Russia Will Not Be Completing Any More US Pipeline Adoptions UPDATED
Our comments hinted at this in last week’s FacePalm Friday as a PAP took to publicly blogging about the news that had not been publicly discussed yet. See the public blog here that mentions 99 of the referred children had been placed with local families.
Now, a publication cites Congressional sources who admit no more adoptions will be completed.
“Russia’s commissioner for human rights, democracy and rule of law, Konstantin Dolgov, met with U.S. officials April 17 and 18 to discuss international adoption policy according to Turkish Weekly.
U.S. congressional sources say Russia refuses to complete adoptions that were in progress before the ban on Jan. 1.
“I feel so sorry for the families and the children this (law) affects,” said Tim Rouse, projects manager for the administration division at Guilford College, who adopted newborn Cassidy Jane from Florida this year.
“I can tell you from experience that, when you lose a placement that you really believed was going to happen, it can be devastating,” said Rouse. “For some, it is just as painful as having a miscarriage. It is heartbreaking. A better solution has to be out there.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the ban in December in retaliation of the U.S. Magnitsky Act passed late last year, named after a Moscow lawyer who died in a Russian prison, according to National Journal. This law denies visas to Russians accused of human rights violations and freezes their assets in the U.S.
At least 700 American families have filed for adoption with the Russian government and are now waiting for the ban to end according to Jan Wondra, vice chair for Families for Russian and Ukrainian Adoption.
Of these families, an estimated 230 have already visited their prospective children and now worry whether they ever will again.
Time and money are another flaw in the long process of adoption.
“There’s a lot of money that changes hands in going to adopt,” said Christine Lawe who adopted her daughter Anya from China in an interview with the Guilfordian.
“Is it going directly to support that orphanage? Are people’s palms being greased?” said Lawe. “You do not know where your money is going to so there is something uncomfortable about that.”
Over 600,000 Russian children currently live outside the custody of their biological parents according to The New York Times [which has the wrong stats]. Although most live in foster homes, more than 130,000 live in Russia’s orphanage center, including many with mental and physical health problems.
“If you are going to adopt, you should adopt from wherever it’s needed most,” said Early College student Thomas Lawe, Anya’s brother. “(Adopt from a country) where orphanages are not a good place to be.”
After the ban, filmmaker Olga Loginova for Radio Free Europe visited her biological daughter’s adopted mother, Tina Traster, to make a documentary proving that successful Russian adoptions do exist, according to The Daily Beast.
“No one denies that 20 deaths of Russian-adopted children is a disturbing statistic,” wrote Traster in her Women in the World article for the Daily Beast. “Something is not right … I know this because I adopted a child from Russia and because I speak to other adoptive parents of Russian children all the time.”
Less than two months after this law took effect, three-year-old Mad [sic ] Shatto, adopted from Russia, was found dead outside his Texas home.
Supporters of the ban claim Shatto was murdered by his adoptive mother, though Texas investigators determined his death was a self-inflicted accident, according to the New York Times.
Regardless, in the eyes of Russian President Putin, this is yet another case of an adopted Russian child dying on U.S. soil.
In the eyes of Russian foster children, however, it is slamming the door shut on the home and family they almost had.
“To me, adopted children are more than loved, they are chosen,” said Rouse. “The only other person that we get to choose to be a part of our family is our spouse. And to me, that makes the relationship all the more special.””
Prospective parents heartbroken: Russia refuses to complete adoptions
[The Guilfordian 4/26/13 by Jamie Luckhaus]
REFORM Puzzle Piece
Guess the happy videos didn’t work, eh?
Update:“In late 2012, the Russian parliament approved legislation dubbed the Dima Yakovlev law, which stipulated a ban on the adoption of Russian children by US nationals. The law is named after a Russian toddler who died of a heatstroke in 2008 after his adoptive US father left him locked up in an overheated car for hours.
“The US side insists on discussing the consequences of lifting the ban on the adoption of Russian children by Americans. We agree to discuss the issue, but today, we have no basis to resume US adoptions, especially given that they have not made the system more transparent,” Astakhov said in an interview with RIA Novosti.
The Russian side is prepared to travel to the United States to hold talks on the issue, he added, noting that matters to be discussed include tracking the fate of children adopted prior to the Dima Yakovlev law, as well as cooperating the in the areas of sport, culture, education and healthcare.
In 2015, Astakhov said that US nationals have found ways to bypass the ban, mainly through mixed marriages. The Russian Foreign Ministry later asked the United States to explain the adoption of 11 children since the ban had come into force,
a request refused by the US side.”
