

Talk to your employer and/or your union officials. If your organization tops up biological parents, insist that they treat adoptive parents equally.

1 We also heard about a few employers who give their employees a lump sum payment to help with adoption expenses. These payments ranged between five and ten thousand dollars.

2 This appeal is currently making its way towards the Supreme Court of Canada. The appeal at the Federal Court of Appeal is scheduled to be heard March 29 – 30, 2007. For a review of the issues in this case see http://www.bcadoption.com/afabc.

3 The rules about E.I. Supplemental payments (Top-Ups) are set out at www.hrsdc.gc.ca

4 The Dave Thomas Foundation in the USA has established a website with materials and assistance to help employers establish adoption friendly workplaces – see www.adoptionfriendlyworkplace.org

6 One adopting couple has written an impassioned plea for parents to lobby their MP’s to help end discrimination against adopting parents. See www.bcparent.ca/articles/adoption/overcoming_discrimination.html.

7 In Ontario court the courts have not been sympathetic to adopting parents. In a case called Shafer the Ontario Court of Appeal decided that the discrimination built into the EI legislation did not contravene the Charter of Rights.

The information in this article has been obtained from a limited survey of Sunrise clients. The next step is to broaden the scope of this investigation to the BC and Canadian adoption community as a whole. If you know of someone who has had a similar experience (good or bad), please contact us. We would like to understand the full extent of this problem in British Columbia and Canada and will publish the results of the final survey.

How the adoption tax credit works

July 19th, 2009 at 06:18am Under Adoption Law

The decision to adopt is one of the most exciting moments in one’s life. Yet, financing an adoption is an overwhelming stress for most adoptive families. The costs involved in the adoption process can be devastating, and prospective adoptive parents may get discouraged.

The Adoption Tax Credit is one of the valuable funding options available to prospective adoptive families, but also one of the most intricate tax law provisions. Received by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Adoption Tax Credit asserts that the adoption expenses are subtracted against the yearly tax liability. However, adoptive families need to learn what the tax credit covers, what the directly related adoption expenses are, who qualifies, and how the provision works.

The tax credit is applicable both to domestic and international adoptions. For a domestic adoption, adoptive families can claim the credit regardless if the adoption process is not finalized. Instead, for an international adoption, adoptive families cannot apply for the credit until the adoption process is finalized. In case the adoption process of an international adoption is interrupted, families may claim the adoption expenses to the maximum amount that may be credited on a second adoption.

Eligibility requirements of the adoption tax credit require that adoptive families have adopted an eligible child and that they have paid qualified expenses on their own. The tax credit defines as eligible any child younger than 17 or any child who is US citizen, or resident alien, mentally and physically incapable of taking care of oneself.

If the adopted child is a US citizen or resident alien, adoptive parents collect the credit for qualified expenses based on when the adoption was finalized. For example, for expenses paid before the adoption is finalized, tax credit is collected the next year; for expenses  paid the same year that the adoption is finalized, tax credit is collected the same year; for expenses paid after the adoption is finalized, tax credit is paid the year the expenses are made.

If the adopted child is a foreigner, adoptive parents collect the credit for qualified expenses the same year that the adoption is finalized. Also, for any expenses made after the finalization of the adoption, adoptive families are eligible for collecting tax credit the same year that they made the expenses.

The IRS (Publication 968) defines as directly related adoption expenses the adoption fees, legal fees, transportation fees, meals, and accommodation expenses provided they are all “reasonable and necessary.” Prospective adoptive parents should revise the IRS guidelines very carefully with a tax expert so that they are sure about the expenses they are eligible to claim. For example, expenses related to surrogate families are not included in the qualified expenses for the tax credit. Also, expenses that are already reimbursed by private programs such as employee benefits are not qualified either.

Currently, the States of Arizona, California, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin exercise the Adoption Tax Credit providing a full credit of $12,150 for offsetting adoption expenses. Adoptive families that have been reimbursed by the tax credit provision consider that is more valuable than plain tax reduction because qualified adoption expenses are subtracted on a dollar to dollar basis. Hence, if someone has a tax liability of $8,000 and has incurred adoption expenses of $5,000, tax liability will be reduced to $3,000. In case the tax liability is lesser amount than the tax credit, the difference is carried forward for up to five years.

Generally, prospective adoptive parents should consult tax experts in order to clarify their eligibility, to investigate if their State offers the Adoption Tax Credit, and overall, to ensure that all their claims are appropriately filed.

Tpis to Know for Child Adoption

July 17th, 2009 at 12:18am Under Adoption Law

From the safety and love to a child without parents is very satisfying not only for children but for adults as well. If adoption is something that we take it that you need to fully understand all the legal and emotional effects. Adopting a child can be a complex and time-consuming process, but the benefits for both of you is priceless.

