Do they have a plan?
I think that we’ll all agree that things at least seem to be out of control at the CCAA this year. Since January they have done 11, 18, 12, 5, 7, 9, 13, and now 15 days per referral batch. Considering that until October of last year they had averaged about a month per month for years, this points to a big problem.
I think we are also in agreement that there seems to be a shortage of paper ready children. The questions start to come when we wonder WHY there is a shortage of paper ready children when there are all these reports of lots of children in so many orphanages. But, that there is a shortage of paper ready children with files sitting in the CCAA office seems to be something most everyone agrees on.
As I noted last week, I think that perhaps we finally have an honest answer about what the wait is going to go out to. They don’t know. Which is scary, because it hints that they don’t have a plan to speed up from current rate of referrals.
The CCAA has told a few agencies and countries that it could go to 18 months or more. I get the idea that when pushed, this is the best answer they can come up with.
My biggest question is: Are the doing the restaurant hostess trick of going just a bit over what they think? Or are they just giving a number that will make the questions stop being asked for another 8 to 12 months, until they reach that milestone and it’s apparent they are going to go over it, as well.
What this boils down to is: Do they have a plan to keep the time frame from further stretching out, or is it going to continue to do what it has done this year? And what it has done this year is fluxuate from 5 to 18 days per batch and average about 11 days of LID’s per month.
Once again, I find myself saying “after this month we’ll have an idea of what the coming months may look like”.
I’m really tired of saying that. I really thought this was going to be the month I had enough statistical data to start feeling confident in my projections. But with the move, no such luck.
July 26th, 2006 at 2:28 pm
RQ, I posted this last night but I am not sure if anyone saw this. Please discuss this in the hopes that we can get everyone on board to support this. Congresswoman Wilson proposed legislation to Congress yesterday to get the validity of our I-171-H forms extended to at least two years. The bill is called Helping Families Adopt Orphans Act. I am forwarding the information sent from the Congresswoman’s office in this email. Please send this information to your clients who are waiting to adopt from China and encourage them to send letters to Congress asking their Congressmen and women to support this bill. Getting the word out quickly to as many people as possible will help our cause tremendously. Congress meets again in September and then once more in mid-November and we are trying to get this legislation passed in one of those sessions.
July 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
There was a commit made that maybe the lack of paper ready babies was due to the fact that the orphanages are not sending in babies. For example they may have a 100 ready babies but only send paper work for 12. I wonder if these orphanages get money based on the number of children they have and thus are not sending in babies so they can keep their funding.
Any thoughts?
Hope
July 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Here is the press release from my comments above ”
Wilson Helps New Mexico Families with International Adoption
Introduces the Helping Families Adopt Orphans Act
Washington, DC – Congresswoman Heather Wilson today announced she has introduced the Helping Families Adopt Orphans Act, legislation to aid families adopting orphans from foreign countries.
“This legislation updates a policy on international adoption that makes sense, given the longer wait times families now experience in processing the adoption of orphans,” said Wilson. “This problem was brought to my attention by a constituent, and it is a simple change we can make to build strong families.”
Andrew and Constance Johnson of Albuquerque had written to Wilson in May about the possibility that their I-171H form would expire before their adoption of an orphan from China was complete. “We wrote to Heather Wilson about our problem, and to our surprise we got a call from her office two weeks later saying she was introducing legislation to fix our problem,” said Constance Johnson. “My husband and I want to adopt a child from China, but we worry everyday that our paperwork will expire before we have our child. Reapplying would be expensive, time-consuming, and burdensome. The 18-month expiration no longer makes sense.”
The legislation would extend the validity of the I-171H “Notice of Favorable Determination Concerning Application for Advance Processing of Orphan Petition” form to at least two years. This form is issued by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. It is the final form needed to adopt international orphans and is the ticket to adoption for many families. The form is currently valid for 18 months, although the time needed to complete the adoption process has significantly increased over the last few years because of delays in travel approval, visas for orphans, and additional processing time to gain approval by foreign governments.
The I-171H form has an application fee of $545, plus $70 per person for fingerprints. Several other forms are needed before receiving approval, including a home study to ensure the home is safe and stable, birth and marriage certificates, health and financial records, criminal background checks, and other information. The entire cost of international adoption can be thousands of dollars. If the form expires before the adoption is complete, a family must reapply and re-submit all applicable forms, fees, and evaluations. This can be prohibitively costly for many hopeful parents.
In 2005, 7,900 children were adopted from China, 4,600 were adopted from Russia, and 3,800 were adopted from Guatemala, according to the State Department.
