Roundup
First, I don’t see any rumors about a possible cut-off date. I also do not believe that we are close to the next batch. One of the “mystery” referral deliveries has been explained, the other has not… but there is no evidence that the CCAA is nearing completion of the next batch.
Second, the media is beginning to pick up on the Scruggs family’s story:
- New TB policy could disrupt overseas adoptions
- U.S. govt regulations forces family to leave adopted daughter in China
- TB testing could delay international adoptions
- CDC rules that Scruggs family must leave adopted daughter in China
- Harper Scruggs’ mother: the aftermath of having to abandon adopted daughter in China
- Mother of Harper Scruggs discusses the heartbreak of leaving adopted daughter in China
- Child’s TB Complicates Adoption by Va. Family
- New TB policy could disrupt overseas adoptions
And finally, there are three petitions out there that people are being asked to sign.
- The first has to do with the TB issues: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/build-families-not-barriers.html. I’m for this one.
- The second petition will make our children citizens sooner, while still in China instead of when we arrive home on U.S. soil. The downside of this is that it could take away the US’s ability to make sure our children are legitimate orphans, but Ethica is working with our lawmakers to word the bill so this won’t be an issue. The address for this petition is here: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/face-act-of-2009.html You can read the text of the bills by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and searching on “Foreign Adopted Children Equality Act”. I’m glad Ethica is working to help make sure that this won’t take away our own State Department’s authority to make sure our children are legitimate orphans. That is one safeguard I’m not willing to give up, not even for instant citizenship. Since that is being taken into consideration, I’m for this one.
- And the final petition can be found at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/families-for-orphans.html. I have not read the text of the bill for that one, so I don’t really know where I stand yet. This act would create a whole new government office, new oversight, etc, and at this point I’m not sure whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing. I’ll point to one pro blog and one anti blog, to give you an idea of what others are saying. I don’t believe this bill is going anywhere anytime soon, but if it ever looks like it’s gaining enough steam to happen then I’ll read through the wording of the bill(s) and come to my own opinions on it, but as of now I haven’t done that. If you want to make up your own mind, you can read the text by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and searching on Families for Orphans Act and then clicking on HR3070. There is a lengthy thread (five pages so far) in the forum with people discussing it.. And here is one blog for it: http://allthesocialorphans.wordpress.com/2009/07/22/families-for-orphans-act-all-about-adoption-or-something-more/, and one blog against it: http://www.adoptionintegrity.com/2009/07/24/fighting-for-orphans/. The thing is, I had a really hard time finding a pro blog that actually talked about it. Most just copied and pasted the JCICS information, they hadn’t actually dug into it enough to tell us in their own words what it does and why they approve of this. The blogs against it have done that. That really bothers me. I don’t have an opinion on this one yet, but it’s looking like at some point I’m going to need to read through the text of the bill and come to my own conclusions.
- One final bill to talk about, though this one doesn’t seem to have a petition, is Senate Bill 1376, which would get rid of the immunization requirement. You can read the text of this bill by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and searching on “restore immunization and sibling age exemptions”. I’m for this one.
For all of these bills, if you have an opinion one way or another, it is important that you let your own Senators and Representatives know your feelings. You can do this by going to:
- http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
- https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
If your representatives happen to be a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee or the Judicary Committee, then all the better. You can check at these sites to find out who is a member of these committees:
- http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/members.asp
- http://foreign.senate.gov/about.html
- http://judiciary.house.gov/about/members.html
- http://judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm
I believe the Families for Orphans Act will be (or is) going through the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The Foreign Adopted Children Equality Act is with the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the House Judiciary Committee, and the Senate Judiciary Committee.
And 1376 (immunizations) is with the Senate Judiciary Committee.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:21 am
For the TB thing, I’m on the fence. I completely understand not being able to stay in China after adoption. I get it.