Acceptance is the legal process in which a child is welcomed as a new member of the family. During the adoption, the process is complete, the adoptive parents are entitled to equal rights and responsibilities of parents. New parents are given the right, the right to custody of the child and fully responsible for the adopted child of the welfare, well-being physical and emotional.

Adoption of a child is legally recognized worldwide. Many countries allow the adoption of law as a means for maintenance and security for children abandoned or orphaned. This universal goal, the face of adoption in recent decades. In years’ past, the baby was, first, that for the adoption, but today the concept of the adoption of a child has also flourished children of all ages. There are several reasons to ensure that all children are now being accepted without any further, whatever the age.

The most obvious result of the adoption is the mere fact that a man, every child has the right to security, health, safety and good luck. Children should be able to plant roots and to feel loved and accepted as members of the family. Everybody needs the feeling that this is a family expects of us, want their life and care for us. Children feel this need and we have very fundamental right.

The base of each child itself is worth to love and be loved. Without these sentiments, a child is not in a position to determine their place in society and their relevance to the other. They are not in a position, the problems of integration into their communities. Without parental valuation attention and the sight of children and the social behaviour of fighting.

Many couples want a family not being able to conceive children. These attentive parents are of the opinion that the adoption of a child is to fill the gap and enable them to take their families. Even if they are not able to biological parents, couples know that children enrich their lives, and they know they can offer much to a child in distress.

Sometimes adoptive parents have children may already be, biological and want to enrich their families through adoption of a child. Nearly thirty percent of adoptive parents are in fact the consequences of their own biological children. The number of love and caring single adoptive parents are also developing.

Without parents, children can from a number of reasons. In many countries, war, disease and hunger are creating tragic situations, the countless orphans. Others are in favor of the adoption by their parents, who know they simply unable to determine the degree of caution that the child needs and deserves. Some see it as a cowardly and selfish action, but may be parents who send their children to adoption are coming and going over the decision. Despite the reason why children should be the only ones to benefit from the love of nature, attentive parents.

Young people are often the parents that they did not recognize the need to support, and to decide whether their children up for adoption. Financial difficulties often play a role in that decision. Single parents like to believe that it can not support the child, training or any other way to help the child in the form of an official of the individual situation.

While the price for the adoption of the law have reached an all-time-high in Asia, Africa, Europe, Australia and North America, there are still many more children are waiting, and we hope, for the adoptive parents, who are willing to open their hearts to De maintenance and security policy is in urgent need.

If you are looking for more information on adoption services, adoption agency or any other issue on adoption please visit this links.

Adoption Dos & Don’ts – Important Guidelines For Prospective Parents

July 16th, 2009 at 12:18pm Under Adoption Law

We cover some essential do’s and don’ts regarding adoption in this article and we hope these will help the thousands of couples looking to adopt a child and build a familly unit. It is necessary to comply with these state outlined adoption rules so as to make the adoption process a legal and successful one, therefore learning about the basics of proper adoption procedures is a big help for prospective parents and they should educate themselves about these to avoid disappointments and debacles later.
Some of the adoption rules are very strict and not following them to the ‘t’ may cause the couple to forfeit their chances at a promising adoption, so prospective parents looking to adopt a child are advised strongly to learn about the rules and play by them too, in order to obtain lawful and above-board privilege to adopt from the state concerned.
All details of the adoption process must be outlined before hand and prospective adoptive parents must make an effort to educate themselves on all aspects of the adoption procedure, including costs and timeline issues besides the state’s adoption regulations and checking for their own eligibility criterion to ensure all details are in order.
They must also carefully go over the adoption contract to ensure they have not missed out on any relevant point or slacking in giving correct and updated information as well as submit and file all necessary documents for speedy processing of the same; if they do not understand some of the legal aspects or details, it is advisable to contact an adoption lawyer or consult an agency to clear these doubts instead of overlooking important issues. Being a long-drawn out procedure, prospective parents must also consider and prepare beforehand their finances for covering the decision to adopt as it can involve many different types of fees.
Prospective parents should understand the various risk factors associated with adoption and work to eliminate these! One of the most typical risk factors involved in adoption includes the birth mother suddenly changing her mind and wanting to raise the child herself; proper screening of the birth mother can help prospective adoptive parents minimize those candidates who exhibit a potential risk of indecisiveness and zero in on those that are likely to go through with the agreement. This precaution can help reduce disappointment at losing out on a child that could have been yours.
Besides the above factor, adoptive parents also need to keep their emotions in check and keep anxiety at bay to avoid making mistakes at crucial points in the adoption procedure as many nervous parents are prone to doing; unnecessary haste and ill-informed parents going in for adoptions make for bad decisions that do not bode well for wanting to build a real family. Understand that adoption process takes time and take this time to read, review and ascertain all aspects of legal documents to ensure an official adoption as well as a lawful one.
Do not be guided by just about anyone when you are looking to adopt a child: go over the legal, social, mental and medical aspects besides the cultural ones of the child as well as academic ones to ensure the right fit for your family environment and your emotional needs; avoid frauds and touts.

