Congressional Coalition on Adoptions is now drafting a letter to send to Republic of Congo to “help parents”UPDATED
“An Austin couple is fighting to bring home their son from over-seas after the Republic of Congo suspended its foreign adoptions program this past summer. It’s an issue impacting hundreds of families waiting to bring their legally adopted children home.
Sherri Smetana is one of those parents. The Austin mother decorated her son Henry’s baby room several months ago expecting him to be home in January.
Last week they celebrated Henry’s first birthday without him. “So, not only am I missing milestones from him, he’s missing milestones with us,” Smetana contends.
According to congressional staff familiar with the problem, the Republic of Congo suspended adoptions due to rumors of corruption and child trafficking.
While the Smetana’s have all the paperwork documenting Henry is legally their son, they are far from alone. A staff member with Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana estimates at least 400 other families are waiting, but that number may be low. Before the suspension, the U.S. State Department wasn’t actively tracking how many families were in the process of adopting children from the country.
An online petition asking Congress and the U.S. State Department to intervene reached more than 103,000 signatures on Monday.
“The Department of State has not served us well. The U.S. Embassy has not served us well,” said Smetana.
About two weeks ago the U.S. State Department sent a delegation to Congo to convince officials to lift the adoption suspension. It didn’t work.
A staff member with Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana says the Congressional Coalition on Adoptions is now drafting a letter to send to Republic of Congo to help parents.
Landrieu’s staff says it could be at least August until Congo officials to make a decision.
Smetana says that’s too long for a toddler to be away from his mother, “Please let my son come home, just sign the exit letter and to the U.S. government, please help us,” she explained after asking what she could directly say to Republic of Congo officials.”
[KHOU 4/7/14 by Andy Pierrotti]
REFORM Puzzle Piece
Update:”For about a year and a half, Jason and Jennefer Boyer have been living in a paperwork-filled limbo.
It all began when the Boyers — who lived in Redmond for five years but recently moved to unincorporated King County between Redmond and Sammamish — decided to adopt children from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
After filling out the different forms, sitting through a home study and going through everything else that was required of them to be approved, they were matched with two brothers — a 1-year-old named Luke and a 3-and-a-half-year-old named Andre — in September 2012. That fall, Jason and Jennefer went through more red tape to be approved by the Congolese court system. Once that was completed and it was established that Luke and Andre were indeed orphans, the Boyers officially adopted the two boys.
DELAY AFTER DELAY
Jennefer said they expected to be able to bring Luke and Andre home by January 2013, but the U.S. Embassy made some changes to how it processed the paperwork and decided it wanted to do a more thorough investigation of potential parents, delaying things by more than a year.
During this time, Jennefer said she and her husband visited DRC twice, in late March and early April 2013 and July 2013. The first trip was to meet Luke and Andre and the second was to bring them home.
But it didn’t work out that way.
“We didn’t get to take them home,” Jennefer said. “It was a great trip. It was hard to leave, for sure…but we don’t regret going to see them.”
She said their case has been thoroughly investigated by both countries’ governments and the two children have passports with visas in them. All that is needed to bring the boys home is an exit letter. But on Sept. 25, 2013, the Congolese government suspended all exit letters and Luke and Andre — who are now 2 and a half and 5 years old, respectively — are still in DRC.
“We fully support the rigorous background checks, applications, home studies and investigations of both the boys and ourselves to ensure that these children are going to homes that will provide what they need in the best way possible,” Jason said. “Having finally worked our way through this arduous and expensive process, it is heartbreaking to be denied with the finish line seemingly in sight.”
In addition to Luke and Andre, the Boyers have two birth daughters who are 4 and 5 and a half. Jennefer said their girls are excited about having brothers and talk about them “as if they are already here.”
“They always pray for their safety…and it breaks my heart,” Jennefer said about her daughters. “There’s just a hole in my family right now.”
CAMPAIGNING FOR A RESOLUTION
The Boyers are among hundreds of families throughout the United States who have been stuck somewhere in their adoption process with DRC.