Russia Sees No Grounds to Remove US Adoption Ban – Ombudsman
[Sputnik news 5/30/16]
Many a Reece’s Rainbow PAP who’d hoped to adopt a Russian child (like the “Meg” blog you’ve linked to) has charmingly (and presumably illegally) posted moving tributes to their Russian now- ex-referral (PAPs who’d met their referral, but didn’t pass court before the ban) and never-referral (PAPs whose dossiers weren’t registered or were registered but hadn’t yet formally received and accepted the referral) on their public blogs:
http://operationorphannomore.blogspot.com/2013/04/for-goodadoption-day.html?m=1
http://catholic-kara.blogspot.com/2013/03/my-heart-hurts.html?m=1
http://www.arteminthehouse.blogspot.com/2013/02/missing-him-loving-him.html?m=0
This is especially interesting, as some have alleged that RR’s unethical behavior — specifically, illegally photolisting Russian kids & encouraging PAPs to preselect a child — is a small part of why Russia imposed the ban. A few months back, the Russia Program Director of Hand in Hand Adoptions sent this email to her clients advising them NOT to mention RR for for fear of jeopardizing their adoptions:
http://theadoptionspotlight.wordpress.com/2012/06/09/reeces-rainbow-the-trouble-in-saint-petersburg-email-from-hand-in-hand/
Since the happy videos and “only” 19-20 Russian-born kids were killed approach to getting the ban lifted has failed, perhaps our government might want to consider a new approach?
PAP Whitney just posted a further “explanation” of why training and stipends for Russian foster parents AND Russia’s efforts to increase domestic adoptions are BAD. Giving money to folks to help offset the costs associated with fostering/raising a SN kid in Russia, if you’re Russian, is supposedly some evil, horrible thing:
http://amiracleformeg.blogspot.com/2013/05/taking-care-of-business.html?m=1
From everything I’ve read, russia has made both genuine efforts and measurable progress in improving its (far from perfect) child welfare system in the last 6-7 yrs. Which is laudable!!!
Whitney’s somehow managed to convince herself that begging for cash from strangers to find an adoption that she cannot afford (and is unwilling to save up for OR earn money for) is reasonable and non-evil.
This PAP (in an earlier post) noted that 99 of the Russian kids who’d met their potential US PAPs have since been adopted *domestically* — which (as rally pointed out) suggests that Russian families *are* willing to adopt domestically AND to adopt kids with special needs. Were Russian kids being “set aside” for profit?? Is it possible Russian officials discouraged or prevented domestic adoptions in the hope of “profiting” from the fees associated with an international adoption?!??
I answer Yes to both of your last questions in the regions in which international adoptions abound.
I see that Whitney has upped the number of Russian kids who’ve met their PAPs from 99 to 300+.
Carlee,
I note that while two PAPs blame the U.S. Government for refusing to advocate for them any longer with the Russian government, NONE mention the tragic death of Max Shatto as having any bearing on Russia’s decision not to permit “in pipeline” adoptions to proceed. The Magnitsky Act, yes; Max Shatto, no.
Perhaps adoption apologists should consider whether allowing the Shattos to escape criminal charges– or even ANY objective investigation– was a mistake. The message it sent was that American PAPs would suffer no consequences if Russian adoptees died in their care.
It would have been better to investigate and prosecute the case the way they would have if Max had been the Shatto’s biological child. Or at least, it couldn’t have been any worse than clearing the APs based on their own statements in the ludicrous autopsy report.
Astrin – It’s actually worse than that, there are PAPs (like “Meg” blogger) who upon reading the news of little Max Shatto’s death — these would be the same articles that you and I read, from CNN, NYT and other reputable, mainstream outlets — but come to strikingly different conclusions:
“Last week, I was feeling hopeful as the news articles coming out of Russia talked of an American delegation being allowed to come talk in Russia. This week, however, relations have taken a turn for the worse as another child adopted from Russia has died. This darling boy came home to Texas in November and died in January. The claim from Russia was that he had been given adult psychotropic drugs and was beaten to death. I don’t believe this is true. He had Risperdal in his system, which can be used on kids for anything from ADHD to Fetal Alchohol Syndrome. She hasn’t had any charges pressed against her in Texas, and she still has custody of the younger brother, so who even knows what really happened. No matter what happened, this is a terrible tragedy. Poor boy. Poor family”.
Because clearly it is the TODDLER that was responsible for his OWN death? That Mrs. Shatto isn’t responsible bc she left 2 toddlers (one known to self-harm) outside unsupervised? That maybe the fact that Max’s biobrother being left with the Shattos (despite CPS having an open investigation of neglect against the Shattos) indicates that CPS in Texas is clearly incompetent vs Shattos did nothing wrong??
http://amiracleformeg.blogspot.com/2013/02/keep-on-keepin-on.html?m=0
Carlee,
Many members of the Religious Right refuse to read anything in the Mainstream Media, claiming that they’re “liberal-biased”.