Adoption For Homosexual Couples – How To Begin The Adoption Process

July 16th, 2009 at 06:18am Under Adoption Law

If partners are in a same sex relationship, one may decide to adopt a child. In the U.S. the legal requirements of adoption from same sex partners differs from one state to another and also in countries worldwide.
‘Second parent adoption’ is one of the options open to same sex adoption, where a partner is able to adopt the biological child or adopt the partner’s child with the parent still having parental rights. One of the partners, in theory could as a single parent adopt a child. The other partner can also adopt the child, so that they too become the child’s parent. This process is not available in Florida where adoption by homosexuals is forbidden, nor is it possible in Utah, where any couples who are cohabiting and not legally married, are unable to adopt anyone. However, it is possible for single people to adopt in Utah.
In the United States, second parent adoption is allowed for couples of the same sex in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington and in Washington D.C. The other 38 states that the laws for adoption by partnerships of the same sex are ambiguous. Homosexuality has become a major social issue with civil unions and marriages of same sex couples becoming legal status in many countries. It may only be a matter of time before all these issues regarding same sex partnerships are wiped out.
Adoption by homosexuals is still a relatively new social issue as the jury is still out on public opinion and its’ slowness for acceptance. The subject of homosexuality is still a sensitive and controversial one to touch on, with hotly contested issues and opinions from both sides.
Gay adoption is rejected by the opponents usually on moral grounds as homosexuality is regarded as immmoral. Adoption by same sex couples is seen as highly immoral, as parents are traditionally thought of as being female and the other male. It is thought that heterosexual couples make better parents and that homosexual couples may not be able to fulfill all the requirements of a child. There are several organisations that strongly support homosexual couples – the American Academy and the American Psychological Association of Paediatrics believe that they qualify as parents equally as heterosexual couples.
Many people fear that a child being raised by homosexual parents influence a child greatly into becoming a homosexual, or that the child’s wellbeing could fall detrimentally. Research shows that this is not as preconceived, and that chidren do fare just as well with same-sex parents as they do with heterosexual parents, as sexual orientation has no bearing on the child. A study conducted by the UCLA estimated that by not allowing child adoption by LGBT couples set the United States annual costs which ranged from $87 million and $120 million. This was because researchers found that homosexual couples were more likely to adopt children that didn’t appeal to heterosexual couples. This is includes children that behavioural problems, children that are HIV positive and also older children. Those children that are not adopted are cared for by the State, and this can place a financial burden as they fall under foster care, a system which is draining on government funds.
As same sex adoption is still a controversial issue, progress is still ongoing but moving along. Same sex couples have to look into the laws and regulations where they live and explore all the options to them.

