Couple Wants To Void Adoption of Russian Orphans UPDATED
“A Long Island couple has asked a judge to vacate the adoption of two Russian-born children who suffer from serious mental disorders and are now living in state institutions.
In a rare move, Nassau County Surrogate’s Judge Edward McCarty III will keep his courtroom open for the case, which starts this month, citing public interest in the “disturbing facts” surrounding the adoption, including the allegation that adoption agencies pulled a “bait and switch.”
Russian adoptions have made headlines in recent years, with several adopted children dying in the custody of their new American parents, and a Tennessee mother returning her adopted son alone on a plane to Moscow in 2010. Russia banned US couples from adopting its orphans in 2013.
In the case Matter of Adoption of Child A and Child C, the couple asks the court to dissolve the 2008 adoption of “purported siblings” who were found through Spence-Chapin in New York and Cradle of Hope in Maryland.
The couple claims the agencies described the children, then 6 and 8, as “healthy and socially well-adjusted.”
But shortly after the adoption, it became clear that the children had serious medical and psychiatric problems, the couple says. The children threatened to kill them many times, the parents claim.
In a separate legal action against the agencies, the couple alleges they learned post-adoption that the children are not related and had been sexually abused.
The children, now 12 and 14, are now in state mental-health facilities.
If the adoption is vacated, the children would become wards of the state. They could remain in mental hospitals or be eligible for foster care.
Adoption experts are watching the case closely. Some worry the public court battle will play into the hands of Russian propagandists who portray American adoptive parents as violent and incapable. Others are concerned that the allegations of inaccurate or withheld records could have a chilling effect on foreign adoptions.
“If agencies had to warranty that children are in good health, agencies would shut down,” adoption attorney Irene Steffas said.
“You can do that with a car but you can’t get a warranty with a human being. That’s a dangerous position to put an agency in.”
Still, Steffas agrees that an adoptive parent is entitled to “every doctor’s report, every shred of evidence about the child’s health and background.”
Adam Pertman, president of the National Center on Adoption and Permanency, said: “So many kids from institutionalized settings come to us abused and neglected. If the records are not accurate, parents are not prepared for the challenges they will face. They don’t get sufficient training. And they don’t get the support and services they need.”
There have been 60,000 Russian adoptions to America in the past three decades, and $330 million has been spent on these transactions.
The judge’s opinion on keeping the court open says an estimated 20 percent of Russian children adopted in the United States suffer from developmental difficulties. The State Department says it does not keep statistics on this.
McCarty’s opinion also cited the fact that 18 Russian-adopted children have died through violence by their adoptive American parents in the past two decades; 75 percent of these children were in the United States for less than six months and were under age 2.
Though the courtroom will be open, the judge has asked the media not to reveal the sealed identities of the parents or children.
The couple’s attorney, Thomas Rice of Albanese & Albanese of Garden City, did not return calls seeking comment.
Linda Perilstein, executive director of Cradle of Hope, and Leslie Case, of Spence-Chapin, both declined to comment.”
Couple wants to void adoption of ‘mentally ill’ Russian orphans[NY Post 10/26/14 by Tina Traster]
REFORM Puzzle Piece
Update:”Kremlin agents have contacted American parents trying to overturn the adoption of their ‘mentally ill’ Russian children, a court heard today.
Judge Edward McCarty accused Moscow of attempted ‘intimidation’ as he revealed the New York parents had been contacted by Russian representatives.
Their lawyer revealed that the parents in the case had been left in a ‘state of fright’ when they received the call on their unlisted phone number.
The judge also disclosed that he had been contacted by the Russians.
He said he would ‘not be intimidated’ and that Russia should respect international law and stop sending him letters.
The case now threatens to blow up into a diplomatic row at a time when relations between Russia and the US are already at a historic low – although there were some signs of a thaw between the two country’s presidents this week.
Russia’s Children’s Rights Commissioner Pavel Astakhov has already called the parents ‘despicable’ and ‘mentally ill’ – and today one of the lawyers demanded that he be more ‘temperate’ in his comments.
At the hearing Judge McCarty, the surrogate justice for Nassau County also made what is thought to be an unprecedented ruling banning any adoptions under his jurisdiction that have been arranged over the Internet.
He hit out during the case of a mother and father who want to void their adoption of two girls from Russia in 2008 via major American adoption agencies Cradle of Hope and Spence-Chapin.
They claim they were victims of a ‘bait and switch’ scheme because the children later developed severe mental health problems which they were never told about which got so bad the youngsters threatened to kill them.
They also claim that the children they ended up with might not even be the ones the originally asked for and may have been sexually abused.
The children, now 12 and 14, are currently in a New York state facility.
They were not identified in court and were referred to as ‘Child A’ and ‘Child C’ whilst the parents were known as ‘PF’ and PM’.
Today Judge McCarty made public a letter sent last month by the Consulate General of the Russian Federation in New York in which he demanded ‘detailed information on the case’.
The letter, signed by consul general Igor Golubovskiy, said that he had been contacted by the Russian embassy to the US in Washington and that they wanted updates too.
In his reply letter, which he also made public, Judge McCarty refused to hand over any documents and asked that they come to court like everyone else – a representative of the Russian Federation was said to be at the latest hearing although they did not identify themselves.
He also told Mr Golubovskiy that he is ‘fully familiar’ with international law and points out that he has ‘served in various capacities in American Embassies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Albania, Slovenia and Haiti’.
