Comments on: Hague Permanent Bureau http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/ Join the Rumor Queen as she looks for the latest rumors and then analyzes them, trying to figure out what the CCAA will do next. Mon, 21 May 2012 16:17:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: litmom http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44443 litmom Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:34:14 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44443 No one here ever said it was a "right" to adopt and parent these children, including myself. If it finally happens for us (and I am feeling like it will be "if," not "when," we will feel incredibly blessed and humbled. But wanting to adopt a child internationally and give one of these children a home is not something to be ashamed of, either, and some of this conversation sort of suggests that. When it comes to "rights," I believe the children do have the right to be raised in loving families. The "rights" all belong to the children here--not to the agencies or institutions or governmental entities. They should be operating in the best interests of the children, as should we. Period. And those of us who desire to give these children loving homes should not be put down for that. No one here ever said it was a “right” to adopt and parent these children, including myself. If it finally happens for us (and I am feeling like it will be “if,” not “when,” we will feel incredibly blessed and humbled.

But wanting to adopt a child internationally and give one of these children a home is not something to be ashamed of, either, and some of this conversation sort of suggests that.

When it comes to “rights,” I believe the children do have the right to be raised in loving families. The “rights” all belong to the children here–not to the agencies or institutions or governmental entities. They should be operating in the best interests of the children, as should we. Period. And those of us who desire to give these children loving homes should not be put down for that.

]]> By: waitingforyears http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44387 waitingforyears Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:36:22 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44387 The terminology of finding families for children is common terminology as per the Hague convention. Those of us from Hague countries have been told about that one from day dot of intercountry education. That is China simply following the set guidelines they have signed to. As per not referring out all the children, that can also come back to the position that China is at re its development. Traditionally the masses have been employed by State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) producing masses of goods, that are not necessarily of great value. The State used to run everything - this is where they are coming from. If they clear out the SWIs that will leave a lot of people without a job including SWI/CWI directors. There is also the face. Often the cleft children have at least their lip repaired before adoption when in reality we would be just as happy to take them unrepaired and younger really. At the end of the day we have to be thankful that things are improving so rapidly for so many children in China living in SWIs/CWIs. You only have to look back 4 or 5 years ago that most institutions there did not even feed their children nutritious milk or food. And seemingly there are still plenty being trained up about that now. Taking a child away from China was the MOST humble gift I could have ever asked of anyone. If China is able to do it again we will be again totally humbled. It is a total priveledge to adopt and parent these beautiful children, not a right. The terminology of finding families for children is common terminology as per the Hague convention. Those of us from Hague countries have been told about that one from day dot of intercountry education. That is China simply following the set guidelines they have signed to.

As per not referring out all the children, that can also come back to the position that China is at re its development. Traditionally the masses have been employed by State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) producing masses of goods, that are not necessarily of great value. The State used to run everything – this is where they are coming from. If they clear out the SWIs that will leave a lot of people without a job including SWI/CWI directors.

There is also the face. Often the cleft children have at least their lip repaired before adoption when in reality we would be just as happy to take them unrepaired and younger really.

At the end of the day we have to be thankful that things are improving so rapidly for so many children in China living in SWIs/CWIs. You only have to look back 4 or 5 years ago that most institutions there did not even feed their children nutritious milk or food. And seemingly there are still plenty being trained up about that now.

Taking a child away from China was the MOST humble gift I could have ever asked of anyone. If China is able to do it again we will be again totally humbled. It is a total priveledge to adopt and parent these beautiful children, not a right.

]]> By: bornfromtheheart http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44386 bornfromtheheart Sat, 13 Oct 2007 08:22:23 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44386 Whether any of us like it or not, politically country by country, both countries Immigation departments, has the final say for IA. And in most cases there is always a limit to the numbers going out against those coming in. Whether Hague or no Hague the numbers are governed, and unfortunately the children of which we all want and need to call our own, for them to have a loving family, a forever family, many miles from the original country of origin, are part of controlled international immigration movement. Have a look at where the last payment of adoption fees goes to in this long process. In many countries it is the Immigration department. I don't however feel that China's govt signing the Hague ( not the CCAA) are keeping true to what they signed. Spam word : family ...ironic Whether any of us like it or not, politically country by country, both countries Immigation departments, has the final say for IA. And in most cases there is always a limit to the numbers going out against those coming in. Whether Hague or no Hague the numbers are governed, and unfortunately the children of which we all want and need to call our own, for them to have a loving family, a forever family, many miles from the original country of origin, are part of controlled international immigration movement. Have a look at where the last payment of adoption fees goes to in this long process. In many countries it is the Immigration department.