International Adoption Agencies – Dealing When Dreams of Adoption Are Fading

July 15th, 2009 at 12:18pm Under Adoption Law

It had been three long years for both Karen and David Richards. They had been waiting to bring home a young Romanian girl to adopt. They had kept a photograph of Larissa on the side of their refrigerator only to be told at the last minute by their International Adoption Agency that she had been adopted and placed with a Romanian Family
The Richards’s are one of three families in New Hampshire and more than 100 in the United States that have been stuck in the middle of a complex political situation involving Romania, the European Union and the United States.
During the course of the families’ wait, Romania has continually tightened its policies on international adoptions in an effort to get into the European Union. It now looks as if more families may end up with news like the Richards’s
“Sometimes even with the help of the right International Adoption Agency, Overseas Adoptions don’t always end as well as some people hope”
For another family, the Cohn’s of Milford, the situation was just as bad. “For the first year and a half, we were very anxious,” said Julie Ann Cohn, who filled out her application in 2002 and was matched with a Romanian girl named Katherina in early 2003. “And now for us, it’s more like it’s sad. I feel like we’ve been in limbo for more than three years just hoping and praying, but we just don’t really know what’s going to happen. We’re waiting for a positive outcome.”
The situation in Romania was exacerbated by the fall of Romania’s Communist government in 1989, international attention was focused on the country’s thousands of orphans, many of whom lived in understaffed, state-run orphanages. Romania began offering abandoned children for international adoption in 1990, and many U.S. parents adopted them. But reports of corruption over the years led to a series of temporary bans. Such a moratorium was in place when a family such as the Richards’s applied to adopt.
The International Adoption Agency that took the families’ money and submitted their applications knew that there was a chance the applications wouldn’t go through. But when all of the families received case numbers, names and photographs of the children they would adopt, they assumed that their applications had met the conditions.
The agency based in Windham provides humanitarian aid in Romania and helped the New Hampshire families find children to adopt. The Director said that people familiar with Romanian politics did not take the ban too seriously at the time.
“If the moratorium is absolutely in effect, then Romanian officials would not be assigning children, but they did,” they said. “In many years Romania had rules, laws and regulations, but the sad thing is that in a country that’s recovering from Communism, everyone put their own interpretation into what was law.”
Once families had seen a face and heard a name, it became harder for them to consider that the adoptions might not go through.
In January 2003, Romania enacted a permanent ban on international adoptions, after the EU indicated that such a law would be a requirement for the country’s ascension.
The Romanian Prime Minister said that all of the pipeline cases would be placed with Romanian families, according to the U.S. State Department and Romanian press accounts. But last week, the European Union passed a resolution with an amendment recommending that the country place the pipeline cases with foreign adoptive families.
The outcome isn’t clear. Edgar Vasquez, a spokesman for the U.S. State Department, said it’s difficult to predict what will happen to the adoptive families.
“Of course we hope,” he said. “We’re deeply concerned.”
Julie Ann Cohn said that the recent news from Romania may mean the end of her wait.
“Once we know for sure that it’s a no, absolutely set in stone, then we’ll likely proceed to a different country,” she said. “When I think my heart is ready for it.”
Kathleen Richard said that she was relieved to hear that Larissa had found a loving family, even if it wasn’t her own.
“I’m thankful that she finally has a family, because if she can’t be with us, I wanted her to have a family,” she said. “That’s what I was praying for. For me, it was just like a Christmas gift for her.”

International Adoption – the Children of Guatemala

July 15th, 2009 at 12:18am Under Adoption Law

In the world of International Adoption, Guatemala is one of the most popular and least regulated Countries. Last year there were estimated to have been 1,500 Guatemalan Children and Babies who have started fresh lives abroad, but the spectre of Illegal Adoptions have haunted Guatemala for years. Stories have emerged of mothers being forced to give up their new born children and of a booming private adoption business that has now grown almost into a multi million pound industry.
One of the key questions to look into is, are illegal adoptions taking place and if so how widespread is the practice? Finally, what is in the best interests of the Children of Guatemala?
“With Overseas adoption, what is in the best interests of the children of Guatemala?”
Whilst organisations, such as UNICEF, do not claim that all of the overseas adoptions coming out of Guatemala are illegal or abusive, a new report issued from the organisation does highlight the increasing problem of child trafficking.
“Overseas adoption arose directly out of Guatemala’s harrowing history.”
Overseas Adoptions and International adoption arose directly out of Guatemala’s harrowing history. The 36 year civil war which ended officially only four years ago left nearly a quarter of a million dead or disappeared and one million homeless, half of them children.
Elizabeth Gibbons is the director of UNICEF, and a leading critic of adoption as practised in Guatemala:
‘Many, many orphaned children were taken into adoption by military officers sent into international adoption. Originally a humanitarian activity, but it became obvious that it had the potential for being a lucrative business. And the higher demand in the West the more birth control, more access to abortion so you have the problem of a huge demand, therefore a supply must be created.’
In recent years there has been a tightening up of controls in many of the major embassies and the UK, US and Canadian embassies now carry out DNA tests of both the birth mother and the baby to check out that the woman giving the baby up for adoption is the real birth mother.
‘The existence of DNA doesn’t in any way tell you whether the mother is willingly giving up the child or whether she is being coerced. The second concern is that the children who pass the DNA test are not the same ones who go with the adopting parents on the plane, they could be switched. And thirdly, that the child who is rejected for having a negative DNA result by one of three embassies that offer this test, can then be offered to another embassy with parents of a another nationality.’
‘No one respects the law or the state; everybody just does their own thing. And it’s the same with adoptions’
So with all of this abuse of the system going on, why hasn’t the government of Guatemala done anything to stop it. The general consensus is that Guatemala is in chaos with the country, now a fledgling democracy, only just emerging from under the shadows of years of Military rule
Guatemala is a difficult place from which to operate from and it is very hard to know who is in charge of what. There doesn’t appear to be a Minister in charge of Social Affairs and Adoption is very much bottom rung on the ladder.
The Chair of the Commission on the Child and the Family in the Guatemalan Parliament is Nineth Montenegro who is a vigorous critic of her own system and is campaigning to pass the “The Children’s Code” to protect the rights of the Child in Guatemala explains:
‘We’ve been working on it for three years now and parliament still hasn’t passed it. They say, if we try to regulate adoption in this way we will deny children better opportunities in wealthier countries. There has been terrible resistance to the new law. You know Guatemala is a democracy only in name, not a real democracy.
No one respects the law or the state; everybody just does their own thing. And it’s the same with adoptions.’
Part Two of this article will deal with the fun and games (euphemism for hassle) of dealing with Lawyers and Orphanages