It would be tragic if it happened to my own family. BUT, being that CCAA is not insisting on children being tested correctly before we are referred the children, then isn’t it wise for the US to do something about it on our end? It’s a long plane trip home, and if a child has TB, they should be treated before arriving home. We don’t really know what our children are exposed to and not exposed to before we adopt them. We had all of our daughters’ immunizations redone, “just in case”, and had her blood, urine, feces tested. She had guardia, and hence, so did we. It would be aweful to bring home DD #2….not do TB testing (or any other major illness) on her, and find that she does have that illness and gave it to DD#1.
Let me make it clear, I’m not for keeping a child from coming home in a timely manner, but I am for CCAA doing all that testing PRIOR to referral, at least to get the ball rolling, and (at least in theory) by the time she is adopted, they can have the tests/treatment done. But for that to happen, CCAA would have to get involved long before the referral and China would have to spend some money on the issue at hand. I don’t see that happening any time soon. But THAT is where the reform needs to be.
August 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Why would the CCAA take care of a problem that is caused by the US? I don’t really get that. Other countries don’t have this problem, as far as I know. Sorry if I sound harsh.
August 11th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
The real TB question is how long is someone contagious and will they go without medical care in the US. A child isn’t going to spread it. Kids get it from adults. Why are they requiring a child as young as 2 to be tested for no cause. Most the kids are going to test positive to the skin test cause of the BCG vaccine to prevent TB. I wish they’d come up with a test that wouldn’t require all our kids to submit to an xray in China. That’s the next test.
China can’t do it ahead of time. The US isn’t going to have an approved panel of doctors in every major city of every major province. Do we really want to expose the kids to anymore tests and immunizations and medical procedures while over there? We all swear to get them immunized within a month home. Our SW verify at postplacement visits we have been the doctor, what tests were done, etc… For a year we are asked about illnesses and developmental milestones. This isn’t a population that is risky to others.
If they are known to have TB or are showing symptoms I want them tested/treated before they come home enough for them to be not contagious, the problem is they are asking for 6 months when medically it’s just a few weeks before they are considered safe for travel. This family we are talking China actually identified and had already started medication. Even if she were a teen she’d be safe.
Last year there were 2 cases in the US of the drug resistant strain and I’ll be they weren’t from adopted kids between the ages of 2 and 12.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Mamman-TB is not US caused. When the children are tested they’re still in China.
kms-Yes, we do promise to do the immunizations etc, but I’ve personally known a few people that decided blood tests would be too traumatizing for their children and held off on blood testing for more than a year (not sure if it ever got done). If they were holding off on that, most likely they were holding off on other kinds of testing as well. Also about the SW follow up visit, this is assuming the follow up visit happens with the SW in a timely manner. I’ve known of several cases where the parents have to remind the SW or agency to do the follow up visit within the alloted timeframe.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
If a child in an SWI in China has active TB, then I think that is China’s problem. That child is a ward of the Chinese state and therefore, China should have the obligation to properly care for that child and protect the other children in the SWI from getting it. The “problem” created by the US end of things is how soon that child is allowed to travel. But the real problem is that this child has TB, and obviously got it while in the care of a Chinese state run orphanage. The child is sick and contagious. That is China’s problem. And it’s sad that the SWI didn’t know she had an illness that needs medically care. Or, if they did know and didn’t give her the care she needed, and then did not reveal that info to the PAP’s, well, then it’s no longer sad. Then it’s tragic. All the U.S. is doing is discovering that this child is sick and needs medical care. It does seem like the amount of time the U.S. is requiring before she can travel seems excessive, but the problem of her illness was already there.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
I have to add that KNOWING this is happening now, and knowing it might continue to happen, it’s completely heart wrenching. Children will be devastated to form that attachment then have to leave so abruptly. No matter how well the PAPs prepare the child, there is nothing to console the child when the parents have to leave.
