FacePalm Friday
Welcome to this week’s edition of FacePalm Friday.
This is where your hosts will list their top picks for this week’s FacePalm moment—something they learned or read about this week that caused the FacePalm to happen (you know, the expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief, shock, disgust or mixed humor as depicted in our Rally FacePalm smiley).
We invite you to add your FacePalm of the week to our comments. Go ahead and add a link, tell a personal story, or share something that triggered the FacePalm on the subject of child welfare or adoption.
Your Host’s Selections:
(1) UK Child Protection Incompetence
“The case in Leeds saw sensitive personal details about a child in care sent to the wrong person, disclosing details of a criminal offence, school attendance, the level of contact agreed with siblings and information about the child’s relationship with their mother.
The document was delivered to the wrong place because the council were re-using envelopes internally after they had been used for external mail, and the original address had not been crossed out.
Leeds City Council chief executive Tom Riordan said: ‘We take our data protection responsibilities seriously and regard any breach as unacceptable.
‘We accept the findings of the Information Commissioner and although we have already apologised to the individual affected we would like to take this opportunity to do so again.’
The breach at Plymouth City Council saw the wrong person receive information including highly sensitive personal details about two parents and four children.
The breach occurred when two reports about separate child neglect cases were sent to the same shared printer.
In Devon, a social worker used a previous case as a template for an adoption panel report they were writing, but a copy of the old report was sent out instead of the new one.
The mistake disclosed personal data of 22 people, including details of alleged criminal offences and mental and physical health.
[Daily Mail 12/17/12 by Sam Webb]
This social worker will have to put away their aspirations for 
(2) Cultivate Wines and Ruby Tuesday fall into the Reece’s Rainbow trance and fork over money to the organization
Wine maker donates $10,000 to Reece’s Rainbow [Gazette.net 12/18/12 by WIll C. Franklin]
(3)Texas domestic adoption agency expands
FacePalm to the agency name: Special Delivery Infant Adoption Agency
“An area adoption agency is expanding to meet the increased demand” Demands that adoptive parents have, right?
My favorite line “If you interested on being a birth mother…” because every woman aspires to be this, right? 
Area adoption agency expands to meet demand
[News Channel 10 12/20/12 by Ashley Paredez]
(4) Samoan Love T-Shirt for Fundraiser, advertised by for-profit MLJ
http://www.printfection.com/MLJadoptions/Love-in-Samoan-American-Apparel-T-Shirt/_p_6087211
(5)JCICS Whiny Statement about Russia Ban
http://gallery.eaci.com/images/cc/JCICS%20Statement%2012-19-12.pdf
FacePalm of the Month
(6)General whining on the unfairness of the Russia Ban
When did it become a Russian child’s right to have an American home? This vote is not a shock if they had been reading what Russia has very clearly stated since summer 2011. Why don’t people set aside their selfish desires and rally behind de-institutionalization? 
Yet another irresponsible RR PAP — she’s in Ukraine simultaneously adopting 2 unrelated girls with SN and doesn’t have the $$ to complete the adoption. The Middletons can’t borrow money, have no emergency fund and can’t borrow agaibst their house (bc they’ve already spent the equity… on the kid they adopted in 2010). No possessions to sell to raise the $$ either.
http://journeytoreunitetwoangels.blogspot.ca/2012/12/quick-update.html?m=0
This is just so incredibly irresponsible. There are SO many families who are this irresponsible. But (sadly) you cannot save people from themselves.
RR PAPs who merrily continue to post pictures (lots!!) and medical info on Russian kids on their blogs because they really truly believe the two options available to Russian kids are 1) saved by being adopted by Americans or 2) rot in the orphanage.