The 2009 Citizenship Law and Adopted Children

July 13th, 2009 at 06:19am Under Adoption Law

The Canadian government has passed a new citizenship law that resolves a variety of issues about Canadian citizenship (Bill C-37). Buried in that law is a provision that has passed unnoticed, until now, which puts limitations on the Canadian citizenship rights of some internationally adopted children. Recent articles in the National Post, the Globe & Mail and the Ottawa Citizen have brought these provisions to the attention of the adoption community.

Although this new law came into effect on April 17, 2009, I hope it is not too late for adopting parents to express their views. Also read Complex Citizenship Laws Anger Adopting Parents). The provisions of the new law are complex, so I have set out a series of questions and answers at the end of this article, which I hope will clarify the finer points of the new rules.

A good way to begin understanding the issues is to read the newspaper articles “Critics Fear Two-Tier Citizenship” and “Citizenship Changes Could Create Inferior Citizens”. For the perspective of Robin Hilborn of Family Helper, see “Canadian law denies citizenship to children of foreign adoptees” http://www.familyhelper.net/news/090129citizenship.html

Essentially the legislation provides that the children of some internationally adopted children will not have a right to Canadian citizenship. In practice, this is likely to affect only a small proportion of all adopted children. What upsets adopting parents, however, is the notion that their children will have a lesser class of citizenship. In effect, the children are being discriminated against. Adopting parents do not want to feel that their children are second-class citizens.

Adopting parents in Canada are losing their tolerance for being discriminated against. Resentment at the inherent discrimination against adopting families built into the EI legislation has been simmering for the past decade (for a detailed description of the discrimination which adopting parents feel about this subject, see our earlier Spotlight, “Adoption in the Workplace”). Now a new law that discriminates against their children is going to have a galvanizing effect on the adoption community.

The Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration, 2008, begins with the following words:

“The Citizenship Act, under which CIC grants citizenship to eligible newcomers, affirms that all Canadians have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities whether they are citizens by birth or naturalization.”

That changed April 17, 2009. In an attempt to solve the problem of Canadian citizenship being handed down generationally to people who don’t actually live in Canada, the government has reduced the citizenship rights of some internationally adopted children, and effectively created a lesser class of citizenship for them. Was this really necessary? It feels like a sledgehammer was used to kill a flea. Could not a more elegant solution have been found to actually deal with the perceived problem?

The Report of the Senate Standing Committee, which reviewed Bill C-37, states:

“Such a distinction would grant citizenship to a first generation born outside Canada while denying it to their children and subsequent generations were they to be born abroad. Such a provision strikes your Committee as arbitrary and unfair.”

The Committee also added: “Rather, the Committee urges the government to ensure that all aspects of new citizenship legislation are Charter-compliant and consistent with Canadian values”.

As a result of concerns by the Immigration Department about the confusion surrounding the new law, it recently issued a clarification.

In a published response to the concerns of adopting parents, the Minister states:

“Critics have entirely missed the point of how changes to our citizenship law, which come into effect on April 17, 2009, will protect the value of citizenship.”

I don’t think that is true. Adopting parents probably do understand the concerns that the government has about protecting the integrity of Canadian citizenship. It is the specific solution, which the government has come up with that they are protesting.

It is an insult to adopting parents to say that their children now have a lesser class of Canadian citizenship. The government needs to rethink these provisions and find a solution that does not put limitations on the rights of citizenship for internationally adopted children. The government should find a solution which fits the actual problem. This article is a call to action for adopting parents. Adopting parents who wish to make their views known to the government should do so immediately. Prior to doing so, however, please read the questions and answers set out below. The law is quite technical and there is already confusion about who the law would apply to. This is not helped by the government’s own website, which is not clear. If, after reading the article and the new rules, additional questions arise that should be asked in the list below, please send them to me and I will add them to the article.

For the purposes of this article, I will use the terms Class A citizenship to refer to full-rights citizenship and Class B to refer to the new, lesser-rights citizenship.

