Ethiopia-Looking at the Past to Understand the Present

This week we will share some information about the Fruits of Ethiopia Intercountry Adoption: The Rights of the Child,or the “Harvesting” of Children? report that was written in October 2009.

Why are we covering a 2009 report now? Because it was only released to the public in February 2011 and it very pertinent to what is currently going on in the US Ethiopian adoption process.

This 120-page pdf can be found at Fruits of Ethiopia at PoundPup Legacy.

This first post will explain the who and the why.

Who compiled this report?

This study was commissioned by Wereldkinderen for an Against Child Trafficking (ACT) investigation.

Wereldkinderen (Children of the World)

Wereldkinderen, aka Netherlands Intercountry Child Welfare Organisation has a website here . Their 2008 annual report found as a pdf here explains what they do: “Wereldkinderen is a child welfare organisation and has as aim to grant support to children who are forced to grow up without a protective home. Apart from that, the organisation gives information on the possibilities to offer support to these children and Wereldkinderen furthers intercountry adoption where necessary, for children without possibilities to grow up in a loving home in their native country. Wereldkinderen promotes the interests of these children and the (adoptive) parents who offer these children a new home.

Wereldkinderen also makes an effort to further scientific research in the area of adoptees. The vision of Wereldkinderen is in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (article 21) and with the Hague International Adoption Convention from 1993. Both conventions were signed and ratified.”

Some of their connections can be found at PoundPup Legacy Wereldkinderen Files . At one time they appeared to be institutional members of the Dutch Coalition on Disability and Development but their page does not seem to be active anymore .

ACT

Information taken from their website explains that “Against Child Trafficking is a non profit organisation, registered in The Netherlands. ACT’s main focus is the prevention of child trafficking for intercountry adoption. ACT advocates child rights based social policies that are in compliance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is the universal standard and the best safeguard against child trafficking.

ACT is monitoring intercountry adoption practices worldwide and conducts research on child rights issues, particularly those that effect children deprived of parental care and trafficked children.

ACT serves as Documentation & Research Center.

Our collected data serve local, regional and international child rights/human rights NGOs and networks, as well as individual child rights advocates and lawyers who deal with child trafficking issues, and of course the media.

ACT alerts international organisations and national governments to concrete cases of child trafficking for intercountry adoption.

Last but not least: ACT’s Parents Assistance Project…helps victims of child trafficking. We work together with local NGOs to retrace the trafficked children at the request of their parents, or to retrace the parents or extended family of trafficked adoptees…and supports these parents and adoptees to take legal action.”

Why was this study commissioned?

Page 6 of the Fruits of Ethiopia report explains:

“The Roots Department of Wereldkinderen receives many requests from adult adoptees to help them trace there biological parents. These adoptees are often, one way or the other, confronted with a different reality then what was mentioned in their adoption file.

Intercountry adoptions from Ethiopia have increased exponentially over the last years. The closure of countries like Romania, Guatemala, Cambodia, Nepal and Vietnam has had as result that adoption agencies have flocked Ethiopia. While there are no formal statistics available, it is estimated that adoptions increased from a few hundreds to more than four thousand in a few years time. More than 70 foreign adoption agencies are registered by the Ministry for Women; some of these umbrella for other agencies (US). In Austria and Canada Ethiopian adoptions have made headlines, as adopted children who were claimed to be orphans appeared to have living parents and other relatives, ages of children were incorrect (children much older then officially stated), as well as hidden health issues. Some of the Ethiopian people against which allegations were levelled, are (or have been) partners of Wereldkinderen.

The issue was also tabled at the EURADOPT conference in Italy in 2008.

However, no special actions had been decided.

In light of the above, Wereldkinderen decided to contract there[sic] own research into the correctness of the adoption files of children adopted from Ethiopia.”

Who is EurAdopt that is mentioned on Page 6 of the Fruits of Ethiopia report?

Also based in the Netherlands, their website explains:

“EurAdopt is an association of adoption organisations in 12 Western European countries. Since the late 1970-ies a number of European organisations working in the area of intercountry adoptions have met regularly to discuss topics of common concern. In 1991 it was decided to formalize this cooperation, and in 1993 EurAdopt was established. The association presently has member organizations in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden. Up to 4,000 children receive new homes each year through these organisations”

So this organization inquired about Ethiopia in 2008, quickly tabled discussion, and as of late 2009 still apparently had done nothing. Wow! This seems like a familiar tactic used by a US agency organization.

According to its’ ethical rules , the following applies to its adoption agency members:

“ADOPTION ORGANISATIONS AND CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER BODIES

Article 16

The organisation must always work to achieve the best interests of the child. The organisation should refuse its co-operation as soon as there is any doubt on this point.

Article 17

The organisation must work primarily towards providing abandoned children with new families in their home countries and secondly, in other countries. Prevention of abandonment and support for children who cannot be placed with a new family should be included in the programme of the organisation.

Article 18

The contact with whom the organisation co-operates in the child’s country of origin must be an authority, organisation or institution which is authorised to mediate in the field of intercountry adoption according to the laws of that country.

The organisation must procure thorough information of the activities of this contact and establish that these activities, beyond any reasonable doubt, follow the ICSW Guidelines for intercountry adoption.

Article 19

The organisation must inform the relevant authorities in the child’s country of origin of the principles and practices upon which the organisation intends to work.