I don’t however feel that China’s govt signing the Hague ( not the CCAA) are keeping true to what they signed.
Spam word : family …ironic

]]> By: Mamman http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44385 Mamman Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:00:56 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44385 Sherry. China signed the Hague Convention, which meens they agreed that the last choice is to adopt abandoned children internationally. The Convention does not say that the last choice is to let children grow up in orphanages, be it in country or in any other way. IF there are children in orphanages who could have been adopted internationally, then they are making a wrong choice according to the Convention. It doesn't really matter if that choice is a better choice according to China, it doesn't matter if they can claim they take care of their own in country, they still don't follow what they signed. It is of course very naive to think that the Hague would make China make sure every abandoned child gets the chance to grow up in a family if that option is available. But to defend their choice and still claiming they are following the Hague Convention the way you do seems very very strange to me. Sherry.
China signed the Hague Convention, which meens they agreed that the last choice is to adopt abandoned children internationally. The Convention does not say that the last choice is to let children grow up in orphanages, be it in country or in any other way. IF there are children in orphanages who could have been adopted internationally, then they are making a wrong choice according to the Convention. It doesn’t really matter if that choice is a better choice according to China, it doesn’t matter if they can claim they take care of their own in country, they still don’t follow what they signed.

It is of course very naive to think that the Hague would make China make sure every abandoned child gets the chance to grow up in a family if that option is available. But to defend their choice and still claiming they are following the Hague Convention the way you do seems very very strange to me.

]]> By: litmom http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44384 litmom Sat, 13 Oct 2007 03:12:56 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44384 Sherry in Vermont, I don't really understand your post. If you really feel that way, why are you on an IA list at all? Sherry in Vermont, I don’t really understand your post. If you really feel that way, why are you on an IA list at all?

]]> By: Jensant http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44383 Jensant Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:50:12 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44383 I never said that CCAA is there to place children internationally. I also never said that China shouldn't take care of their own. If China did not think loving families, even those over seas, were not better over orphanages, why allow IA adoptions at all, that certainly wouldnt be in the best interest of the children. I definately do not agree with you, there. Not to refer babies out, because orphanage life is better than IA adoption, to me is just silly, I am sorry, but that is they way I feel. I have a hard time feeling that is what CCAA wants too. I also really think that right now, CCAA is trying to find more homes for SN children. I never said that CCAA is there to place children internationally. I also never said that China shouldn’t take care of their own.

If China did not think loving families, even those over seas, were not better over orphanages, why allow IA adoptions at all, that certainly wouldnt be in the best interest of the children. I definately do not agree with you, there. Not to refer babies out, because orphanage life is better than IA adoption, to me is just silly, I am sorry, but that is they way I feel. I have a hard time feeling that is what CCAA wants too.
I also really think that right now, CCAA is trying to find more homes for SN children.

]]> By: Sherry in Vermont http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44382 Sherry in Vermont Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:33:45 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44382 But keeping them in-house IS taking responsibility for them, isn't it? Even if the care isn't what a family will be... what about CCAA always talking about Blue Skies and other "improve orphanages and conditions" - why improve them at all if they plan to eliminate the need for them? It seems to me that China is acknowledging and putting money towards orphans MUCH more now than 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago... all points to them keeping kids in house. I agree families are best for kids, especially when we ARE lined up for years in hopes of being those families - but it does not appear that CHINA thinks international families are best for their kids, or they'd be just sending them out of country as fast as they could draw up the paperwork, no? I mean, the problem is not lack of families, but lack of babies... and they give several reasons why - and none of those reasons point to "more babies coming soon". The reasons point to finding ways to care for their kids in country... not to increase international adoption. :( But keeping them in-house IS taking responsibility for them, isn’t it? Even if the care isn’t what a family will be… what about CCAA always talking about Blue Skies and other “improve orphanages and conditions” – why improve them at all if they plan to eliminate the need for them?