Q1. Who does the new law apply to?A. The new law applies to adopted children who receive their citizenship abroad, pursuant to the new direct citizenship provisions enacted in Canada on December 23, 2007. [See also Q10 below]

Q2.Who is not subject to the new rules?A. The new rules do not apply to the following:

(a) adopted children born in Canada;

(b) Internationally adopted children who come to Canada on a permanent resident visa and subsequently obtained Canadian citizenship after their arrival in Canada. Up until now this has been the situation of most (but not all) children adopted overseas and brought to Canada. They will not be affected by the new rule, despite what it says on the Canada Immigration website. The web posting “New Citizenship Rules” states:”This limitation will also apply to foreign-born individuals adopted by a Canadian parent. The adopted children of Canadian citizens will be considered to be the first generation born abroad. This means that:If a person born outside Canada and adopted by a Canadian parent has a child outside Canada, that child will not be a citizen by birth;……..”

This information is misleading. In a clarifying email from the Ministry of Citizenship & Immigration (which doesn’t seem to be posted anywhere at the moment), an official makes it clear that the restriction on obtaining Canadian citizenship only applies to situations described in the above quote and where the parent of the child born outside of Canada originally was granted Canadian citizenship overseas pursuant to the new 2007 direct to citizenship route. This misstatement on the government website has caused some parents to believe that the new law will apply to their children, when in fact it will not.

(c) The new law will not apply to children who would normally fall into the Class B citizenship definition, but whose parent is working overseas with the Canadian government (Federal or Provincial) or serving overseas in the armed forces. Instead, these children will have Class A citizenship. However, children whose parents are working for Canadian corporations, the United Nations, who are on vacation, or who are otherwise travelling outside of Canada do not get this exemption and will have Class B citizenship. This is a distinction which is hard to justify. If you work for one kind of employer your children are Class A citizens, and if you work for a different kind of employer your children are Class B citizens. Surely there is a better way to sort this out.

Q3. What is the most serious consequence of this new law?A The most serious consequence that is evident at this time is that a child born overseas to an adopted person has a reasonable chance of being a “stateless individual” (this would be the adopting parents’ grandchild). This leads to a number of questions:

(a) Why would this happen? – Only some countries grant citizenship to a child born in their country (Canada and the USA being examples of countries that do that). Many countries rely on the citizenship of the child’s parents or some other criteria. The child would be born stateless if they did not derive a citizenship through either parent and they are also born in a country where birth on soil does not give access to citizenship. As a stateless person, the child would have no obvious way to come to Canada.

(b) Is there a remedy? – A child of a Canadian who was born stateless abroad would have the option of applying for a grant of citizenship on the basis of statelessness. The amended Citizenship Act has provisions for granting citizenship to stateless children of Canadian citizens, but the child must first live in Canada for three years. This stateless child would have neither a passport nor a right to enter Canada, so it is not even clear how the child could travel to Canada to establish residence. One can only hope that there will be a benevolent immigration officer overseas who has empathy for the predicament that the Class B Canadian citizen finds himself in, and will grant the stateless child some sort of visa to come to Canada. This event will be 20, 30 or 40 years into the future. It is hard to predict what the world will look like then in terms of population and pressures on the Canadian immigration system. What will immigration officers say to a Class B Canadian citizen in 30 years who wants to bring their stateless child back to Canada? Adopting parents today will be the grandparents of that child. We can all hope it’s a sympathetic response.

(c) Any born-abroad Canadian adopting parents could immediately face the problem outlined in (b) above. Again, this is because the provisions of the new law apply to children born outside of Canada as well as to those adopted.

Q4. What happens if my adopted child has Class B Canadian citizenship and gives birth to a child overseas?A That child, your grandchild, will not acquire Canadian citizenship. He or she may be eligible to be sponsored as a permanent resident, and then apply for citizenship as soon as he or she becomes a permanent resident.

Q5. How does it work for subsequent generations? Do they have Class A or Class B Canadian citizenship?A Generational Chart Showing Whether Descendants have Class A or B Canadian Citizenship Rights:

Parents Child

FirstGeneration (Adopting Parents)

N/A

SecondGeneration(your adopted child)

If this child receives Canadian Citizenship overseas under the 2007 law, he/she will have Class B Canadian Citizenship

ThirdGeneration(your grandchild)

If the child of the adopted child above is born outside of Canada, he/she will not be entitled to automatic Canadian Citizenship. The child may apply to enter Canada on a Permanent Resident Visa. If he/she subsequently obtains Canadian Citizenship, then it will be a Class A Citizenship.

Fourth Generation(your great-grandchild)

The child of this Class A citizen parent, if born inside Canada, (the Adoptive Parents’ great-grandchild) will have Class A Citizenship.