“Liberal-biased” seems to be code for “contains facts that contradict what I want to believe”.
The Ector County Sheriff’s Dept seemed to conduct their investigation with great care to avoid the possibility of encountering information which might be “liberal-biased”– to the extent of not even finding out the name of the piece of playground equipment which they thought might have caused Max’s death.
Or, for that matter, asking Laura Shatto why she didn’t call 911 IMMEDIATELY upon finding him unresponsive, rather than grabbing him “…by the neck with both hands and shook hard until blood bubbles began coming out of his mouth…” You’d think ANY cop investigating a child death would consider a statement like THAT from the caregiver who was last alone with the deceased a red flag.
http://www.oaoa.com/news/crime_justice/law_enforcement/article_53ef4076-9663-11e2-9e1b-0019bb30f31a.html
I came across a “free the Russian 500” petition — US PAPs want to pressure Russia to allow the 500 “in process” pipeline cases to be completed:
http://www.change.org/freethe500
I’m not sure where they got the number 500 from — the article above cites 700 pipeline cases, of which only 260 PAPs had travelled to Russia to meet and formally accept their referral.
260 is the more accurate number. 500 probably gave agencies money and have been scammed/not getting refund, yet they blame Russia and not the agency. The inflated numbers are always what JCICS and the other lobbyists use to try to garner support. There never were 900 families who were matched with Guatemalan children either.
I’m really surprised that in this blog there is no mention of the fact that Russia is planning to stop all foreign adoptions by same-sex couples..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22310890
Oh Vladimir,
We have many posts on Russia and do not place all updates in all posts. We do mention this in 2 posts with respect to US. See general law post at https://reformtalk.net/2013/01/01/dima-yakovlev-law-and-proposed-amendment/ and the US-Specific case from California at https://reformtalk.net/2013/01/22/russian-adoptee-custody-case/
I am still updating posts from late last week which will include issues with Ireland and France that will go in the law post.
Russia’s (legitimately) upset about a new case — a Russian couple’s biological baby (who was born with a serious heart condition, who sees a cardiologist a few times a month) was removed by CPS when they took the baby to a different cardiologist (at another hospital) to get a second opinion (!):
http://www.news10.net/news/article/243243/2/Parents-global-audience-await-decision-in-Sacramento-custody-case
Why was this kid removed?Is this bias against birthparents?? Why would the Shattos get to keep their kid despite admitting to have neglected him (i.e. leaving the boys unsupervised outside, which counts as neglect in TX, not calling 911 right away,etc), whereas this couple loses custody for seeking a second opinion???
I think there is bias. We are going to cover this case and another interesting Russian case today. Stay tuned!
Carlee,
You beat me to it! I was going to mention this as another example of CPS taking a child into state custody for dubious reasons– like letting a child get too fat or NOT putting them on Ritalin. Children are only supposed to be removed from the home if they’re actually being abused or in serious danger of death– not because some social worker doesn’t agree with a parenting decision. Or it’s an issue that can be better dealt with by parent education, like obesity.
Mind you, I think the malefactor here is the snubbed doctor. After all, how can a social worker judge for him or herself whether a baby with a heart condition is imminent danger or not? They go by what a doctor– who is a mandated reporter in the state of California– says. It’s up to the doctor not to abuse this power out of personal pique.
I’d noticed the Russian last name, but assumed it was a family surname generations removed from the “home country”. Are they Russian citizens, or naturalized Americans? The fact that the Russian Consulate is taking an interest suggests that they aren’t native-born, and Anna Nikolayev seemed to speak with an accent.
The parents are Russian citizens (and the baby is presumably a dual Russian-US citizen):
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/us-returns-baby-to-russian-parents/479477.html
The good news is they got their baby back… FIVE days later. It’s appalling that it took so long.
CPS removing this particular kid is straight-up bias against the parents.
Carlee,
It’s also appalling that the court seemed to take away the parents’ right to seek a second opinion by instructing the parents “… to follow all future medical advice…”
Whoa! How did these “circumvented” adoptions actually happen? I don’t get it.
I have no idea.
Russian parents marry Americans, move to the US, and the child is adopted by his/her American step-parent. These are not adoptions of children in Russian state care. Russia is playing word games to make it sound that way.
If they were new adoptions, Astakhov should be asking his court system how they happened.
Otherwise the USCIS documents Entries into USA, and these likely were children Adopted prior to the ban, who just entered USA.