Adoption attorney Kelly Dempsey said there are anywhere between 500-600 families stuck at various stages in the process and about a third are like the Boyers, who have already legally adopted their children. Dempsey connected with this case as general counsel for Both Ends Burning, a nonprofit advocacy organization dedicated to ensuring every child’s right to a family. She said once Both Ends Burning became involved in the issue, they invited the waiting families to join them in an advocacy campaign to resolve the pending adoptions. The first part of the campaign was an online petition on Petition2 Congress.com that would send letters and emails to members of Congress. The petition was posted at the beginning of April and as of Thursday, 113,686 letters and emails have been sent.
GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT
In addition, Dempsey said they encouraged the families to contact their respective members of Congress about the issue. This has prompted Congress to send a letter to Joseph Kabila Kabange and Augustin Matata Ponyo, the president and prime minister of DRC, respectively. A total of 169 members signed the letter, including Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray from Washington and Rep. Suzan DelBene, who represents the 1st Congressional District, which includes Redmond.
The letter asks Kabange and Ponyo for their help in resolving the issue and offers support to the DRC government “in its efforts to ensure that adopted Congolese children are safe and well-cared for and that future intercountry adoptions between our countries continue to be conducted in an ethical, transparent manner.” The letter also asks Kabange and Ponyo to consider allowing the American families “who have legally completed the adoption process to move forward” and specifically requests they expedite processing for pending adoptions of children whose health is at risk; begin issuing exit letters again and provide families who have finalized adoptions on or after Sept. 25, 2013 “with a means for obtaining” exit letters.
In addition, Secretary of State John Kerry visited DRC recently and spoke on the topic. The pending adoptions was not originally on his agenda, but it was added once he became aware of the issue.
“I urged President Kabila to move as rapidly as possible in the review of the situation that raised some concerns, and also to lift the new freeze on international adoption from the DRC,” Kerry said in a statement. “We want to enable Congolese children, who seek to, to be able to be matched with parents abroad who are eager to provide them with a secure and happy future…I have seen this firsthand. My sister has adopted a young child from China. I know how positive and important this can be for everybody concerned, and I think it’s an issue that’s important to all of us as a matter of basic human decency.””
Boyers stuck in adoption process with the Democratic Republic of the Congo[Redmond Reporter 5/9/14 by Samantha Pak]
“Congress and Secretary of State John Kerry are trying to loosen a deadlock surrounding almost 500 stalled adoptions cases in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Kerry’s visit to Africa last week included a private conversation with Congolese President Joseph Kabila. In a press conference afterwards, Kerry said he urged Kabila to lift the freeze on exit permits for children in the adoption process.
DRC immigration authorities stopped issuing exit letters to adopted children in September 2013. Adopted children cannot leave the country without an exit letter, even if the adoption has been legally finalized and the U.S. Embassy in Congo has granted the child a visa. There are now 460 children whose adoption cases have been stalled. ”
“In April, almost 170 members of Congress signed a letter to Kabila and Prime Minister Augustin Matata Ponyo, pressing them to issue exit permits for the children. The letter requested the DRC expedite the processing of adoptions in cases where children have health risks, issue exit permits for completed adoptions, and provide families still in the process a means to obtain exit permits so they can finalize their adoptions and bring their children home.
“The DRC government’s suspension of pending adoption cases, many of which have already been legally finalized, creates deep distress not only for the families waiting to receive the children, but especially for the waiting children themselves,” said Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann, co-chair of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption.
The letter noted that about 50 of the 460 pending adoptions are “fully finalized—approved by the Congolese courts, the Ministry of Gender and Family, and the United States Embassy in Kinshasa.” Many of these families are living in the DRC with their adopted children while others are paying for foster parents to keep the children until they can get them to the United States.
DRC officials said they suspended exit permits due to concerns about the well-being of Congolese children adopted internationally. A delegation from Congo’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was scheduled to meet families with adopted Congolese children in the United States earlier this spring, but the delegation cancelled the trip. The State Department is now asking families with adopted Congolese children to send photos and videos of their children that it can present to Congolese officials.”
U.S. officials press Congo to give adopted children exit papers[World Mag 5/10/14 by Kiley Crossland]
It’s amazing how even Mary Landreau does not seem to acknowledge that DRC is a SOVEREIGN STATE.
The US government CANNOT make the Congolese government do anything — including lift the DGM exit permit suspension.
It is OUT OF THE US GOVERNMENT’s CONTROL.
They’re also kind of dancing around the point that the US isn’t isn’t the issue here — the US issued visas to quite possibly trafficked Congolese kids.