Q6. Can I do anything to avoid this new law if I am going to adopt a child in the future?A Yes you can. Do not use the new direct citizenship route for children adopted overseas. Only use the old route of applying for a permanent resident visa for the child, and after the child is landed in Canada apply for Canadian citizenship. This child will have a Class A Canadian citizenship.

Adopting parents report that they are consistently advised by Canada Immigration officials to use the new direct citizenship route. Anyone considering which route to follow should read our previous Spotlight – Citizenship for Adopted Children: Canada’s New Law for 2008. In addition, adopting parents should obviously think about whether they wish their children to have Class B Canadian citizenship, and what effect that might have on their grandchildren.

Q7. Does the new law contravene the Charter of Rights?A I don’t know. The government has not invoked the “Notwithstanding Clause” under the Constitution of Canada, so the Charter does apply to this legislation. In the 1998 McKenna case, the Canadian Human Rights Code was used to say that it was discriminatory to adopted children not to be able to obtain citizenship overseas. It was this case that 10 years later finally led to the new citizenship law of 2007 permitting just that. On the other hand, adopting parents were not successful in invoking the Charter of Rights to overturn the inherent discrimination in the EI legislation in the 1997 Schafer case. It does seem likely that eventually someone will challenge this notion of Class B citizenship for adopted children under the Charter of Rights. A Charter challenge could also come based on discrimination against persons born abroad to Canadian citizen parents.

Q8. Are the new rules retroactive?A Section 3 (4) of the Citizenship Act states:

“Subsection (3) does not apply to a person who, on the coming into force of that subsection, is a citizen.”

What does this clause mean? It means that if you are a citizen on the day the new law comes into force, then you will not lose your citizenship. Unfortunately, the Immigration Department is interpreting this to mean that a person will not lose their Canadian citizenship, but the new provisions will change the quality of your citizenship.

So, for the adoption world, the law will be retroactive and will have the following three results:

(a) Children who have been adopted and obtained their Canadian citizenship overseas since December 23, 2007 will have their Canadian citizenship downgraded from Class A to Class B on April 17, 2009. This will come as an unhappy surprise to Canadian adopting parents, who have pursued the direct citizenship route as a result of non-stop directions from Canada Immigration officials to adopting parents to take the new route; and

(b) Adopting Parents who were born to Canadian parents overseas and acquired Canadian citizenship as a result. Any adopting parents in this category will have their citizenship changed from Class A to Class B on April 17, 2009. As a result, when they adopt overseas, their children are not entitled to direct Canadian citizenship. Their only route will be to sponsor the child as a landed immigrant, obtain a permanent resident visa, and subsequently apply for Canadian citizenship.

(c) Adopting Parents who were adopted overseas themselves as a child, and then became Canadian citizens through the Permanent Resident Visa process. The new law will NOT affect these adopting parents as they have Class A citizenship. Their adopted children will be eligible for direct citizenship (albeit Class B). If these adopting parents use the Permanent Resident Visa process, however, their adopted child will have Class A Canadian citizenship.

A CIC official has verbally confirmed that these provisions are retroactive. We have requested that the government confirm to us, in writing, that the law is retroactive. We will update this section when we receive the government’s written answer.

Q9. Does this new law only apply to adopted children?A No, in addition to adopted children, the new rules apply to children born outside of Canada, unless their parent(s) fit within a specific definition. In addition, Bill C-37 (the new law) also deals with many other citizenship issues unrelated to adoption.

Q10. If I am adopting parent who was born abroad to Canadian parents, can I adopt overseas?A You can adopt, but if you are single you will not be able to use the direct citizenship route. Your child will have to be admitted to Canada with a PR Visa. The reason for this is that the new law applies to children of Canadians born to Canadians overseas, as well as to those adopted overseas. However, if you are married to a Class A Canadian citizen, then you will be able to use the direct citizenship route.

Q11. Is there any “patch” that the government could use to repair this law?A The application of the new law should be suspended until the adoption community has a real chance to have input, and perhaps a better solution is found. One suggestion being proposed would provide an exception to the new law if the adopted child lived in Canada for a certain unspecified period of time. In other words, the child would start with Class B Canadian citizenship, and if the child eventually qualified by living in Canada for a certain period of time, they would graduate to Class A Canadian citizenship. Whether this would be a satisfactory solution for Canadian adopting parents remains to be seen.Note: These concerns are not limited to children adopted abroad, but also apply to children born abroad. The implications of this law are likely to be seen more immediately for born-abroad Class B citizens than adopted-abroad Class B citizens.