Wilson has one adult adopted son and was the New Mexico Cabinet Secretary for children Youth and Families, which oversaw adoption and fostercare.”
- END -
July 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
I thought I’d read somewhere on this blog that an orphanage director stated that CCAA wasn’t letting them (orphanages) send in paperwork for as many babies and that this was putting a strain on the SWI. I beleive it wasn’t that long ago that I read that here. Does anyone remember reading this? If this is true..why? I beleive we have heard many many people who have recently been to China who have stated that the orphanges were full…so…whats up with CCAA? Could it be the new director? hmmm….or what?
July 26th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
If this wait continues…I will surely lose my mind!
July 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pm
RQ – it might be a pointless exercise, but I’m trying to make some correlations between past referral batches and the myriad of LID polls that have been done here and elsewhere. Do you have any polls prior to the March 9th poll that you have posted in the ‘Polls’ section online?
July 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pm
We received our referral last month and our daughter will be two in Oct. We requested an infant 0-15 months. She was about 20 months at our referral time. For two days we tried to figure out why we were referred a child older than our request and the answer we kept getting was: well she just wasn’t paper ready until now. I still don’t get it. Like may of you are asking, where’s the hold up. Why, when there are so many of us ready to adopt, are there children, like ours, waiting in orphanages until they are almost two years old (or even older)? I get so frustrated with the lack of information in this process. We’re so happy to know there is a child for us, but we’re so sad that she had to spend the first two years of her life in an institution just because of paperwork.
July 26th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
My coordinator from my large-ish multi-country agency is among those who feel there really is no plan at the CCAA.
I looked up the number of the bill referenced by papa2b above, it’s H.R. 5888, introduced 7/25/2006, referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The title says “To direct teh Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that an individual may file an orphan petition for at least 2 years after approval of an advanced processing application.”
Here’s a link to a page that lists the members of the Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx
This is great news for us all, actual ACTION toward extending the I-171H. Papa2b, thanks for giving us a “heads up” on this, I intend to pass the word.
July 26th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
If they DO have a plan, would it kill them to share it with the rest of us?
July 26th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
I see people introduce themselves on APC and they’re so giddy about “getting started” or others are all excited about their LID and I say to myself, “there’s not much to be excited about these days!” When we started the process last August it was exciting… we were going to be parents again this summer. Now we’re stuck in the middle of a very long & very slow line. Just like at Wal-Mart this morning… only one lady in front of me but as my luck would have it she separated her full cart into 3 different piles and paid for each one seperately… taking 3 times as long.
Each month I think the CCAA is going to turn things up a notch only to be disappointed again. You’re all invited to my pity party… it’s gonna be a big one!
July 26th, 2006 at 3:16 pm
RQ – I agree with you on the impossibility of prediction/projection; there are just too many uncontrollable variables in a wildly changing China. Many are out of CCAA control. Your site still serves a huge function: bringing together those who want to hear and share information — even tangled shreds that dangle uselessly from our hands! — particularly in the week leading up to expected referral. Your LID group in forum (our Nov. one anyway) is a huge boost (esp with our regular injections of cellule-dose, hee).
But I think you’re right: the past patterns are no longer predictive of what’s to come, and maybe we should stop scrambling to make sense of them. It’s random chance. It’s random chance.
July 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Mothership?????????? Trying to find you to PM you re: your visa.
July 26th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Remember the Perfect Storm analogy of a while back?
I really do believe that once we get beyond all of the “perfect storm” chaos that we will be able to make sense of this. And, seemingly, the move was the last part of that.
Hunan is back to normal (supposedly), the move is over, they have figured out the extra paperwork needed for Hague compliance, and I forget what else.
So, call me delirious, but I do think that at some point we will be able to make sense of the numbers.
July 26th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
Thanks for your comments Avasong … we too are thrilled to finally know our child, and heartsick to imagine her waiting almost 2 years for her family. And yes, people keeping asking “why has she been there so long?” (she was 21 months at referral) as if to imply, there was originally something wrong with her. Yet I know of another child from her SWI recently adopted at 19 months, so this is perhaps more common than we realize. And again, I am saddened by knowledge that she and other have had to endure additional hardship. It will be interesting to see the range of children in this current referral batch.
