Interesting Information
The following comes from three different countries and six different agencies. It’s in no particular order.
- Several agencies are now saying that there will be no new rules put into place. The CCAA wanted them and the Ministry of Civil Affairs appears to have said no. This means singles will presumably remain at 8% and all of the other rumored new rules will not happen.
- I am told that a couple with both partners weighing more than 300 pounds just received a referral.
- I am told that someone with a heart valve replacement and a December LID has still not had any questions about their dossier.
- Several agencies have stated that domestic adoptions within China have not “taken off” like it was hoped that they would.
- I have five emails from people who have travelled in the past month. Three of them saw nearly empty orphanages, two of them saw very full orphanages.
And now a bit from me. If orphanages went full speed ahead on making babies paper ready after the April meeting, we could potentially see a big month this month (May, June, July, August, Sept, Oct - that’s six months). I had hoped to see an increase in September since they occasionally refer babies that are only five months into the process since six months will have passed before the family travels. I don’t know what it means that we did not see a slight increase in September’s numbers (and we did not, September was one match different than July). It could mean the theory is all wet, it could just mean that the CCAA is not going to refer them until the full six months have passed.
More than one agency has remarked that the domestic adoption program within China has not taken off like it was hoped that it would. I wonder if this means the CCAA is about to allow more babies to be made paper ready for IA since they aren’t being adopted domestically in the numbers originally hoped?
As was pointed out in the comments by waitingfor2, things started to slow down in October 2005. If this slow down reflected a smaller number of babies allowed out of the country in 2006, and if more are going to be allowed out in 2007, then October 2006 could be when things start to turn around.
We’re just full of theories of why there may be a speed up. Aren’t we? I personally am not counting on things speeding up enough to stabilize the wait. But it is nice to have a reason to hope.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:15 pm
Is there any solid data available on the number of dossiers that China has for each LID or are we relying on RQ’s polling? And do we have any idea of how reliable that polling is?
I’m certainly very appreciative of all the facts that RQ has gleaned and am somewhat comforted by any knowledge, even if it’s disturbing (like the DTC-LID thread that hinted at how long it took our agency to translate our dossier).
September 26th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
klotzian,
FAQ, Number 12
September 26th, 2006 at 1:26 pm
In terms of the rumors not coming true…
It’s so unfortunate that so many people had to deal with such fear and emotion all for nothing.
I heard of a few couples who even decided against a China adoption based on these rumors.
I know that rumors are just that…rumors…but with so much riding on the information it’s difficult not to take it more seriously than it is.
I need to learn to either stop reading or stop believing any rumors I hear. Those days I spent upset over something that is not even happening wasn’t a good use of my time or my spirit.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Kizah - from what I understand the CCAA lobbied very hard to get the changes made into law, and the Ministry of Civil Affairs turned everything down. There was a whole lot of political drama that apparently went on while the CCAA was trying to make this happen. The rumors were not just pulled out of thin air, there was a very very good chance that they could happen. And if the CCAA ever manages enough political oomph with the MoCA to make it happen, then it probably will at some point.
I personally would rather know about the “could happen” stuff so I’m not blindsided. If you would rather not know anything until it is a for sure fact then you’re right, you should probably stop reading.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
The politics here are very interesting. Why wouldn’t the Ministry of Civil Affairs want to change the requirements?
September 26th, 2006 at 1:38 pm
RQ - I just love the way you think! This all makes sense I hope you are correct! My theory is that they will speed up not because of any other reason than…I am going to plan a vacation and will have to cancel it all if I get to travel around December….I would be fine with that!
Either way, I truly appreciate everyone’s thoughts, wishes and emotions on this blog! RQ you have such consistancy in your comments and attitude - very glass half full touched with reality - thank you for that.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
It is pretty hard to change thousands of years of thinking in a short time period. I am not surprised that the domestic adoption program did not take off as hoped. It is unfortunate on many levels, but it shows that somewhere in the world at all times, there will be children who need loving families and there are families just waiting for those children.
RQ, thank you for all your time and effort. On days I do not like the news/rumors, I remember that you are the messenger. My choice to read or not, and I keep coming back. You are as guilty a pleasure as the Bit O’ Honey in my desk drawer :)
September 26th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
I just don’t see how this status quo could go on much longer before the system cracks. I would think that the CCAA would have to speed up dramatically right now or halt applications for a while as we have heard rumor of, as it doesn’t sound like the wait is deterring alot of folks. As a worker bee in CCAA looking at mounds and mounds of paper everyday that is only growing taller instead of smaller would make for a depressing work situation. But that is me and my western thinking…
September 26th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
All of this speculation makes me wonder how BIG of a batch October may bring? We can only hope!
