CCAA Statement about the Shared List
Several agencies have listed for their families some extra guidelines that the CCAA has issued to them, involving the shared list.
In a nutshell, the guidelines say:
- Each agency has one USB key that allows them to log in. The CCAA wants it to be used by the “principal” of the agency (whether it be government agency or adoption agency).
- Agencies have 48 hours within locking a file to fill in full application and submit that application. This time is not to be used to find a family for the child. Children should not be locked blindly.
- Each family should only have one child locked for them at a time. Names typed in should match passport names.
- It is prohibited (later they also use the word forbidden) for agencies to distribute pictures, words, or videos, to include such private information like name, birth place, and SWI – on a public place on the internet.
- They want the agencies to continue to snitch on each other (mutual supervision among adoption agencies).
I’ve heard through another grapevine that at least one agency that had a way to log in twice has lost that ability.
One thing that is missing in all of this: Discussion about whether families already logged in should have first option towards children. Again, what’s best for the kids is to have a family be able to get to them immediately. Choosing a child and then having to wait a year to go get them is not the ideal, but that seems to be happening more than I (personally) think it should. I do not believe all families should have to be logged in to choose a child, that’s not what I’m saying. But I do believe that children should first have the opportunity to be chosen by families already logged in, and if they are not chosen within a set amount of time (three days, maybe?) then their file should be opened up so they can be chosen by those not yet logged in, too.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:40 am
Good news! Thank you.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:27 am
Hello,
Those news are really great! thanks for informing us. I heated the issues raised recently with agencies..So unfair
However, I would like to react on the “logged in issue”. This does not works for the families who are SN from the start.
This is our case. I do not want, after doing all my preparation, to have families having priority in this process.
Please keep in mind as well that not all countries procedures are the same. I leave in Europe and in my country, we are not allowed to sign the agreement with the agency before having the paperchasing done. This takes between 12-18 months MINIMUM (as a judgment is done = US home study I think). Then, you can start with the agency (doing another way is just..illegal). If you respect that, the children will not wait for you.. Lock a child before the paperchase is for me, a US issue.
I hope I correctly explain as my english is not very good.
I also hear about people doing other adoptions at the same time while waiting. This is not allowed here.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:17 am
RQ-why would it take a year if families were not LID? We are not LID but are working very hard to complete our dossier…if we were given a referall tomorrow, it would not take a year to complete the adoption…
February 16th, 2010 at 10:21 am
mbs140 – it does take some families a year if they are not lid. even those working very hard on their dossiers. the point is if a child is an easy-to-place child, why should they have to wait any longer than they should to find a family? i’ve seen easy-to-place children wait nine-12 months for a family to bring them home when families who are LID already could have done so in three-six.
also, you said you are working hard on your dossier. what if you had barely started yet? I800A approvals are unpredictable and it’s something out of your control.
as far as this new statement from the c2a2. it’ll be interesting to see if/how they enforce it. agencies that break the rules could be penalized by not having access to the list for a period of time.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:24 am
The idea of being LID for a WC referral has been hotly debated here and on my agency’s board since we started in May ’06. I have repeatedly seen family’s receive a referral for a Waiting Child and then take 6 months to a year to travel due to…..according to one family blog that I read: “we got busy and didn’t get our dossier finished very quickly.”
I firmly believe qualified families should be taken according to LID when applying for a waiting child and my agency went that route – finally – almost 2 years ago.
I think that for folks new to the program, we need to keep in mind that for MANY years, there were only a small handful of agencies participating in the SN program and they worked hard to get families to take those kids. My agency was one and when you would go to the initial info meeting they STRONGLY encouraged you to review the WC and look into your heart to see if you would take one of these kids.
I want to say that it has been the one thing about the entire process that has consistently bothered me as we waited for our referral. To see families just starting the process get a referral before families who have been logged in for ages.
Yes, it sounds like sour grapes. Yes, I know we get the child we were supposed to have – we did for sure!!! But, to see children stay in orphanages – often needing medical interventions – while waiting for a family to get it together – especially now with the added time with the Hague; to see children staying even longer in foster families – continuing to bond with those families and then removed – while waiting for families – is so hard to see.
With the NSN program being set up to take families in order of LID, I would think moving to a primarily SN program would encourage them to take families in the same manner – by LID.