Adeye Salem writes that “Please, don’t anyone bother leaving a comment telling me that the ban on Russian adoptions is a GOOD thing! You have no idea the consequences this will have on children who languish in cribs and those who have severe medical needs! Seriously, don’t waste your time here–rather go overseas and SEE for yourself what unimaginable suffering and desperation looks like to an innocent child–and then come back with an educated opinion. We’re talking about the LIVES OF CHILDREN!”
http://www.nogreaterjoymom.com/2012/12/would-you-pray-please.html?m=0
Julia Nalle writes that “I’ve been watching and praying for weeks now. I’ve been reading and following and wondering. And I’ve been in total denial because the enormity of what may take place if Rus*ian adoptions stop is so horrible that I just can’t even go there with my mind…
… I am not going to try to explain what is happening on this blog because frankly it is truly beyond me. In a nutshell… our government made their government mad and the means by why which they are getting back is to end all Rus*ian adoptions by Americans. There are a huge amount of Reece’s Rainbow families who are in process. Some have just started and some are just waiting to finish and bring their babies home…
… institutions are like in Ru*sia. CLEARLY what happens to the special needs orphans who are NOT ADOPTED. ”
http://covenantbuilders.blogspot.ca/2012/12/a-nightmare-i-dont-understand.html?m=0
Neither Julia nor Adeye mentions that many of the photolisted kids aren’t legally available for adoption (because if that’s the case they’re 100% okay with praying the bioparents can be found so they can relinquish their rights for RR families to adopt kids who aren’t in need if a family. All in the name of Jesus).
Whether the ban goes through or not is out of anyone’s control. So why not focus on finding other ways to help these children? It bothers me that adoption, international no less, is seen as the only solution to institutionalization. It’s a tiny band-aid to a much bigger problem.
I would think people would want to attack the root of the problem. But then…a source of children to adopt would be lost.
I have extremely mixed feelings about the ban. It could be the catalyst for serious measures within Russia to deinsitutionalize, institute a foster care system, encourage domestic adoption, and address the social factors that contribute to relinquishment…but without said measures, things could get very bad very fast (especially since the most vulnerable children in the orphanage system are also those more likely to be adopted by Americans than Russians – that is, children with special needs). At the same time, given the tragic fates of so many adoptees in this country, it’s completely understandable that Russia has lost faith in American parents. I think any discussion about the ban needs to take into account the many, many complexities inherent in the issue — ethics (or lack thereof) in the adoption industry, institutionalization, extreme poverty, attitudes towards the disabled, the fraught relationship between the United States and Russia, etc.
So I find it absolutely INFURIATING that so many APs (who should know better!) are painting the ban exclusively in shades of black and white. Case in point: the blogmom at A Place Called Simplicity, who informs us oh-so-humbly that “the Lord had given me a prophetic picture of what was happening in the western world regarding the orphan and adoption.” Spoiler alert: taking prayer out of school means that God is mad at America and the only way to redeem ourselves is to become child collectors. Or something.
http://aplacecalledsimplicity.blogspot.com/2012/12/from-my-heart.html
Oy vey…
It’s heartbreaking… and the phrase that keeps popping into my head is that you can’t save these well-intentioned folks from themselves. Doubly so for the ones that genuinely believe they’ve received some sort of divine orphan-related prophesy that automatically overrules common sense.
I do think Russia might actually be taking positive steps to improve their care for their children – Rally wrote a great post about it earlier today, noting that Russia’s appointed a Children’s Ombudsman a year or two back, significantly decreased the number of kids in orphanages since 2006. It does seem there’s room for hope. (Or possibly I’m now in “have straw, will clutch” territory).
“Or possibly I’m now in “have straw, will clutch” territory”
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. I posted this before reading Rally’s piece, and my already-confused feelings are now EVEN MORE CONFUSED. So much processing needs to happen now. So much.
I do sometimes wonder, with the hardcore adoption-as-evangelism folks, whether on some deep level they don’t want the orphan crisis to end. After all, if they believe that adoption is the most radical demonstration of their faith, that it will prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are pure and selfless Christians, that it is NECESSARY to adopt in order to assure their own salvation…then surely they need the orphans much more than the orphans need them?
Leah, the adoption industry seems to think that it is “good” when adoptions in a country go up, but really I think that is failure. If a child welfare system is being reformed, then biological families should be staying together and the majority of the rest of hte children should be in foster care or domestic families and international adoption should decline. But I guess my metric is considered crazy by the adoption evangelism movement.