US Government Screws Over Kairi Abha Shepherd UPDATED

Another international adoptee faces deportation. This time it is to India. Kairi Abha Shepherd was adopted to a US family in 1982.

You can see the latest court filing Shepherd v Holder  from May 8, 2012 here. Rebecca Wals explains what has led to the declaration that Kairi is an “alien” in this 2008 article in Salt Lake Tribune Rebecca Walsh: Meth, adoption, deportation

“Erlene Shepherd was one of those women who is going to save the world – one sponsored child in Guatemala, one stray cat at a time.

Before she died of breast cancer in 1991, Shepherd adopted eight children, paid 50 cents a day for another dozen around the globe and took in every lost pet she found. She kept important documents in two tote bags in her car. They were eventually stolen. And she died before she could file citizenship papers for her youngest – a little girl adopted at 3 months old from India.

None of those details should matter.

Except that 12 years later, Kairi Shepherd got caught forging checks to pay for her meth habit. Erlene Shepherd’s quirky record-keeping went on trial. And as a result, her daughter has been snared in the morass of sometimes conflicting American immigration laws – legally adopted, a permanent resident, but still facing deportation to a country she never knew.

“They tell you you slipped through the cracks and that’s your luck,” she says.

Kairi Shepherd’s troubles started with her mother’s death when she was 8 years old. She was passed between older siblings (her maternal grandmother suggested offering her up for adoption again). A co-worker introduced her to meth – for its bursts of energy and appetite-suppression – when she was 17. In 2003, she was charged with forgery. Immigration came calling. Then she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.

She has been in jail most of the past year, detained by Homeland Security, shuttled between four county jails from Ogden to St. George, sometimes allowed to take her MS medication, sometimes not.

All of which is to say: Enough already.

“Yes, she made mistakes. And she should be held accountable. But she has been,” says her older sister, Kristi Tafoya. “Why aren’t adopted children protected?”

 

US: Adopted Indian faces deportation [Hindustan Times 5/12/12 by Chetan Chauan] states that “Until 2000, parents were required to file an application before the adopted child turned 21 to claim citizenship. Erlene had filled Kairi’s application, but failed to file it before her death.”

“After 2001, legal international adoptions automatically conferred citizenships on children adopted by US citizens.

Kairi, however, missed the deadline by turning 21 a few months before the new law came into force.

Kairi was unaware of her legal predicament till she was caught and convicted of forging cheques to fuel her drug habit. Erlene’s patchy record-keeping enabled government agencies to seek her deportation for the offence, as per US immigration laws.”

“The Tribune quoted Kairi as saying that she would not be able to leave Delhi airport if deported because her adoption records were stolen from her mother’s car before her death.”

It is rumored, but we are not able to confirm at this time, that the agency that placed Kairi was the same agency that placed another deported adoptee, Jennifer Haynes and that Kairi was from IMH (International Mission of Hope) in India.

Indian adopted at 3 months faces deportation at 30  [India America Today 5/16/12 by Tejinder Singh] says “In a written statement to India America Today, Anjali Pawar, director of Sakhee (a Pune, India-based non-governmental organization working on child rights) said the Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) in India informed her in an email from J. Pati, Joint Director, “With reference to your mail dated 11.05.2012 about the case of Kairi Shephard adopted in 1982. CARA has not processed the case. However your letter has been forwarded to US Embassy for more information.”

Pawar noted she had yet to receive a response to her letter about the case of Kairi Shephard sent to S. M. Krishna, the Indian Foreign Minister, which stated, “To deport an adoptee, who is further also suffering from multiple sclerosis, is a gross violation of existing adoption norms and undoubtedly a huge human rights violation.”

When asked if the Indian Foreign Ministry or the Indian Embassy in Washington had contacted the US, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said, “I don’t have anything for you on that.”

The Indian Federal Ministry of Welfare in its guidelines for adoption posted on the Indian Embassy’s (Washington, DC) website (http://www.indianembassy.org/guidelines-for-adoption-of-indian-children.php) outline very specific procedures which must take place in order for an Indian child to be adopted abroad. Questions are being raised regarding whether the procedures are actually followed, as 30 year old Kairi Abha faces deportation to a country from which she was uprooted as a 3 month old baby.

Chapter 2 of the “Liaison with Indian Diplomatic Missions,” instructs:

“The Central Adoption Resource Agency shall maintain liaison with Indian diplomatic missions abroad in order to safeguard the interests of children of Indian origin adopted by foreign parents against neglect, maltreatment, exploitation or abuse and to maintain an unobtrusive watch over the welfare and progress of such children. For this purpose, the Central Adoption Resource Agency shall inform every Indian diplomatic missions concerned whenever an Indian child is taken in adoption or for the purpose of adoption, by foreign parents. The names, addresses and other particulars of such children and their adoptive/prospective adoptive parents shall be supplied to the Indian diplomatic missions as early as possible and in any case before the end of every quarter.”