LID Sept 13, 2006
September 26th, 2006 at 1:53 pm
Just a note on “empty” and “full” orphanages…usually adopt. parents do not get to see the whooooooooole place. In 2002, we saw a very crowded SWI. In 2004, same place, it was quiet with a few rooms on the first floor with some babies. We ONLY SAW TWO ROOMS out of ???? In addition, many babies had been placed in foster care situations which were funded by US parents (not HTS, not LWB)…but no one knows how many foster kids are in one home…I think it is impossible to know if the SWI is full or empty…you see what they want you to see…clean rooms with some babies….
September 26th, 2006 at 1:54 pm
Do you think that the CCAA wanted to keep the “rumored changes” as quiet as poss. in order to get these changes passed, and when the drips came out and spread like crazy (somehow contributing to the political drama), it somehow had an impact on what MoCA decided? Just trying to piece together the seemingly reactive major silence of the past month with this info. to see if they are related. I feel like I have a big puzzle and am just trying to see if this piece fits in or belongs with a different puzzle.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Violet - there is enough information that I am sure that there are orphanages with very little NSN children in them. Orphange directors have spoken with people about their being fewer abandonments and most of those being for SN children. This is generally in the more economically prosperous areas.
However, in other areas (usually where the economy isn’t so good), people see orphanages with more babies than ever.
I do believe that some orphanges have very few babies that they can make paper ready.
However, there are other orphanages with many (many) babies that could be made paper ready, but are not.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:02 pm
I am curious to know if the “3 almost empty orphanages” were in the more northern provinces; since information from my agency reports that the majority of babies come from the southern provinces.
Maybe there really are that few paper ready babies available in the northern part of China?
September 26th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
I am so pleased to hear about the weight thing, that was basically my biggest worry and seeing that heavy partners have had their referral does ease things for me.
RQ when do you think you will be doing the next poll, it will be interesting to see how many people are logged in in that month.
I have just seen your september analysis and i have to admit i did one yesterday and my dates are almost the same as yours, but let’s hope that teh latest news proves us all wrong and we can finally get a whole month of referrals.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
I’m pretty sure you can’t generalize it as north and south.
The area around the three gorges dam tends to have full orphanages. Many of these areas have not recovered economically from the move.
Areas where migrant workers go to work tend to have full orphanages (single women who accidently get pregnant aren’t registered there so can’t get a free abortion and can’t afford to pay for one).
Non-rural areas with low unemployment rates and rapid economic growth tend to have almost empty orphanages.
As you can see, there is more to this than simply north and south.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:07 pm
I’ve just seen the new poll is up, sorry, i guess great minds think alike lol
September 26th, 2006 at 2:21 pm
A point here, after re-reading my post.
I do not believe we know for sure that the rumored new rules aren’t going to happen, but we have several agencies from several countries saying it so there is good reason to hope that this is the case.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
About the person with a heart valve replacement: Was heart valve replacement one of the medical ssues that showed up in the stricter guideline discussions? My DH had one ten years ago, and I hadn’t heard anything about it, so I assumed that this procedure wasn’t a problem. Am I wrong to assume this?
September 26th, 2006 at 2:32 pm
limboforlibby,
You read my mind. (on both points)
LID 5/10/06
September 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
People with organ transplants have been being turned down. This is not a rumor, it has already started happening, though some with organ transplants have apparently made it through the review room, so there are some questions as to exactly what will get you denied. One valve replacement was denied a while back (February or March maybe? It’s been a while.) We don’t know if there were other things that may have pushed them over the edge on top of the valve transplant. It is encouraging that this recent family seems to have made it through the review room, as that would seem to point to a valve replacement alone not being enough to get you denied.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pm
It bothers me when people complain about trying to track down rumors about what is happening in china adoption and I include my own agency. Yes, rumors are rumors and everyone should take them as such, but for many of us it is all we have. It is as close as we can get to our children and if it helps us get through the day just to see a glimour of hope then so be it. Even it the news is not so good at least it’s more than we would have other wise. I am greatfull for whatever information I can come across good or bad. It is more than I would get if I did not come here and I can say for certain the down days or bad feelings would come irregardless. At least here I have people who understand.
By the way, my agency said today to stay away from the rumors. I guess you can tell I didn’t like it very much.
hope
September 26th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
zgirl1,
Specific heart valve no, general organ transplant yes. My agency assures me that with thorough letters and medical exams from your cartiologist you should be fine. My husband has also had a transplant and we got special letters and medical reviews from him for our dossier.
Of course you never know. Which way is the wind blowing today?
LID 5/10/06
September 26th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
RQ; to me it sounds plausible that the CCAA has been trying to educate orphanage directors on paperwork since April. When they were touring in May, this is pretty much what they said themselves. But I wonder why that would mean that we would have to wait for Aprilborn babies that turn 5-6 months this fall. Why would the paperwork not also apply to babies that were already in orphanages? In any case the paperwork would take as long, so I guess the amount of time would be the same. I am just wondering why the babies would be young, how are you thinking RQ?