The DRC government isn’t required nor can it be compelled to issue exit permits to its own damn citizens!!!
I had to LOL, because it’s the Democratic Republic of Congo – the Republic of Congo is a whole other place. They need a new fact checker, or maybe the PAPs are so clueless they aren’t aware of the difference.
I think they expect the US government to threaten “economic sanctions” if the DRC doesn’t allow possibly-kidnapped kids to leave the country with American APs. After all, America has such a GOOD record of returning foreign nationals to their real parents when proof of trafficking is found. /sarc.
The Smetana’s child was under a year old when they adopted him– and if he has special needs, you’d think that heart-wrenching fact would have been given in the article. The chances that parental rights had had actually been severed when the Smetanas “legally adopted” him are very slim.
The chances that he was ETHICALLY available for international adoption are even slimmer. Regardless of race or culture, few parents willingly surrender healthy newborns for adoption. According to Kathryn Joyce, the best that Crisis Pregnancy Centers can do by applying maximum emotional blackmail and religious guilt-tripping is 1% of their clients agreeing to sign the paperwork.
And if “Henry” wasn’t ever truly available in the first place– then the adoption wasn’t legal, and the Smetanas aren’t his parents. Period.
Holy cow – that first paragraph, are you secretly my husband? We adopted from Congo, 4 yrs ago and he always says that if these PAPs want to get Kabila’s attention they should threaten to cut aid – of course he’s also being sarcastic, as that would make the US out to be the worst if we did that.
We’re going to that state dept thing next week in DC. I’m happy to report back how awful it will be, since we are anti-CHIFF and we don’t really care of the shutdown continues…we’re also good at making friends, apparently. 🙂
LOL! No, I’m not your husband– I’m female and single. ;-D
Do you think you can get your pro-CHIFF friends to think about how they’d feel in they put their kid in day care and when they came to pick him up… he was gone? And all the staff claimed to have no memory of his ever being there?
Poor people in developing nations use orphanages the way poor Americans did in the 19th and early 20th century– as temporary child care until their situation improved enough that they could care for their own kids again. The majority of children in “orphanages” are no more orphans than they are child stars.
That’s the reality of child trafficking. If it happened to an American, we wouldn’t hesitate to call it by its real name– kidnapping. And it’s what the DRC government is trying to stop.
They aren’t my friends! I think if they knew how anti-CHIFF I am, they’d lynch me.
I’m looking forward to seeing how the debates in the fb group about how to properly dress ones children to impress the Congolese works out when said children are freaking out from sitting and waiting for 3 hours to meet the delegation. Should be a proper freak show.
You need, need, NEED to provide us with a post-meeting with the delegation update!
Oh, to be a fly on the wall with those over-entitled PAPs!!!
I second Carlee! Please report back with the results of this insanity.
BTW, I was just thinking about the discrepancy between Unicef’s report that most of true orphans available for adoption are over 5 and have special needs and all the fundraising blogs for healthy infants and toddlers. I wonder about the unconscious racism implicit in such PAPs willingness to believe that healthy black babies– whether from DRC, Ethiopia, Haiti, or the United States– are children that “no one wants”. (Including, apparently their own biological families.)
Yes, that last country listed is correct: American PAPs are fundraising for domestic adoption of healthy newborns, apparently under the misapprehension that infertile secular parents aren’t on years-long waiting lists for a reasonably-healthy newborn of ANY race.
http://danielandmae.blogspot.com/2013/06/adoption-update-6413.html
http://heartstringsattached.blogspot.com/2013/09/whats-next.html?showComment=1378672156803#c3829624308995852490
http://www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/adoption-fundraisers-church-tax-deductions-the-adoption-tax-credit-and-fraud/
Carlee, I couldn’t reply to you directly – yes, I will report back. Don’t worry.
And yes, the fundraising is out of hand.
They cancelled the meeting!!
http://adoption.state.gov/country_information/country_specific_alerts_notices.php?alert_notice_type=notices&alert_notice_file=democratic_republic_of_congo_11
They did indeed — and the cancellation notice is a humdinger! I think my fave part is (maybe second-fave, next to the line about the Belgian woman trying to sneak a kid across the border):
“The issue of intercountry adoptions is a very sensitive subject for the Congolese people and government. The government has asked all affected countries to give them the time necessary to review its adoption policies and processes following the growing Congolese concerns of fraud, corruption, and child-buying in the adoption process. Given these sensitivities and concerns, Congolese government officials have not responded favorably to perceived foreign coercive pressure. ”
That’s a polite way of the Congolese govt saying “back the hell off” and the State Dept saying “we’ve done everything within our mandate to deal with this issue, the ball is in THEIR COURT so back the hell off nutters!!”