The chapter states that “Periodical Progress reports of children from foreign adoptive parents as well as from recognized social or child welfare agencies in foreign countries” should be obtained, “to examine such reports and to take such follow-up action as deemed necessary.”

It is unknown whether Periodical Progress reports were obtained in Kairi Abha Shepherd’s case or if CARA followed up after the death of her adoptive mother.

Chapter 6, under “Rights of the Child Taken Abroad,” explicitly notes, “On adoption of the child by the foreign parent according to the law of his/her country, it is presumed that subject to the laws of the land the child would acquire the same status as a natural born child within wedlock with the same rights of inheritance and succession and the same nationality as the foreign parent adopting the child.”

Guidelines penned by a task force of members from voluntary placement agencies under the chairmanship of Justice P.N. Bhagwati (the former Chief Justice of India) declared: “Even after the adoption is legalized, the enlisted foreign agency should maintain contact with the adoptive family in keeping with the need of privacy of the adoptive family and provide support and counseling services, if necessary and safeguard the interest of the child till such time as he/she attains majority.”

It appears the repeatedly orphaned Shepherd was denied her specific “rights of the child taken abroad” from India and that there were widespread failures among the checks and balances designed to protect vulnerable minor children from India who have been adopted abroad.

“She doesn’t have any known family in India, has no contacts, has lost the ability to speak any Indian language and might just die due to her serious health ailment of multiple sclerosis, after being thrown on Indian roads,” declared Pawar, questioning, “Why after her adoption in the US, her citizenship status has not been adjusted?”

“As long children from India adopted by US parents are faced with the threat of deportation, adoptions from India to the US should be halted altogether,” demanded Pawar in her letter to Indian Foreign Minister Krishna.”

REFORM Puzzle Piece

 Deportation is an injustice in this case. Let this be a reminder to all adoptive parents to SAFELY keep adoption records for your child and ensure that they have proof of citizenship. It is an important responsiblity that you had better take seriously!

Update: An update has been published about Kairi’s situation. We will summarize what is in the public domain, but will not link to it as some deeply personal information was shared by several factions in the update and it is unclear whether Kairi authorized that. We call upon everyone with her personal information to clarify if she authorized that information being shared or to remove it from the public domain. Additionally, I am sick and tired of reformers trying to “own” a person in need and the accompanying self-righteous ranting when another tries to assist.

• India’s Minister of External Affairs met with Secretary of State Clinton to declare that deporting Kairi was a human rights violation.
• She was released on bond
• ICE offered deferred action, which includes “annual check-in, and the expectation of an indefinite hold on any deportation proceedings.” Also, ” It confers no legal status and no path to legal status. It just allows the person to remain in the U.S. and get a work permit so they can work legally. The deportation order still stands, it’s just not being enforced — unless the person messes up… Kairi could not sign the deal with ICE if she had any pending charges against her. And she did. During the last few months before her near-deportation, she had become a fugitive. She did not attend meetings with her parole officer. She received a hearing notice on some old charges that she thought had been dropped a long time ago — all in connection with the check fraud for which she served time. Because she was a fugitive, she did not appear in court. She had a number of warrants against her, and was moving from place to place to avoid the police. She believed — and her lawyers confirmed — that these warrants would not allow her to sign the Deferred Action papers. In fact, as soon as she was brought in by the police or turned herself in, she would likely be sent to jail again. Upon finishing her sentence, she would likely be picked up by ICE again. And the judge she would be facing in Salt Lake County was known as a hardliner against parole violators. She had the ability to look at the circumstances and decide not to send a violator to jail, but she had NEVER done so.”
• A new Public Defender got involved to attempt to get Kairi’s warrants lifted and charges resolved so that “she could sign the deal with ICE and… to link her restitution payments to whatever money she earned. In other words, she would owe part of every dollar she earned to the state, but would not owe money if she could not work.”
• September 2012, she went back to court where both prosecutor and public defender argued on her behalf.
• Kairi was sentenced to “hundreds of hours of community service and gave her a date in February of 2013 to come back to court. If she had no additional offenses, and had done all her service, her record would be cleared. Two weeks ago, Kairi appeared before the judge for the last time. Her criminal case was finally closed.
• The “next task” is to get  ICE to reinstate the “long-dormant Deferred Action offer, get her in to sign it, and apply for her work permit. There is no guarantee that the ICE offer is still good. “