July 26th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
3tsmom, yes I’ve heard about that previously as well, though I forget where. But I do remember who ever said it said that the new director came I think end of September/beginning October 2005, and that they wondered if this would affect things at the ccaa, that maybe a new director was put there to enforce things for political reasons. If that is true, I think that they, at the ccaa in charge, have some of an idea of what they are doing, but also figuring out some things as they go as other issues crop up. Here’s hoping they keep the best interests of the children in first priorty.
July 26th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
I too can relate to the earlier post of the person at Walmart. I feel like I’m in the deli line at Shoprite with a blue #2 feeling like hey we have a good number but then hit with the harsh reality that they are only up to red #4 and it is the dreaded patron who says I’ll have an eighth of a pound of this…a 1/2 pound of this….3/4 pound of this….1 1/2 pound of this etc. etc. etc.
July 26th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
You know… stork alert day is always so filled with mixed emotions…some of us are thrilled that we’ve finally heard the news that the storks are on the way, some of us are sad because we missed the cut-off but excited to know that “we are next!!” and some of us (like me) are left to try and figure out what the he#$ is going on in China. I just don’t know what to think anymore…. nothing makes sense, the numbers don’t add up and our friends at the CCAA aren’t talking (except to tell us this breaking news… we’ve moved!) Does anyone else feel like they’re about to snap!!! I think I need a valium!!
July 26th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
RQ – I think you hit the nail on the head with the perfect storm analogy. There seems to be (from what we know)….no more delaying factors out there. They finally have everything taken care of and so hopefully, we will see the wait pick up over the next month or two.
I just don’t believe that flipping out is going to help. It will be interesting to see the ages of referrals from this batch – are they older children who were in the system longer. It seems that last time there were younger babies being referred, which worried me that there are less paper-ready babies.
July 26th, 2006 at 9:44 pm
I almost hate saying this out loud, and please no flames. But my theory is that we are going to see China, not admitedly, but intentionally nevertheless, not making their girls paper ready at the rate they were in the past. The reason? The shortage of girls in the country. The boys who will be growing up and looking for brides. I have a sick feeling that the girls who will suffer most for this are the older girls (who we are requesting) that I feel perhaps are going to be “held” until they are “of marriageable age”…..forced to live the rest of their young years in an orphanage. It all makes me sick. But I feel strongly about this.
July 26th, 2006 at 9:55 pm
They have no more excuses for being slow. Everything is in place. I can certainly see this month only being 15 days worth, considering the move. If next month (can’t believe I just said that) doesn’t produce more days, then there is something going on. This time next month…..if they only cover through 7/31/05, then I think we can pretty much say the wait will be 18-24 months. I will then make peace with myself that I won’t see our daughters little face until then. Half a month referrals puts me at March/April 2008 referral, with a LID of 05/15/06. I think I have said it before…China needs to crap or get off the pot. Shame on them for hurting us, and even more so, THEIR daughters. THEIR daughters they do not want. “Everything for the Children”. What a joke that statement is turning out to be. It breaks my heart, not only for my own pity party, but for all of you and your families waiting to love a child.
Okay, I ranted and raved enough for this month. Will keep my hopes up for one more month.
And, sincerest congrats to all of you who will get to see your babies in a few days. I am very, very happy for you all. Your wait has not been easy either. Enjoy your week and please let us know when you post pictures to your blogs, if you have them! :)
July 26th, 2006 at 10:07 pm
Does anyone know what the term “Paper Ready” really means? Like, what paperwork needs to be done on a child to be considered “paper ready”?
July 26th, 2006 at 10:29 pm
I’m starting the process just now, and doing the math with the last few months (looking only at the last few months – i.e. 5 days, 7 days, etc.), if the referral rate continues at this pace, combined with my expected LID date, I could be looking at a 2016 referral. Given age concerns with the CCAA, you could have parents getting their dossier in while in their 40’s, but being close to 60 at actual travel. Thus, it appears obvious to me that the rate will have to pick up, or they will have to make drastic changes to their requirements to cut down on the number of applicants. Thus, perhaps I’m optimistic with starting the process, but I can’t see the wait times for referral going past 2 years (not that 2 years is anything to cheer about).
July 26th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
I went to a social event at my agency last weekend and NOBODY – I mean NOBODY had any clue about the increase in time. Unfortunately they are all newbies…prospective parents who are in the middle of their paperwork. I just couldn’t believe it and felt so terribly for the 30 people who were so bright eyed…thinking that they’d get a child in 2007 with a fall of 2006 LID. It wasn’t my place to tell them…I just felt so horrible. It makes me angry that these folks will feel the way so many of this blog do…frustrated, sad, desperate, hopeless, etc…etc… I know that the official wait is still 12-13 months but isn’t it the responsibility of the agency to tell the parents that the wait will soon be MUCH longer. There is no way the matching can go at this rate and now stretch this process out indefinitely.