We decided not to go because of the Congolese not attending, but I’m sure some of the PAPs and APs in attendence will be more than happy to flip out on the Dept of State employees they’ll be meeting with instead.
Little “Jill” was adopted all of 9 months ago + is being re-homed via Facebook – just like in Reuters Child Exchange!!
https://m.facebook.com/secondchanceadoptions/photos/a.115016055319593.21347.115013581986507/337319746422555/?type=1
To give the APs their due, they ARE demanding a homestudy and legalities. That’s something.
Though I wonder about their claim that “…This is a private adoption, so a state or foster home study usually would not work. A state approved private or international home study will be needed…” This sounds like an attempt to keep the disruption “off the books” with the Eebul Gubbamint, so that they can file another I-800A to adopt again– and hopefully get a compliant “girlie girl” rather than a feisty tomboy.
Their stated reason for disrupting is that this was an unintended out-of-birth-order adoption, due to inaccurate paperwork. Since the claimed age discrepancy between “Jill’s” actual age and paper age is only about 12-18 months, they had to have planned the adoption knowing that their youngest existing child very close to Jill’s supposed age. Plus, they had to have met her before the adoption was finalized, so they should have realized THEN that she was older than claimed.
This makes me think that temperament plays a larger part in the decision to disrupt her than age. Aggression between siblings of approximately the same size and strength isn’t as dangerous as when there’s a significant power gap. My older brother and I are only 18 months apart, and I managed to hold MY own.
Oh, the perils of falling in love with a photograph!
They’re still advertising a kid as “free to any home” online. Visible to anybody with a Facebook account.
Visible to anyone who doesn’t criticize APs for dragging kids away from their culture and language, only to decide to get rid of them if they don’t meet expectations, that is. 🙁
What worries me is the insistence that a state/foster care home study isn’t acceptable. Heaven knows, we see plenty of kids abused in foster care, but my understanding is that some PAPs adopt internationally because they CAN’T PASS a home study to adopt domestically. I find that really, really scary.
Domestic, foster/state, and international home study are three separate things. They all have different requirements and almost never will suffice for the other one. The only cases I’ve ever seen of one being accepted in place of another is an international being accepted for a domestic child born with very severe special needs, but international home studies are usually more involved than domestic and state/foster. Those who pass international but not domestic or state/foster usually have more than a certain number of kids in a state that limits the number of kids in domestic, but not international, adoptions.
A family that adopted 2 Congolese siblings a mere 10 mos ago is DISRUPTING / REHOMING BOTH KIDS!!
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=708249335878849&id=188110224559432
Latest news: this boy is probably the brother of the girl we posted the ‘ad’ before here on this page. So all info about them is ‘constructed’, to say the least.
“Hi everyone, My name is “Evan”, well it isn’t really, but that is what I am supposed to be called here on the internet. I am maybe 7 or 8, no one knows for sure, but the adoption agency thought I was only 3 or 4, so they found a family for me that was all ready for a 3 or 4 year old. The family had been really concerned that all us kids were in birth order (whatever that means), but someone somehow really messed things up by saying I was 3 or 4, when I obviously am not! Look at my big teeth coming in. Actually I am really glad these teeth are in because for a long time, I had nothing there! Just this big ole gap. I can also do things like bounce a soccer ball on my foot over and over, which is not like a 3 or 4 yr old boy could do. (By the way, I love playing with a soccer ball and I have been told I have real talent!)”
Second Chance Adoptions
Tue · Edited ·
Hi everyone, My name is “Evan”, well it isn’t really, but that is what I am supposed to be called here on the internet. I am maybe 7 or 8, no one knows for sure, but the adoption agency thought I was only 3 or 4, so they found a family for me that was all ready for a 3 or 4 year old. The family had been really concerned that all us kids were in birth order (whatever that means), but someone somehow really messed things up by saying I was 3 or 4, when I obviously am not! Look at my big teeth coming in. Actually I am really glad these teeth are in because for a long time, I had nothing there! Just this big ole gap. I can also do things like bounce a soccer ball on my foot over and over, which is not like a 3 or 4 yr old boy could do. (By the way, I love playing with a soccer ball and I have been told I have real talent!)