Personally, I think that allowing the SN program to be the “fast track” is not neccesarily the best for the kids in the long run.
With that said, it looks as if the CCAA is attempting to turn the SN program into a good program the was the NSN program is.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:41 am
mbs140,
It may not take a year after LID, but it will probably take several months.
If you were matched today, but your paperwork still had not gone through the USCIS office in your state (depending on your state, of course), it could take upwards of 3 months just to get through that office alone. Many states (mine included) take as much as 5 months to get through this process alone. Then you have to do the authentication and Chinese consulate things with your paperwork, adding another 2 – 3 weeks. Once your paperwork finally gets to the CCAA, you have to wait to get through Review, then wait for LOA/LSC, TA and finally CA. All of this could take, conservatively, 6 – 9 months after LID.
And all that while, you are staring at a picture of a child who is growing up without you, in an orphanage, maybe not in the best orphanage in China.
This is exactly what happened to us. The 9 months between accepting our referral and meeting our daughter was excruciating. Although it kills me to think of our sweet girl with another family, I do think we were wrong in identifying her before our paperwork was ready, thus causing her to wait for us.
I agree with RQ on this one, and if I were to adopt again, there is no way we’d identify a child before we had our paperwork in China already. Of course, that’s all moot now, as the system has changed since 2007 when we identified our daughter on an agency’s list.
TB
February 16th, 2010 at 10:56 am
earthmama – to illustrate your point. we have a may 2006 LID. we’ve been in our agencies SN program for 2.5 years. we were just matched in january. we saw countless kids we would have loved to have reviewed be matched with families just starting – many of them without LID’s.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:02 am
I too think they should give first choice to the people who are already LID. We were logged in in Sept 2007 and given our SN referral the first week of Nov of 2009. We traveled at the end of January and have been home for a week and a half with our child. He is getting the surgery he needs next month. He is 16 months old. I would hate for him to have had to wait longer for a family just because they needed time to do the paperwork necessary. I think these children need to be given a chance to get home as soon as possible. If there is not anyone who is LID that is a good match then I am all for someone paperchasing to bring the child home.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:30 am
Although I believe families already LID should have first choice I don’t think kids should be left on the list for longer waiting for an kID family. And for the record we were LID last year in April 2007 , were matched in May 2008 and still didn’t travel until jan. 2009, a 8 month excrutiating wait!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 11:36 am
I understand completly your point of view, however, I disagree with priority by LID.
We are talking about special need children. They can not fit to every family and could wait ages before being matched. Also, families could accept because they think “it’s their turn”…This very risky for the children.
However, I agree agencies should not accept to Lock a child for families without a complete home study. A I said, this is compulsory in some other countries.. It is strange to ask CC** to set up new rules because one (or more..) country administration did not put enough controls in place. This is international adoption and many countries are involved..
February 16th, 2010 at 11:54 am
Without some of us families who start the paperwork after we see the child, many of the OLDER kids would be sitting and sitting and sitting.
Referring sn by log in date seems to do an injustice to older kids.
I have watched the lists, blogs etc and most (not all) families who switch to sn are looking for minor need, ayap. NO one is beating a path to the older kids doors. My son is almost 8. He’s been in the system for 5 years. yeah, would have been great if someone logged in already wanted him. Where were they? People have been logged in for 4 years now. I bet there are hundreds of kids who were available then who are now just 4 years older.
The competition is there for the youngest, prettiest, healthiest kids on sn list… But what about those who are not. I believe finding them families, whether logged in or not should be top priority in a sn program.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:49 pm
What RQ is saying isn’t that people who aren’t LID should be excluded entirely—but that people with LIDs should get first crack at the list, with the people without LIDs getting a look a few days later. I hardly think a few-day wait will keep some of these hard-to-place kids from getting homes, but it will enable easier-to-place kids to be placed with families who can get them into their permanent homes much faster.