It seems to me that China is acknowledging and putting money towards orphans MUCH more now than 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago… all points to them keeping kids in house.

I agree families are best for kids, especially when we ARE lined up for years in hopes of being those families – but it does not appear that CHINA thinks international families are best for their kids, or they’d be just sending them out of country as fast as they could draw up the paperwork, no? I mean, the problem is not lack of families, but lack of babies… and they give several reasons why – and none of those reasons point to “more babies coming soon”.

The reasons point to finding ways to care for their kids in country… not to increase international adoption. :(

]]> By: RumorQueen http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44381 RumorQueen Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:10:13 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44381 Sherry, if they were finding homes for them I would agree with you. But they aren't. Hague says we are the last choice. Hague does NOT say to leave them in orphanages when you have all of these applicants who are willing to parent them. Sherry, if they were finding homes for them I would agree with you. But they aren’t.

Hague says we are the last choice. Hague does NOT say to leave them in orphanages when you have all of these applicants who are willing to parent them.

]]> By: Sherry in Vermont http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44380 Sherry in Vermont Sat, 13 Oct 2007 01:05:15 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44380 China is not going to refer all the children in her orphanages out. Right now, IA is a teensy fraction of the children in orphanages available for adoption - and that number is going DOWN, not up. China is not saying that they haven't the staff/time/money to refer out all the children, they are saying they are NOT going to refer so many out internationally. And that's what the Hague means - take care of your own, find them homes in country, and as an absolute last resort, let them be adopted internationally. The CCAA is NOT there to place all the children internationally - I believe their job is to ensure placement of those children referred to them by the orphanages into the best homes for the children. According to the Hague, that is domestically first, then to Chinese families, then families not Chinese or in China - we're dead last on that list, and I don't think insisting they prove to the world how many kids are in orphanages is going to change that. Regardless of how many are in orphanages, China doesn't want to refer out more than the amount they are referring - which ain't much, and is going down every month as far as I have seen the past 2 years. Saving face is taking responsibility for their own orphans - not handing them over to the rest of the world. China is not going to refer all the children in her orphanages out. Right now, IA is a teensy fraction of the children in orphanages available for adoption – and that number is going DOWN, not up.

China is not saying that they haven’t the staff/time/money to refer out all the children, they are saying they are NOT going to refer so many out internationally. And that’s what the Hague means – take care of your own, find them homes in country, and as an absolute last resort, let them be adopted internationally.

The CCAA is NOT there to place all the children internationally – I believe their job is to ensure placement of those children referred to them by the orphanages into the best homes for the children. According to the Hague, that is domestically first, then to Chinese families, then families not Chinese or in China – we’re dead last on that list, and I don’t think insisting they prove to the world how many kids are in orphanages is going to change that.

Regardless of how many are in orphanages, China doesn’t want to refer out more than the amount they are referring – which ain’t much, and is going down every month as far as I have seen the past 2 years.

Saving face is taking responsibility for their own orphans – not handing them over to the rest of the world.

]]> By: Jensant http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/comment-page-1/#comment-44379 Jensant Sat, 13 Oct 2007 00:36:27 +0000 http://chinaadopttalk.com/2007/10/12/hague-permanent-bureau/#comment-44379 Could this be a saving "face" thing with China. Heaven knows the children are there and CCAA is there to help place these children. However, is the thought of providing numbers to receiving countries, that would show just how many children are abandoned in China, shameful to them, so they wish to give a false impression of the number of children available, by limiting the amount of referrals given out, thereby saving face? Just a thought running thru my brain...... Could this be a saving “face” thing with China. Heaven knows the children are there and CCAA is there to help place these children.
However, is the thought of providing numbers to receiving countries, that would show just how many children are abandoned in China, shameful to them, so they wish to give a false impression of the number of children available, by limiting the amount of referrals given out, thereby saving face?

Just a thought running thru my brain……

]]>