Article 20

The organisation is responsible for the working methods of its representatives and co-workers. Representatives and co-workers who might influence the number of children placed for adoption should not be paid on a per case basis. The salary paid to representatives and co-workers by the organisation should be reasonable, taking into consideration the cost of living of the country as well as the scope and terms of the work undertaken.

Article 21

Fees charged to the organisation by professionals should be commensurate with the work carried out.

Article 22

Representatives and co-workers responsible for the adoption procedures should have professional or other appropriate training.

Article 23

Organisations must provide information to the competent authorities of both the sending and receiving countries concerning trafficking in children, improper financial gain and any other abuses. They must promote adoption through licensed or authorised organisations.

Article 24

The organisations should try to develop practical co-operation amongst themselves concerning the placement for adoption of children with special needs so as to increase their chances of being placed with suitable adoptive families. They should also promote co-operation regarding research, counselling groups, adoptive parents groups, social services etc., and spread the information.

Article 25

The adoption work should be carried out in such a way that competition for children or contacts should be avoided.

Article 26

Organisations having or intending to have the same contact in a country should consult and exchange information.

Article 27

An organisation which terminates co-operation with a contact in a country of origin because it appears that the contact is operating in violation of the ICSW Guidelines or contrary to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child or is ethically doubtful in other ways, must inform other organisations accordingly.

Article 28

An organisation wishing to express criticism concerning the work of another organisation must convey the matter directly to the organisation concerned and, if necessary, bring the matter to the attention of the EurAdopt Executive Committee.

In cases of serious or repeated breaches, the exclusion from EurAdopt of the organisation concerned should be considered when the matter is referred for discussion at the next plenary session of EurAdopt.”

We are going to keep these ethical rules in mind as we look at the report.

You might be wondering what actions did Wereldkinderen take after learning of these scathing findings?

After these findings, did Wereldkinderen stop Ethiopian adoptions to the Netherlands? Yes, on September 18, 2009, a mere few weeks before the issue date of the October 6, 2009 report they did stop as stated in the following article.

The Netherlands freezes adoption process in Ethiopia

[RNW Radio Netherlands, 9/8/09]

“The largest adoption organisation of The Netherlands, Wereldkinderen ( Children of the world), has decided to bring an immediate stop to the adoption process in Ethiopia.

An enquiry has shown that some of the dossiers which were granted a go-ahead have been found to be full of mistakes. In some cases, it appeared that the biological mother was still alive, while the dossier stated otherwise.

Wereldkinderen thinks that poverty in Ethiopia and the growing number of demands on the part of adoptive parents from western countries are to be blamed for the abuse.

For now, Wereldkinderen would like to study thoroughly all the cases in Ethiopia. This is the reason why all new demands have been put on stand-by.

Every year, tens of children coming from Ethiopia are adopted in the Netherlands.

This is no first scandal that has hit the world of adoption. Not long ago, the former director of Wereldkinderen resigned following judicial threats. She was investigating cases of abuse with regards to adoption in China.”

But that stop was short-lived as this February 18, 2010 press release by the Netherlands Ministry of Security and Justice shows: No reconsideration of adoptions from Ethiopia

“There is no reason to reconsider the existing adoption relationship between Ethiopia and the Netherlands. This opinion was submitted in a letter to the Lower House of Parliament by Minister of Justice Hirsch Ballin. The accredited bodies for adoption Stichting Afrika and Vereniging Wereldkinderen will resume adoptions from Ethiopia.

In September 2009, the accredited bodies (licensed organisations providing intermediary services for adoption) Stichting Afrika en Vereniging Wereldkinderen decided to temporarily halt the procedures for new applications for adoption from Ethiopia and to conduct further investigation into the files of children in the current adoption procedure. The reason therefor [sic] was that the factual background of some children adopted from Ethiopia was not in accordance with the information that was included in the files.

Subsequently, a delegation from the Ministry of Justice and the accredited bodies involved visited Ethiopia in November 2009, during which visit they spoke with various agencies, including Ethiopian Ministries, the embassies of the US, Italy and France, and UNICEF. The aim was to obtain insight into the adoption procedures in Ethiopia.

During the visit, the Ethiopian authorities indicated that they are making preparations to join the Hague Adoption Convention. For this purpose, the child protection services of Ethiopia are being strengthened. There will also be more attention for the supervision of the activities of foreign accredited organisations providing intermediary services for adoption, for which a special agency was instituted.[emphasis Rally] The alleged wrongs that were the reason for the investigation has also been identified and recognised by the authorities. It is for this reason that children that are left as foundling will from now on only be taken in and given accommodation in state children’s homes.

Minister Hirsch Ballin observes that the Ethiopian authorities are willing to discuss any shortcomings and that they are open to cooperation. The Minister therefore sees no reason to reconsider the adoption relationship with Ethiopia, and the accredited bodies will continue their work. The accredited bodies will, however, incorporate extra guarantees in the adoption procedures, and developments in Ethiopia will be carefully monitored. Ethiopia is being offered support in their process of joining the Hague Adoption Procedure. The Minister will also ask that attention be given to Ethiopia at the European level. “I am of the opinion that, in this way, I am doing justice to the endeavours to further a clear and careful adoption procedure in the interest of the child”, the Minister declared.”

REFORM Puzzle Piece