Anyway, I was born overseas and adopted into this family, and there I was plunked into a family who was super concerned that us kids are in birth order. But because I am actually older, things messed up and my family really loves me, but they think I would do a whole lot better in a family who is all ready for a boy just my age.
Since my family thought I was younger, I just finished kindergarten, but I did really, really good, and I had a great time. I am ready for first grade but I bet one of these days, if I get a little extra help, I could scoot into a higher grade and be with other kids my age. My teacher liked me and I liked them, and they gave me great marks on my report card, especially in behavior.
So mainly, I need a new family. I hope one of you reading this will be interested in adopting me, where there isn’t anything like birth order to worry about.
I really don’t have any big problems, I like pets, and I try to be really good, and everyone says I don’t have a bad temper. I don’t hurt anyone, but once in a while I kinda forget I am in a home in America, and I remember what it was like to live in an orphanage, so I shove and push, especially when I am in a group of boys and forget that I am in a family now. But I really try not to do that, and I especially don’t do any weird things that sometimes moms and dads worry about when they adopt a boy my age.
I don’t ever go up and hug strangers but I wish a stranger would come along and think I am pretty cool and then decide to become my mom or dad, then I promise I will hug you!
If you want to ask about adopting me, write to secondchance@wiaa.org Please don’t say anything mean about my family because they truly want to do what is right and find a home that will work out better for me. They say that you HAVE to write a private email to secondchance@wiaa.org to find out more about me.
If you would share this to your own Facebook page, I might find a family even faster. Because adoptions are legal and need a lawyer and all that, it costs a little bit, but I think I am worth it, and besides you will get the IRS Tax Credit.
Hope to be seeing you soon!!
Love, Evan
It’s almost hilarious how hard the APs try to justify their desire to rehome this poor boy after only 10 months, while at the same time marketing him to prospective new “buyers” as a great bargain. I wonder if now that the “RAD Excuse” has come under fire (and is a turn-off to PAPs) the new No-Fault excuse for wanting someone to take this adoptee off your hands has become “Unsuspected Out-of-Birth-Order Adoption”?
Of course, if PAPs with younger BioKids who DON’T see that something’s really off when they meet their prospective adoptee for the first time, you have to question what’s wrong with THEM. They have to have experience with this age group if they have kids young enough for an out-of-birth-order adoption to be an issue, so unless we’re talking about pituitary dwarfism they should have seen that he was twice his declared age! Four years is a pretty big age discrepancy, especially for a kid who’s only supposed to BE four years old at most.
So… the original adoptive family either planned this as an out-of-birth-order adoption to begin with (and only discovered there are REASONS secular authorities advise against them after the fact) or they willingly closed their eyes to blatant adoption corruption. He’s not the kid his paperwork says he is, so their adoption agency is either colluding with traffickers or falsifying ages to make children look more appealing to their client base. Perhaps both.
And may I say how I HATE the cutesy device of parents writing as if the child himself was speaking? It’s condescending and disrespectful. He’s an independent individual, with his own perspective and opinions. They can’t know what he thinks or how he feels, and it’s patronizing and dehumanizing of the APs to presume to do so.
Second Chance Adoptions is INTENTIONALLY separating biological siblings who were adopted a mere 10 months ago from DRC — a month AFTER the exit permit ban came into force!
http://wiaa.org/secondchance.htm
It’s also worth noting that their soon-to-be-ex-adoptive parents “borrowed a great deal of money for his adoption from Congo, and now they will incur legal costs for this adoption. It is hoped that a new family can contribute a little bit to the family’s legal fees:”. TRYING TO RECOUP the BIG BUCKS they spent before KICKING THEIR NEW KIDS TO CURB!
If you’d like to tell Jill and Evan’s soon-to-be-ex-family what you think of their decision to disrupt… this might possibly (but unconfirmedly) be their blog:
http://helpbringjanaehome.blogspot.com/2013/08/give2-save2-in2.html
I’m not comfortable with blasting APs who MIGHT be the ones who are disrupting Jill and Evan. And frankly, I’d rather APs disrupted than abused their unsatisfactory adoptees.