Furthermore, he adds, he ‘attended the World Court and the International Criminal Court at The Hague.’
Judge McCarty signs off by telling the Russian consul general that only when the case is over will he be prepared to discuss the matter further
n a long statement to the court the judge then explained the extent of Russia’s tampering in the case.
He said: ‘This court has learned that there have been contacts by a representative of the Russian Federation with the petitioners in regard to this matter. These contacts have left these adoptive parents in a state of fright.
‘Conduct by the Russian Federation has affected this litigation….inadvertent or intentional Russian Federation conduct will not intimidate this court, judge or litigants to bar public knowledge to the sensitive issues presented in this matter.
‘Under International Law any contact between the Russian Federation diplomatic corps and local political institutions is inappropriate. Any such contacts should be through the United States Department of State. The Russian Federation cites International Law in their letter to this court and I urge them to follow it’.
The parents were not in court but were represented by their attorney Thomas Rice who said that Russia was trying to be an ‘interloper’.
He described the case as an ‘entirely tragic situation’ and said the mother and father they were going through ‘indescribable pain’.
Mr Rice said that the Russian adoption agencies, who he called ‘agents of the Russian Federation’, were able to identify his clients and get their unlisted telephone number to their total shock.
He said that as a result their privacy had been ‘violated’ and that they were ‘subject to intimidation and fear by the breach of confidentiality’.
Referring to his description of his clients as by the Russians as of as ‘despicable’, Mr Rice said: ‘I would request that the Russian Minister of state for children be more temperate in his comments’.
The case has provoked a debate in the US and strong criticism of the parents by some, but Mr Rice said this was ‘scurrilous’ and ‘disrespectful’ with no basis in reality.
Judge McCarty also praised the parents and said there was ‘not an iota of proof’ that they had victimized the girls.
He passed his law banning internet adoptions in Nassau County because he said he believes the process is so unregulated it amounts to ‘human trafficking’.
His ruling bans any adoptions organised through the Web or via any ‘unofficial adoption programme’ that is not affiliated to the state.
Those who disobey it could be fined or thrown in jail for contempt.
Judge McCarty said: ‘Today marks a court attempt to regulate the rehoming / unofficial adoptive trade in adoptive children.
This is a first step. I urge other state adoption courts as well as state legislators and federal legislators to take suitable actions to regulate this aspect of the adoption process.’
Judge McCarty adjourned the case until December when he will decide if he will continue to hear it in open court. Most adoption cases are held in private.
He said he feels that the ‘integrity of the American adoption agencies…has been called into question’ and the allegations of fraud claimed by the parents were so ‘disturbing’ they should be heard in public.
Mr Rice, Peter Kelly, the lawyer for the children, the adoption agencies and Nassau County social services all want it held behind closed doors.
Mr Kelly told the court that earlier in the day he had visited the girls at their facility and that he was ‘satisfied’ they were being looked after properly.
Last year Russian President Vladimir Putin banned Americans from adopting Russian children in what was seen as a return of Cold War style diplomatic tit for tat.
Before that, in the past 30 years some 60,000 children had been adopted by Americans from Russia as part of an industry worth $330 million. ”
[Daily Mail 11/12/14 by Daniel Bates]
Update 2:“A Long Island couple seeking to revoke their adoption of two Russian children tried to do an end-run around the legal system by getting rid of the kids over the Internet.
The couple had asked Nassau County Justice Edward McCarty, who is handling their revocation request, if they could make the move.
The judge issued a blistering response Tuesday saying not only wouldn’t he support it, but he was imploring the state Legislature to close the legal loophole that currently allows it.
“Such re-homing or any other descriptive phrase to classify this trade is unmistakably human trafficking in children, even absent any financial element,’’ McCarty wrote.
He said his decision is “an attempt to publicize the re-homing trade in children.’’
“Re-homing” involves “the transfer of custody of the child to a stranger” without prior inspection of the new home by an official or without oversight by a court, McCarty said.
The term comes from the trading of pets.
The judge’s ruling noted that there were between 200 and 300 instances of re-homing in the United States last year.
“Most of the transfers of these children found them to be between the ages of 6 to 14 with some as young as 10 months,” the judge wrote.
“The most often cited reason for rejection by their adoptive parents is a failure to bond,” McCarty said.
He cited a 2003 investigation by the Reuters news agency that found that adoptive parents from Wisconsin gave away a Liberian girl to an Illinois couple whose own children had been removed from the home after they’d been accused of sexual abuse.
The children, 12 and 14, in McCarty’s case were adopted in 2008 and have been living in state facilities since 2012 because of mental issues.
The adoptive parents, whose identities have been sealed by the court, claim they were duped when agencies told them the purported siblings were perfectly healthy. The couple has said the kids threatened to kill them numerous times and had been sexually abused.
Their lawyer did not return a request for comment.
Michael Stutman, head of family law at Mishcon de Reya, who is not involved in the case, said, “McCarty’s compass is clearly pointing in the right direction, but it is unclear to what extent he will be successful.””
Judge denies couple’s request to unload adopted kids on Internet[NY Post 12/16/14 by Julie Marsh]
Re: “…“If agencies had to warranty that children are in good health, agencies would shut down,” adoption attorney Irene Steffas said…”
That says it all right there. Who cares what the truth is? The primary concern is that the Rescue Adoption Mythos remains unchallenged and that NOTHING interrupt the continuing flow of profits into the adoption industry.