Q12. Why was the adoption community in Canada not consulted before this law was brought into force?A The adoption community in Canada was unaware of these new rules until articles appeared in the press in mid-January, 2009. How did this happen? – Bill C-37 received royal assent on April 17, 2008. It came into force on the first anniversary of that date, April 17, 2009. For over a year preceding the passing of the new law, the government consulted with various interest groups who could be affected by changes to the Citizenship Act. It does not appear to have been made clear, however, that a Class B citizenship would be created for children adopted overseas. On December 13, 2008, the regulations under this new Act were published in the Canada Gazette, and provided for a 30-day comment period. Unfortunately, this comment period extended over the Christmas and New Year’s vacation and expired in early January. Buried in the comment attached to the Canada Gazette was the statement , “The aforementioned limitation will also apply to foreign-born persons adopted by a Canadian parent”. It was only when these proposed regulations were published that one person noticed this and has been raising an alarm for the past few weeks.

Surely, if the Government of Canada was going to do something as dramatic as create Class B citizenship rules for adopted children in this country, it is incumbent on them to really bring this to the attention of adopting parents, the Adoptive Families Association, the Provincial Adoption Bureaus, Adoption Agencies across Canada, and the Adoption Council of Canada. It is incredibly dismissive of the adoption community to have been treated in this manner by the government.

Q13. What can I do to stop this new law?A Perhaps nothing. The new law (Bill C-37) has been passed, given Royal assent, and the regulations under it are in force. Some parents are currently considering filing a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. And, of course, someone with deep pockets could take a Charter of Rights challenge to try to have the law declared unconstitutional. On the other hand, perhaps adopting parents in Canada can speak out with one voice and object to what has happened. Adopting parents in Canada represent a potent political force. To date, this has been largely untapped. It is time that the Canadian adoption community make its influence felt. There is no reason why we cannot have an Adoption Caucus of MPs and Senators who listen to what’s important to the adoption community in Canada. The natural focus of these efforts could be the Adoption Council of Canada, which can harness some of the tremendous energy and opinions of adopting parents in this country. Hopefully, this issue of Class B Canadian citizenship for some internationally adopted children will provide a focus for adopting parents to work together.

In the meantime, parents who wish to comment on what has happened should contact their Member of Parliament and the Adoption Council of Canada.

What does Jewish law say about adoption

July 13th, 2009 at 12:18am Under Adoption Law

In Judaism, adoption is an important as well as an intricate issue. Although the Jewish Law recognizes adoption as a legitimate way to build a family, it also evokes conflicting messages, known as halakhah, in regards to adoption. Emphasizing greatly on bloodlines and ancestry, Judaism prioritizes tradition with respect to adoption.

A child that is legally adopted under the Jewish Law and is being brought up in a traditional Jewish household is not considered an adoptee. In regards to the Jewish religion, the adopted child is considered part of the family. However, for a Jewish family that wishes to adopt a non-Jewish child, there is always an additional filter that respects the Jewish tradition through generations of Jewish families.

Under the Jewish Law, an adopted child is duty-bound in the laws of death and mourning in the event of a loss of a close relative, namely mother, father, sister, brother, spouse, son or daughter. Considered as an immediate family, the adopted child recites the traditional mourner’s prayer (Kaddish) for 12 months and is obligated in the laws of mourning.

Jewish adoptive parents should carefully consider how they communicate respect for the Jewish religion to the adopted child without diminishing the importance of the birth parents’ religion. Particularly, when it comes to open adoptions and the birth family is not Jewish, the child is likely to raise questions about the Jewish religion, the birth parents’ religion, the differences between the two, why they exist, which is better etc. In these cases, both adoptive and placing parents should communicate in a respectful way and should follow a common way on explaining all these questions to the child without prejudices and conflict.

In many cases, there are conflicts between the different factions of Judaism, namely Orthodox, Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative. Under the Jewish Law, an adopted child whose birth mother is not Jewish should be officially converted to Judaism. However, if the birth father is Jewish, Reform and Reconstructionist Jews do not proceed to conversion, while Orthodox Jews recognize conversions performed solely by Orthodox Rabbis.

All these complexities create additional challenges in regards to adoption under the Jewish Law. For children who are not born Jewish and have different race and culture in their genes, it is a difficult challenge to connect with a Jewish family, particularly when outsiders question this connection. There are cases that Chinese children are adopted by Jewish families and because their characteristics are so unique, they have been told that they are not Jewish. The same has happened with blond children with blue eyes, who do not look like typical Jews and again their identity has been questioned by third parties at school or even at the synagogue.

For all adopted children is difficult to create a solid identity. Jewish adoptive families should help children who are not born Jewish to develop a strong Jewish identity. On the other hand, they should respect the challenges that evoke from the birth family’s religion. There are cases that Jewish children have celebrated Christmas with their birth parents because the Jewish adoptive parents have accepted that their child should make his or her own choices. In any event, communication is the key.