BTW, they’re claiming that the two are being separated because they’re “trauma-bonded”… and that the YOUNGER child Jill is the one who’s the abuser!
http://wiaa.org/secondchance.htm
“…Evan has what is described as a trauma bond with his sister. Because they had to struggle for so many of their early years, their relationship with each other is poor and growing worse. Evan is easily traumatized by his sister and professionals feel that he would do better being in a separate home…”
From what I read alone, sibling trauma bonds form when kids are raised by abusive/absent parents, and have no one else to cling to. Given that Jill and Evan were supposedly raised in an orphanage in apparently gender-segregated groups, you wonder how they could have the psychological isolation from others to develop such toxic enmeshment.
I’ll see if I can get someone who knows more than me to give an opinion.
Isn’t one of the requirements for IA a medical physical for the adopted child? I don’t claim to be a dentist but children’s baby teeth fall out in a predictable manner and their permanent teeth erupt the same way.
I’m dubious that no one noticed this child was missing his milk teeth and had his permanent teeth coming in.
I visited this facebook page and scrolled down. Second Chance was crowing about how they found an IL partner agency. Did not name the IL agency.
In response to the Reuter’s re-homing series, the Attorney General of IL sent a letter to any rehoming facebook page or yahoo group and told them not in IL.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/29/us-adoption-react-idUSBRE99S1A320131029
“In a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Madigan called on the company to take down the page and “ensure this practice never again finds a home on Facebook.” Madigan wrote that Facebook’s initial response to questions about the page – that “the Internet is a reflection of society” – “suggests your company is comfortable with its website being used to facilitate this illegal conduct.”
I think they’re claiming NOT to be a “rehoming” page because they DO require home studies and legal adoption proceedings. IOW, no dropping off kids with some strangers you exchanged e-mails with and driving away. To my mind, this is a valid point, though whether this will fly with the Illinois Attorney General’s Office remains to be seen.
In any event, it’s still an adoption photolisting site, with all that entails.
The APs who are doing this disruption fund-raised and used OWAS. Now defunct, thank goodness. On their blog they said they stuck with OWAS because God told them to despite known corruption. So there is a good chance these children are trafficked and none of their back story is true. Second Chance pulled the ad for these kids (because it is an ad) because the APs were being “harassed.”
The vile rehomers are still trying to rud themselves of the DRC kids they adopted barely 9 mos ago via internet — FB is down, but it’s still up on the agency’s website:
http://www.wiaa.org/secondchance.htm
The family hasn’t even bothered to update the “about us” section of their company website, which still reads:
“https://shastalooseleafteas.com/AboutUs.html
“Hello, my name is Justin Kerstetter, my wife, Brandy, and I are the owners of Shasta Loose Leaf Teas. We are a small family-owned business, it is just me, my wife and our 4 kids. We recently completed the adoption of two of our children from DRC and enjoy spending time as a family in the great outdoors of Northern CA. One of the reasons we wanted to open our own business was so we could spend more time as a family and Brandy could stay at home with the kids. You can be sure that every order is packed with care, and although one of our small helpers may put a label on a little crooked from time to time, we make sure that your tea is of the greatest quality.”
I guess the APs haven’t found anyone to take Jill and Evan of their hands yet, so they feel no need to update their family data. I’m sure once they’re gone, the Kerstetters will delete all mention of them from their family intel as if they’d never existed. They’ve already deleted their fundraising blogspot.
BTW, the phrase “sibling trauma bond” seems to be a Nancy Thomas invention, because when you Google it all the matches are Trauma Mama sites and/or reference Nancy Thomas. The DSM-5 doesn’t list it, nor do reputable sites like the Mayo Clinic.
Trauma bonding is usually discussed in regards to spousal abuse or child abuse, and it involves a significant difference in actual or perceived power. An older sibling who functions in a quasi-parental role might induce a trauma bond, but you wouldn’t expect the younger of two neurotypical siblings to have this kind of role, expecially since they apparently entered the orphanage as small kids.
But in the Nancy Thomas Definition™, “sibling trauma bond” seems to mean siblings who fight with each other and vie for their new parents attention and affection, rather than act touchingly solicitous with each other and politely “appreciative” of whatever time the APs can spare them, without being so gauche as to demand more.