On a brighter note, CONGRATS to all of the parents who are receiving referrals soon!! HURRAY!!!! YIPEEE!!!
:) (LID – 3/06)
July 26th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
I’m also somewhat confused about how they get the children paper ready. In the past it was explained that they basically forward the info for what they deemed were the ‘most adoptable’ babies to the CCAA and that every orphanage could only submit a small number of children for acceptance into the IA program. But in RQ’s post a few days ago, the CCAA was making it seem that they wanted more orphanages in the IA program and more children’s info to be submitted.
I think it would be somewhat (not much) easier for me to accept if the number of orphans in China was decreasing but since that’s obviously not the case it’s frustrating thinking of all the children who might not find a home just because someone won’t fill out some paperwork. I may be being unfair but I wish they would shed some light on the process so we truly knew where the bottleneck was and what they were doing to fix it. I’m hoping the paperwork floodgates open soon so we can all get our children sooner.
I would think that they are also expecting more paper ready children just for the fact they are not implementing quotas. It really doesn’t make sense to have people wait in line if they are expecting the wait to get exponentially bigger.
July 26th, 2006 at 10:53 pm
For a child to be eligible for international adoption there has to be a clear papertrail – so the person who finds them must take them to the police station and have a police report made, the orphanage must place a finding ad in the paper, etc. The orphanage then must keep up with certain paperwork while they wait the allotted time and then finally they send the child’s dossier to the CCAA.
There are reports that women who report a “found child” must submit to a gyno exam to make sure she isn’t the mom, and a man who reports one must bring his wife for an exam. I’m not sure how widespread that is, but it is apparently the rule in at least some provinces. The point here is that sometimes they don’t have the “finder” available for a police report.
We also have a report of one orphanage director who was complaining that the CCAA wasn’t allowing him to send as many files as he’d been allowed in the past. This would tend to support the theory that the CCAA is intentionally slowing things down.
But, why? To make things come to an almost standstill before the olympics? To try to convince the world that there are no more abandoned babies? Or, maybe something less sinister – maybe they had their hands full handling the Hunan scandal and could only handle paperwork for so many babies per month.
If we knew the “why” then we might be able to guess whether they will speed up again or not.
July 27th, 2006 at 1:33 am
You know I think, in my guessing, that there a few reasons as to the slow down. I think that China is concerned about the imbalance in gender. But mostly I think China does not want to be critisized by the countries they want to be ‘peers’ with. And there is no denying that they are a super power as a country. But I think they are sensitive to the opinions of other ‘western’ countries. Did they impliment the one child policy because they were so concerned about the population explosion, or because other countries were concerned, or a mixture of both?
To be honest I think that sometimes adoption makes people uncomfortable – especially to some (not all) people who are not adopting. So instead of focusing on the good -parents finding a child, a child finding parents, a country willing to allow adoption internationally in the best interests of the child (if no domestic adoption is forthcoming), they want to find the bad like insinuating a country is bad for having so many abandoned babies, instead of focusing on the positive fact that this country wants to allow some children to be adopted. Perhaps with the Olympics coming up people are a lot more aware of China, and some people in their ignorance view China’s power with some fear – so they want to critisize it – like about the gender imbalance, and showing western families adopting, when really the number of children we are adopting is just a drop in the bucket.
My thinking is why not allow as many children as possible to be adopted, of course prioritzing domestic adoptions first. But won’t allowing as many children as possilbe to be adopted actually help the gender imbalance? Won’t children who are adopted much more likely to survive and thrive, making more and better potential brides? We are a world, couldn’t the Chinese young men find some of their brides at home and some abroad? Maybe I am thinking too much in Utopia mode – but I just wish it could be.
Also I wish news reporters would realize that their ratings through negative comments can actually affect the lives of the daughters of China, if China makes some of it’s decisions based partially on how things appear to the world. Shame on these reporters looking to wrongly critisize just to get more ratings/readership.
Perhaps we as adoptive parents need to be proactive and say to the world “Do not fear a country that is increasing so fast” which would hopefully help China feel less of the need to impliment strict guidlines on number of children in families resulting in fewer abandonments, and also say “Do not critisize a country who wants the best for the daughters who are left in orphanages and not adopted domestically -praise China instead for wanting the best for these daughters, and allowing them to be adopted internationally” and “Do not fear a nation that has more boys than girls – there is a whole world of women – more women then man in fact” perhaps there would then be less pressure about daughters leaving the country then.