And I agree with her.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
We are adopting our third child. Our first was a NSN before the rules changed. It took 11 months from the time we started the paperwork until we went to get our daughter. With our second child, we had a LID of April 2007 and switched to SN. It took 6 months to go to China after we switched. That was about 18 months ago. We found our son and then got our paperwork together for him. To expedite this process, I begged, cried and pleaded with everyone from our social worker to the FBI and the CBI to get our paperwork though. When I call our adoption agency, I bet they cover the mouthpiece and say, “Oh! It is her again!” But, at least our paperwork was processed as soon as possible. We are “in process” and no one knows when we will be in China because everything is changing so much. By the way, I started the paperwork last August and my agency thinks that we might get our final acceptance from CCAA in March and will travel 4-6 weeks after that. We will see. That would make it about 8 months or so.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
In the past couple of weeks someone posted in the comments that they’d been matched last May and were hoping to get their TA soon. They don’t have it yet, but if they get their TA soon then they will likely travel in April – almost a year after identifying that child. That’s what I’m talking about. When you choose a child first, and then start paperchasing, it can take a year to get to the child. If there are people already LID who would choose the child, then it’s not fair to the child. (I have no idea of this family or this child’s circumstances, I’m just pointing out that we’ve recently seen someone give a timeline in the comments that shows it can take nearly a year to get to the child.)
I have seen other people post timelines on their blogs that have taken longer than a year from finding their child on a list until the child was in their arms. Again, if another family can get there in months instead of a year or more, then they should be allowed to do so. Speaking as a mom who adopted one child extremely young and another at almost two years old, words cannot express the difference a year made in the developmental problems that can arise by a child being institutionalized that much longer.
However, if no one already LID chooses the child, then of course the child should be able to be chosen by someone still working towards being logged in. I don’t know how long the children should wait for someone logged in to choose them – three days? a week? two weeks? I don’t know about that, but I do strongly believe that when children first appear on a list that there should be a time frame that only those already logged in have access to those children. It is not fair to the children to have to wait extra time to be adopted – not when there may be people wanting to adopt them who could get there and get them home so much faster. I’m told that for harder to place children, some people will only paperchase because they know that this child is their child. If they could not be assured of adopting this particular child, they would not paperchase. So, yes, for the harder to place children who may not find a family otherwise, I understand allowing people still paperchasing to be matched to a specific child. But for a child who is likely to be matched to someone already logged in, they should have that chance.
As for those countries who don’t allow families to choose a child until their government paperwork is complete – I suggest you talk with your own countries about that. The CCAA cannot change the way your country does those things, that’s up to you.
—-
The other argument I’m seeing has to do with what order individual agencies prioritize their families. Most seem to do it by the date the family chose to involve themselves in the SN program, but some of them do it by LID. Honestly, it seems to me that the fairest way would be to do it by date the family chose to involve themselves in the SN program – and within that group, those already logged in would get highest priority since they can get the children home the fastest. But, that is up to each individual agency to decide, I do not believe the CCAA is that interested in that side of things at this point in time.
And, as I said last time, many agencies try to lock files for their not-yet-logged-in families first, since they have the highest success rate at locking files that they don’t have to type the extra information in for. The CCAA really needs to fix that.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:03 pm
The most imp concern for SN children should be to find the best family for that child AND THEIR SN…not LID. These children need families who are the best fit for the SN…if a family is already lid, that would be ideal, but going by lid only raises concerns…mho
February 16th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
I do not post here often, but, having just completed an adoption for a SN waiting child, I have issues with several aspects of this LID argument. We found our child on a waiting child list. We were not paper ready and had to start from the very beginning. Despite our best efforts, we did have our stuff together, our paperchase and adoption still took almost 9 months to complete. Yes, it was difficult for us to know that our son was just waiting in the orphanage for us, but we knew he was meant to be with us. The argument, as I understand it, is that those with an LID are given first crack at these children in order to expidite the process. This, to me, does not serve the children, but serves the parents. Most of us who are paperchasing for children are adopting the harder to adopt waiting children who have been on shared lists and agency lists with no takers. My son had his file reviewed by many families, both with our agency and outside of our agency with no one interested in paperchasing for him. The sad part is, he is a perfectly healthy child…but he is a boy and he was 6 by the time we found him.