September 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pm
glassmaker Says:
halt applications for a while as we have heard rumor of, as it doesn’t sound like the wait is deterring alot of folks.
I thought that dossiers to China had slowed down since the wait has increased. I could be wrong, but I heard that agencies were saying that the number of new clients were down. RQ…any info on this?
September 26th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
While I do believe that a big part of the slowdown has been fewer paper-ready babies, I wouldn’t be surprised if some politics have also played a role. So many times when an organization wants something changed they have to have the data to back up the need. Could the CCAA have created a slowdown in order to show the MoCA that their changes were needed? I know, this is all speculation and conspiracy, but I just feel that there is more to what is going on than just fewer babies. Will we ever know? Doubt it. It will be interesting to see if anything happens with wait times now that the MoCA has turned down the CCAA — will they get worse or for some strange reason get better? What an agonizing ride we’re on!
LID Feb 06
September 26th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
flowerpower - its six months from when the finding ad is placed. The babies aren’t necessarily going to be young, it’s just that if the finding ads were placed in April then they can be referred in October.
September 26th, 2006 at 2:58 pm
Phoebe3 - as of about two months ago agencies were saying that the rate of new clients had not gone down a substantial amount, some were saying they had as many as they’d ever had.
I do not know if that has changed since then.
September 26th, 2006 at 4:19 pm
Just curious, those babies who were in the orphanages during November through April (almost paper ready) during the slow down, did their paperwork have to be restarted with the new regulations that were put in place at the April meeting? Or were those babies matched under the old regulations? Is it possible they are now being close to being paper ready “again”, with the possibility of double the amount of paper ready babies for next month? Possibly just trying to convince myself there has to be a big batch soon!! LOL
Amy
September 26th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
It is my understanding that when the orphanage director was put on trial during the Hunan incident that a lot of orphanage directors got scared and decided to stop sending paperwork in.
The April meeting was in part to tell them that if they follow the guidelines and make sure that everything is in order that they cannot be put on trial if something comes up that is questionable. Only if the guidelines are not followed or if there is evidence that they were part of a coverup could they get in trouble.
So, I believe that some orphanages were not making any babies paper ready for several months.
Did they all start to suddenly place finding ads in April? Maybe, maybe not.
September 26th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
RQ, about the heart valve stuff: Yeah, I knew that organ transplants are an issue for the CCAA, but I incorrectly assumed that this guideline was about BIG transplants on organs such as the heart, lungs, liver, etc. Heart valve replacements are (relatively) routine enough that I don’t put them in the same category as other types of transplants. But maybe the CCAA does.
DH had his when he was 24–he was born with a congential heart defect (leaky valve). He’s fine now. I wonder if the CCAA discerns between the different health conditions that lead to valve replacement surgeries. (Congenital versus age/illness related valve issues, for instance).
September 26th, 2006 at 5:45 pm
zgirl1-
I have Mitral Valve Prolapse ( valve that sticks).. no surgery though… We are currently waiting for referral and we are thru review. There is the slightest chance that something could happen when it comes time, but I am certain all is well for us.. I hope that eases your mind a bit.
September 26th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
I have learned a lot from this thread.
I knew about the Hunan scandal, but not much more than it was a scandal. Knowing what I know now, the slow down in referrals actually makes a lot of sense and it does seem like there is a small glimmer of hope for things to pick up a little.
September 26th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
Zgirl’s DH here: Our dossier included a letter from my PCP saying that the valve job had been done 10 years ago with complete success and that I had an “essentially normal life expectancy” (my health record was otherwise 100%–no other possible concerns). I’m wondering if we also should get a letter from my cardiologist, however (our agency didn’t raise this idea, but why trust them completely?).
September 26th, 2006 at 7:39 pm
snowmonkey - if your agency says you are okay then you should trust them. Many agencies have said that no one gets denied that doesn’t know ahead of time that there might be a problem. If your agency hasn’t let you know this could be an issue then you really should be okay.
As I said, someone has just made it through the review room, so this tells me that this alone will probably not cause a problem. We don’t know all of the details of the person who was denied - maybe they had other health issues as well and all of them combined caused a problem.
Really, trust your agency. It’s their job to know what might cause a problem, and if they say you are okay then you should be okay.
September 28th, 2006 at 7:27 am
Hi ,
we are just back into the process
for a third time ! However wondering if any of the rumors
center around number of children
in family? We currently have four
and one that lives out of state
with his Mom. Would the recent
interesting information post mean
this may not be an issue either?
Also any info. on age limit if one
is well with in age range and one
is 46? Any insight would be appreciated.