If we could somehow start this mentality instead in a broad way, as an adoptive community, maybe we could make a more positive atmosphere for China to make decisons from, in a world wide way.
I know I may not be focusing enough on the motives and real issues within China, but a girl can hope right? Wouldn’t that be great if we could impact things somehow – come in the opposite spirit of fear – come in a spirit of love and acceptance? I know this would be hard – I am getting my feelings out. I can hope anyways. And the best way I can help is by sharing my thoughts.
And if China ever reads this I just want to say I think I could say for the adoptive community as a whole – “we support you to adopt out your daughters, where they are not adopted domestically. We praise you for where you do this and we do not live in fear and critisism as others may speak out. We are behind you and praise you for allowing us to adopt your precious, smart, beautiful & wonderful chinese daughters. Everything for Children! We stand behind you in this and speak it out – please let us adopt more of these precious blessings. We respect you for allowing us this honor, and for your care for your children in this.”
As for our agencies, I think that yes some of them are not telling us what is likely regarding the wait, because of money. But I also think for some of them it is also about the children (though perhaps in a sneaky way) by continuing as if everything is normal so that parents keep attempting to adopt these children they (the agencies) also care about because they know we, the adoptive parents can and will raise the most stink about not being able to bring these children home who we are desperate to love. I think some of the agencies want China to feel this pressure, so that hopefully things will change (if slow down intentional) so that more children will be able to be adopted again. Although I definately think it is unfair of these agencies to use parents this way – I am just trying to show what also may be going on in their minds. Just getting my thoughts and wonderings and feelings out. I could be off.
July 27th, 2006 at 9:05 am
Paper Ready = finding ad placed/run for 60 days (not to locate birth parents as many believe, but to legally transfer custody of the child), baby’s medical condition determined healthy, immunizations, medical exam, developmental behavior recorded, photos taken, all compiled into his/her dossier (all this per our 11-yo daughter who was adopted last year at age 10 and helped organize babies’ files).
I’ve posted this is in other comments sections here, but I’ll say it again: CCAA is very concerned about the increasing numbers of families who travel to China and then decline their referred babies due to their unexpected conditions or medical needs. At least 3 orphanages have recently told visiting families they will not refer babies younger than 18 mos so that they can “make sure the children are healthy” for adoption. Isn’t one possibility for the slowdown that they are holding onto children’s dossiers longer (thus fewer “paper ready” children) for this purpose?
July 27th, 2006 at 9:25 am
postfarm, this is very interesting. But I’m trying to dig something out of my memory. Weren’t agencies in the Netherlands and maybe Australia (forgive me for being vague, it may have only been NL) fairly recently told that they can’t request a child between the ages of two and six? Or was it three and six?
I know there was another statement around the same time saying, in effect, that “As Young As Possible” should be understood to mean up to two years old.
Am I confusing everyone else as much as I’m confusing myself?!
July 27th, 2006 at 9:31 am
Yes, we have all been told that babies older than two years are not available. There are lots of reasons given as to why this may be, but apparently for those asking for a child in 2 – 6 year old age group, they are basically being told they are SOL.
If a few orphanages are going to hold onto babies until they are 18 months then this may help those families who are restricted by their own country’s law as to the age they are allowed to adopt.
By far, most orphanages get the paperwork out the door as soon as they legally can.
July 27th, 2006 at 11:24 am
We’re about 4 months into our wait. I’ve been watching the rumors for the last few months getting readily depressed. I, too, am frustrated that we used to see full month referrals. Now we see days worth. I think the lack of paper-ready children very much has to do with the push for more females. There is a whole campaign as we now know. I think it embarasses the government that they have a gender crisis yet people from around the world are adopting their daughters. I’ve spent many years in Asia. The Chinese are a proud people and very close-mouthed about their policies/plans in order to protect their reputation and their appearance to the public. I know this sounds pessimistic but I believe that, until their gender crisis is resolved (which will take decades), we will continue to see a lack of paper-ready children for IA. That, on top of the Hague Convention issues and the bureaucracy that is required by local orphanages to participate does not bode well for us waiting.
July 27th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
What does SOL mean?
July 27th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
Eh, sorry ’bout that. It’s not an internet term, it’s an everyday term and I didn’t even think when I used it.
If you don’t already know exactly what it stands for, chances are you’d rather not.
It basically means you’re out of luck.