If China started the process of every child ready for IA 2 or older, at least then the PAPs would know and be could prepared for staying in China longer. Not that all PAPs could do that…we probably couldn’t afford it, but at least we could prepare for it accordingly.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Luvbugsmom,
the problem is that the US will not let the children travel home together with their parents, to be treated there, at home. I still don’t see how that could be CCAA’s problem. Lots of children come to the US with both contagious (for ex. hepB) and not contagiuos (for ex. heart disease) illnesses, and you don’t expect the CCAA to treat them prior to traveling. Lots of children have come home to their forever families through IA for decades, with a big variety of bugs. That is not something new. The US just closed it’s borders to some of them. That’s created by the US. Why do you think other western countries don’t have this rule? Plus, you can say over and over again that it is the CCAA’s problem, that will not change anything. That’s probably not the way they see it. If you disagree with that (as you seem to) or agree with it (as I do) doesn’t matter.
I think this is mainly an agency problem, even though they didn’t come up with this rule either. But their job is to make IA possible, through all the laws there is both in the US and in the countries the children come from. When something changes, they need to adjust, as will the PAPs have to. Probably meaning a little more money to pay, but it must be possible to solve. Travelling twice for US families could be a possibility. That’s not something I think is good, but if everything is planned for travelling twice from the beginning, it doesn’t have to be as traumatic at all, as it was for the Scruggs.
The whole situation is crazy, and I sure feel very sorry for everyone affected by it. But making the CCAA responsible for this too, among all other things we are angry with them for, seems a little too much.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
I’m going to have to say, again, I still think it’s a really poor idea to pont people to read blogs to find out facts. I also think it’s really a shame to pass judgement on something in disguise, by saying, in effect, I’m not going to read it because I know it’s not going to pass. That’s a judgement. That’s a “no.” And it’s such a shame for all the children it would help. Plus, through the effort of so many of us, the support is growing for both daily, in the public and in congress. The people of the adoption community are once again giving their time and making a difference in thousands of little lives.
I hope people who are on the fence will contact Joint Council directly for information about their 2 petitions (the FACE is not theirs) as they would love to talk to anyone. jcics@jcics.org will get you to them, or go to their site. Certainly their info. and experience is far better than some bloggers’ opinions, and the “opinion” of someone who doesn’t want to take the time to even find anything out.
Thanks so much folks!
We can do it. We can make a difference for children the world over.
xo~
wBw
August 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Rumor Queen:
Canadian law was changed a year ago to allow for children adopted abroad by Canadian citizens to become Canadian citizens before returning to Canada. There are alot of forms to fill out to prove the parents are Canadian citizens, and to prove the adopted child really was abandoned. In comparing our experience with the Canadian government to the American procedures I have seen described here, I would say the Canadian system is every bit as rigorous as the American one. Therefore you should have no fear that a grant of citizenship while still in China would open the door for children who are “other than legitimate orphans”.
August 11th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Their blog is available for all to read to know what happened, who knew what and when.
August 12th, 2009 at 2:43 am
luvbugsmom,
Actually, the SWI DID make sure the child got treatment, and her body was responding to the meds. You make it sound like her SWI didn’t care, and that is just absolutely not true. They made sure that she got treatment for the TB, and she was still on medication.
Mary
August 12th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Here is an interesting thought. It is my understanding that once all the paperwork is complete in China, all the child needs to do is step on American soil and they are a US citizens. If that is the case, according to International Law a Consulate and Embassy belongs to the Country, therefore the US Consulate in Guangzhou is American soil. If the child touches the ground they are US citizens, of course the paperwork needs to be complete. Just a thought.
Anyone complaining about CCAA on the TB issue is off base, this is a US issue.
August 13th, 2009 at 5:41 am
I would love that to be the case. It’s logical and makes perfect sense.
But, It’s actually when you cross a particular part of the airport in the first place you land in US where you hand over the brown envelope. Even the paperchase with Hague with abuse clearance wouldn’t consider living abroad on a military base US soil. They required a clearance from the country that hosts the base. The hosting country was confused cause they need an address from their country to check on that and they aren’t allowed on base because its US soil.
I guess it’s good they let us being them to and inside the consulate.
Kristine