Like Britsmum, my son had been in the system since he was 3 days old. Six years passed before he found a family. He is now a well adjusted 7 year old who loves his family. Does part of me wish someone would have adopted him as a baby? Sure, but they didn’t. If those who are logged in choose to pursue an older child or more severe SN adoption, that is their personal choice and I hope they fnd a child they can love and cherish. If they do not, I do not feel they should be “ahead” of those of us who are willing to consider and WANT to only look at older children or children with SN. As violet pointed out, the most important person in all of this is the child. They need to find the best family for them, regardless of LID.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Have some of you even bothered to read what I’m trying to say? It really doesn’t sound like it. Read what I (and several others) are saying before you argue with it, otherwise your arguments make no sense.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
our agency does a formula based on how long you’ve been LID and how long you’ve been on the SN list..this is totally fair. we are still paperchasing but have been on the SN list from day one…why should a family that is tired of being on the NSN that has been LID for 3 years that decides the wait is too long and jumps on the SN bandwagon (let’s all be honest it happens ALL THE TIME) get referral for SN before us?? that’s just silly…
February 16th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
With respect, RQ, I have read your post as well as all of the following comments. I do not feel LID”s should have first crack at a referral, period. To be frank, this has been an option for them all along, but most have chosen not to pursue it. As mbs140 pointed out, most who choose to switch to SN do so because they are tired of the wait. It is the wait which causes them to switch – not the child. These waiting children have been continually available and will continue to be available. All families who want them should be allowed to pursue them, regardless of LID.
February 16th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
As stated in the discussion a few weeks back when the problem with the shared list came to light, there are HUNDREDS of kids waiting on that list RIGHT NOW. All the families waiting who have a LID have the opportunity to bring home one of those precious children. So I don’t see why there is a need for a discussion over who should receive a referral first. The referrals are there, they just have to be accepted. It is anyone’s right not to choose one of those children, but you can’t complain when you have a longer wait.
The problem is that there are many (notice I didn’t say all) who want a NSN referral from the SN program. That is not the purpose of the SN program. It’s easy to suddenly start standing up for the “best interest of the children” when it also benefits one personally. It’s easy to say a family needs to already be paper ready when you are at that point. The problem with that is, if many of these children waited for a family who already had a LID to speak for them, they would never be placed. BTW, I completely agree that children who can be easily placed should go to a family who can bring the home quickly, NO arguments there. But, there should not be a negative picture painted of families who see a child first and then decide to work diligently to being them home.
Here is my post from the last discussion, and I still stand by it:
The absolutely beautiful, precious little one who reached out from the Rainbow Kids newsletter and grabbed our hearts had been waiting for some time. There is not a frenzy for kids who will most likely need bilateral amputations at the knee once they are home.
I’m not saying that anyone should take on a need that they are not prepared to handle. I’m not saying that it’s ok for agencies to do unethical things. I’m not even saying that everything can or should be “fair”. My point is that this “frenzy” is over just a VERY FEW of the wonderful children who need homes.
There doesn’t have to be this competition, or LID discussions, or any of the so called frenzy. As a very blessed mom of 3 of the kids who were not a part of the competition, it just seems that some people are saying, “I want so badly to have a child” and there are hundreds of children on the shared list saying “Here I am, consider me”, and most people are looking at them saying, “Oh, sorry, I didn’t mean you, I meant the ones who don’t really seem like they have a special need”.
My intent is not to offend anyone. I’m just speaking from my own perspective.
Tracy B.
February 16th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
i really don’t think some people are reading what rq wrote. she is NOT suggesting if you are not LID you can’t adopt an SN child! she is saying that there should be a period of time where a family that IS LID has an opportunity to adopt that child before releasing the file to everyone.
if it is a hard-to-place child, they will remain on the list long enough for people without LID’s to apply. if they are easier-to-place, the child gets home that much sooner if the adoptive family is LID
February 16th, 2010 at 2:35 pm
Noendinsight, you took the words right out of my mouth!
I know people are passionate about this subject, but come on! Read the original post!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
I completely understand what RQ is saying. However, that’s not what everyone in the discussion is saying. Take this statement:
“Yes, it sounds like sour grapes. Yes, I know we get the child we were supposed to have – we did for sure!!! But, to see children stay in orphanages – often needing medical interventions – while waiting for a family to get it together – especially now with the added time with the Hague; to see children staying even longer in foster families – continuing to bond with those families and then removed – while waiting for families – is so hard to see.”
