U.S. Says No Adoptions Now of Young Tsunami Victims

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The youngest victims of the Asian tsunami may be homeless, traumatized and possibly orphaned, but they are not yet candidates for U.S. adoption, the State Department said on Wednesday.

The U.S. government and some adoption agencies have been deluged with offers to place the children of the catastrophe with American families, but this is not feasible now, said Kelly Shannon, a State Department spokeswoman.


``The State Department shares the humanitarian concern for the children of this tragedy and applauds American citizens' desire to assist them in their time of need,'' Shannon said by telephone. ``However, at this time it is not possible for U.S. citizens to adopt these children.''

U.S. immigration law stipulates that children adopted from other countries must qualify as legitimate orphans -- with no parents, or with a sole-surviving parent who is incapable of providing proper care for the child, and who has released the child for emigration and adoption.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-quake-adoption.html

I'm on the one hand appalled that orphans can't be adopted, but on the other hand appalled that AT THIS TIME there is pressure from AMURICANS to adopt them (wtf?)

"that AT THIS TIME there is pressure from AMURICANS to adopt them (wtf?)"

Unless I am misinterpreting you (feel free to correct me if I am), I find your statement rather insulting.

There are a lot of Americans offering to adopt kids because Americans are generous people, and many of us are willing to open our homes to children in need, that's where the "pressure" is coming from.

Our government may consist of 90% greedy, selfish assholes, but our population does not.

Redstone

my point is that RIGHT NOW (as I implied in my post) would be the wrong time...parents may still be alive, relatives might be found to take them in, or (god forbid!) their own countrymen might want to adopt them. After everything settles, and the disaster is done being addressed, THEN, if americans wish to adopt, and if the countries involve wish them to, fine.
but to start RIGHT NOW to work on it seems overly mercenary.

and before you get your tail in a spin, we were in the adoptive process as parents. I'm not judging adoptive parents but the TIMING and the assumption that americans should be the ones to adopt them first in line.

I still don't think the article implied there was any "pressure," just offers of help. Further, I don't think there was any implication that any Americans assumed they should be "first in line," either.

I think everyone here (including me) agrees with your re-statement of your views. I just try to look toward people's charitable impulses with a little less negativity, I guess.

Redstone

I think the desire to adopt is a natural, generous consequence of the concern we all have that there are so many orphaned children in the affected areas. I think it's wonderful that we have opened our hearts to these unfortunate ones. In time, I hope some of the orphans can be adopted, if that is what is best for the kids.

As the parent of one foreign adopted child who was found abandoned on a doorstep at the age of one day, I can tell you that looking at the pictures of those children orphaned by the tsunami made me cry and wish that I could adopt at least one or two. I think you are wrong to characterize the desire to alleviate some misery in their lives as pressure from Americans to adopt.

Dim Son actually got it right (perhaps for only the 2nd or 3rd time in his political career) when he said that Americans were a generous people. Darn, I hate when I have to agree with something that * said. Thankfully, it is an extremely rare occassion.

With so many still missing and unaccounted for, it is too soon to begin adoptions. Parents may still turn up.

The orphans and the parents whose children were killed may need each other badly.

what I want for these children now is food, clothing, shelter and comfort, and lots of therapy, the poor thangs. I am so hopeful about the outpouring of cash from around the world and the legions of volunteers heading over there. It's not often we get to see the world at its best.

those who want to adopt these children could give a donation to Save the Children http://www.savethechildren.org/radio_asia_earthquake.asp?StationPub=hp_radio_asia_earthq&ArticleID=&NewsID=
at this link or click on the one listed on DU with other relief organizations.

Like most everyone, I see those children and just want to open my arms to them. The reality is, even if adoption were available, we couldn't, in all practicality, go that route, but certainly, that is where my donations are going.

Those who truly do want to adopt have to face that the first order of business is to save these children, reunite those who they are able to, with their families and bring some semblance of order back to their world. Then will be the time to look at possible adoptions. However, the financial need is immediate.

Mary

and my company is matching; if STC sends me a receipt I can simply send it to my company headquarters and they will match it. SWEET! In the first four days my company, which made an initial donation of $150,000, got employee contributions of almost the same amount. I'm loving it, it is not often I am proud of my company. In the end we will probably be donating half a million.

It's too early to know who these children are, where they are going if they indeed have any surviving relatives ready and willing to care for them.

adoption special...

onenote

Brilliant!

:wtf:

These children who lost their parents need adoptive parents.

So many people are still unaccounted for.

really hard. you have to live in most countries two years. you can't adopt in some at all. They are clannish and want to keep the kids together. they also believe in the idea that the children are the village's children and all have a responsibility to take care of them.

They should wait to see if they can find their own families/relatives. Its much too early to even think about adopting these kids. I've already heard that some may have already been taken by people.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to help by adopting eventually, under the right circumstances.

But the last thing these kids need right now is to be whisked off to a foreign country by strangers!

Just my opinion.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

That's not a good reason to adopt- kids aren't like puppies, geez.
Following the advice of other DUers in this thread, I think it would be best to wait for the possibility of parents/relatives to show up- but in the meantime, perhaps a group could be formed to start paperwork and all that in case these children are truly orphans? That way, they could find a home as quick as possible.

Caution is good…not only from the child’s standpoint with regard to capable relatives but seriously, about those that wish to adopt….I don’t think I would be off-target in thinking that there are some inquiring that are a level or two below say a Neil Bush….

that is going on right now and not be thinking of the long-term commitment that you need to give to a baby.

They are better off not being americanized. I envy Asian cultures strong extended families. Maybe I'm wrong,But how about expatriates and Asian nationals who can give continuity,And maybe a choice of religious practice. The idea of evangelicals buying little souls for the slaughter just pisses me off.:mad:

What do you mean? A lot of these people will still trade their kids for the 15 gallons of insecticide that Borat was talking about. I have been to Laos, and the toys the kids have there are, quite frankly, crap. I think they would be better off in the States.

actual case of parent selling their 8 yr old as a sex slave to a neighboring trailer park resident for a carton of cigarettes.
And we have plenty of Priests just waiting to minister to sweet young children...until they're caught, of course.

er...what were you saying about being better off in the states?

btw: I'm making a point. If there are anecdotal examples of people in asia who trade their kids, and you're going to extrapolate that to the entire region, you're going to have to do that for the us for anecdotal evidence as well.

I suspect more so than the right-wing "family values" people, for that matter, despite the amount of lip service they give to it.

Bye Kephra.

Sonia

:kick:

:kick:

One of the first things people would be offering to do was adopting orphans. (That and sending clothes, rather than money.) But it looks like we've been able to learn from experience.

family one week after the attack, taken to another country with a completely different culture, and language, surrounded by strangers and taken from their community support structure...would that be in the best interest of the child? Wouldn't you, as americans, prefer the child be adopted within the US? wouldn't you prefer some time of healing occur first?

Imagine, a horrible tragedy, you lose your parent, and before you can deal with that, you're whisked off to another country where you suddenly have to learn a new language, and deal with a foreign culture, ON TOP of dealing with a tragic loss of your family...how stressful would that be?

Even if the japanese (or insert any foreign culture) family's heart is in the right place, and it would be, even if it was an act of supreme compassion, would it really be the best thing for the grieving child?

I've been trying to think over the last few days of a better way to communicate the point I was trying to make earlier, and I thought of this as a good way to do it.