That doesn’t sound like a minor needs situation to me. Many of the children like the ones described in this situation are the ones waiting for a family to “get it together” because the ones who “had it together” were not interested in them. There are many who are saying or suggesting that families should have a LID before accepting a referral…period. Those comments are the ones I’m addressing, not RQ’s. I completely agree with and understand RQ’s statements.
February 16th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
As far as being the best fit for that need our Agency wouldn’t match you with a need unless you had that need checked. Its not to say that you couldn’t choose a child with a different need, but you wouldn’t be matched with a child with a need other than you marked on your checklist. They go by LID, when you signed on to SN and what needs you have checked. So yes, you could have a shorter wait time if no one has checked a certain need and you did!!! I thought it was extremely fair to both the children and the families. Let’s face it if you are not open to a host of SN and maybe a larger age span you will wait longer to be matched then those who aren’t. And there is nothing unfair about that!! And if you are willing to accept this child and no one else is and you are not yet LID then I say let them go for it!!! As I said before being LID does not always mean a shorter wait!!!!
February 16th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
It really is no answer to say there should be no competition for the “minor” SN children because there are many other children who are waiting with “greater” SNs. This is a variation of “Why are you adopting from China when there are plenty of waiting children here in the U.S.?”
The choice of how to make one’s family is personal and there’s no “right” way to do it. The fact is that there is a group of SN children on each shared list that comes out who will easily be matched with families who are happy to adopt children with “minor” SNs but do not feel capable to raise children with more complex SNs. The question is this: How should those children be matched with PAPs? That question has no more to do with the other waiting children in China than it does with waiting children in the U.S.
RQ posted earlier that some agencies prioritize non-LID parents because it takes a few less seconds to enter their information on CCAA’s system, and those few seconds may make the difference between the agency’s ability to lock the file or not. The non-LID families are not like you, hoping44 and waitingonfourth. They did not find a child that they are paperchasing for. They are seeking the same “minor” SN children that the LID PAPs are. The only difference is that the LID people have been waiting up to FOUR YEARS and the non-LID people have not.
If you wish to defend the status quo, explain why it’s better that the PAPs who decided to adopt last week should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have to wait a year for a home, than that PAPs who have been waiting four years should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have a home in 8 weeks.
February 16th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
noendinsight and Trulyblessed- I hear what you are saying! I happen to very much agree with RQ as well.
All those children that have been sitting on the list are open to someone wiht a LID or without a LID. If they have been sitting on the list because they are harder to place- well then they have already surpassed the time for LID families to have a priority at reviewing their file, thus leaving their files open to anyone willing and wanting to adopt them. Only new children introduced to the list would be files that those with LID would have access to first. Many of these files will then be open to those not with a LID.
I happen agree with what RQ stated as I knew of a family that had locked a child’s file and never completed the adoption. That child sat and waiting for atleast 2 years for the family to come and get him. I am not sure why the agency did not put an end to it or why CCAA did not step in. But this child’s file was released eventually and was then quickly adopted by another family. The child sat there and waited for all that time. I know the family had good intentions- but through hardships and other stuff, could not get the paperwork completed. I blame many for this situation and hope that all children come home as quickly as they can, especially those needing medical interventions.
5/06 and waiting and waiting…
February 16th, 2010 at 3:53 pm
daddyjac- well said…
February 16th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
Daddyjac you are my hero!!!
We are adopting to complete our family and we are not choosing gender, nor photos, but we know very well what needs we can bring into our families.
We do not feel guilty for deciding on what needs we can meet within our family.
Life is hard enough, adoption is hard enough.
February 16th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
We chose our little guy in June 2005. DTC 01.31.2006.
Home with our ds In May 2006. Alot of people with our agency were about the same as we were. Then things changed dramatically with regards to SN’s. I belonged to their yahoo group, but they have since closed.
February 16th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
i have seen quite a few baby girls under 15 months (some under 12 months) with MINOR needs referred to families without lid’s.
February 16th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
daddyjac posted: “RQ posted earlier that some agencies prioritize non-LID parents because it takes a few less seconds to enter their information on CCAA’s system, and those few seconds may make the difference between the agency’s ability to lock the file or not. The non-LID families are not like you, hoping44 and waitingonfourth. They did not find a child that they are paperchasing for. They are seeking the same “minor” SN children that the LID PAPs are. The only difference is that the LID people have been waiting up to FOUR YEARS and the non-LID people have not.
If you wish to defend the status quo, explain why it’s better that the PAPs who decided to adopt last week should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have to wait a year for a home, than that PAPs who have been waiting four years should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have a home in 8 weeks.”
daddyjac,
Please read my last post.
February 16th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
hoping44 – it looks like our posts crossed. Apparently we were talking about different things and I apologize if I tarred you with too broad a brush.
February 16th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
daddyjac – No problem :)
February 16th, 2010 at 6:20 pm
daddyjac asks: explain why it’s better that the PAPs who decided to adopt last week should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have to wait a year for a home, than that PAPs who have been waiting four years should get a referral tomorrow and the child will have a home in 8 weeks.”
well, the people who have been waiting for 4 years are obviously not waiting for a sn child. The people who signed up last week may have ONLY signed up for a sn child.
If the family who had been waiting 4 years submitted a list to their agency expressing interest in sn before the family who just signed up last week, that’s different.
Lets be careful not to blur the “best interest of the child” with “the best interest of people who have been waiting a long time for nsn who are now tired of waiting”.
I think RQ had it right with her comment that interest in SN date should also be factored into the equation and not simply LID for nsn. There are quite a few families who are only in this for a sn child but could not log in under that program since there is none. many of us paperchase after we get the go ahead from China to adopt our children. Frankly, if someone showed up the day after me, looking at my son with a LID 5 years ago, I’d be pretty upset if they felt they should get the nod because they had been waiting in another line for a longer period of time when my son had been waiting for 5 years with no interest from anyone.
Lets just hope agencies figure out whats best for their clients and all things are as close to equitable as possible.
I sincerely hope that we all end up with the child that is meant for us regardless of the route.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
I have been LID since April ’07. I switched to the SN program last fall. My immigration paperwork is current. My agency is telling me there are 200+ families in “line” ahead of me in their SN program. Many of them aren’t LID yet. Yet, I know many of them will get referrals before I do. It is frustrating. I am sad about it every day. But like so much of this process, it is out of my control. I can only continue to hope that the *right* child will be matched to me when the timing is right.
*sigh*
February 16th, 2010 at 7:41 pm
But many of those 200 families are not all looking for the same thing possibly. Some will accept boys, some older, some with needs others arent looking for. That makes the line different than purely 200 people ahead of you seeking out the same child you are. I hope the wait shortens. I hope kids find homes.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
@Britsmum – I know you are right, and I’m not complaining, or suggesting a rule change is necessary. I am just saying – I’ve been waiting almost three years now since my LID, and it is what it is. It really has been a “perfect storm” of challenges, changes in policies, and ongoing fees and paperwork over the past three years. But when I think about dropping out, or looking elsewhere to find my child, I just can’t do it. My heart is with this program, and every molecule in my body tells me to stick with it to the very end, no matter how long that takes. So I am, and I will.
February 17th, 2010 at 5:33 am
Britsmum said: “well, the people who have been waiting for 4 years are obviously not waiting for a sn child. The people who signed up last week may have ONLY signed up for a sn child.
Lets be careful not to blur the “best interest of the child” with “the best interest of people who have been waiting a long time for nsn who are now tired of waiting”.
THANKS-THANKS-can’t say it better.
RQ, I did read carefully what you said but for me, the issue is more an “internal control” issue. Conventions should not be signed by PAP’s with agencies before paperchase is done. I understand paperchase must be done before, but LID’s history (to answer to some other comments) is out of subject. If priority is to be done, it should start with interest to SN process AFTER all papers have been completed.
February 17th, 2010 at 11:30 am
Brumama – You can’t know that the all people who signed up last week for ONLY a special need child, did so because they ONLY want parent a special need child – I am sure many signing on now do so to avoid the 6 or so year wait for a NSN referral they would encounter – just because they did it from the start of their adoption doesn’t mean that they aren’t just trying to circumvent the wait that folks in the NSN line are caught up in. We all just want to be parents.
February 24th, 2010 at 12:20 am
We just accepted a referral for our daughter with Tetralogy of Fallot- heart defect.