See this post for our response to the ban.
Russia Today translates the text of the law into English. See Dima Yakovlev Law [Russia Today 12/28/12 ] and pasted below:

“RT provides the full text of the Russia’s reply to the US Magnitsky Act – the Dima Yakovlev Law. Translation by RT.

“Measures against persons involved in abuse of fundamental human rights and freedoms including those of Russian citizens”

Approved by the State Duma on December 21, 2012 and approved by the Federation Council on December 26, 2012.

Article 1

Measures against persons involved in abuse of fundamental human rights and freedoms of Russian citizens shall include:

1) a ban to enter Russia for those citizens of the United States of America

a) who have been involved in abuse of fundamental human rights and freedoms;

b) who have committed or been complicit in crimes against Russian citizens abroad;

c) who hold public office and by their actions or lack thereof have exempted from responsibility for persons who committed or aided to crimes against Russian citizens;

d) who were supposed to take decisions which exempted from responsibility persons who committed or were complicit in crimes against Russian citizens;

e) who have been involved in kidnapping and arbitrary imprisonment of Russian citizens;

f) who have passed arbitrary and biased sentences on Russian citizens;

g) who are engaged in arbitrary prosecution of Russian citizens;

h) who have taken arbitrary decisions that violated the rights and justified interests of Russian citizens;

2) seizure of financial and other assets owned by the US citizens who are prohibited from entering Russia and a ban to conduct any deals involving property and investment of these citizens.

Article 2   

1. The list of the citizens of the United States of America forbidden from entering the Russian Federation and organizations, the activity of which has been suspended in compliance with Article 3 of this Federal law, is kept by a federal executive body in charge of developing and implementing the state policy and legal regulation in terms of foreign relations of the Russian Federation..

2. In respect of those citizens of the United States citizens, included into the list, provided by Part 1 of this Article:

1) they are forbidden from disposing of property located in the Russian Federation;

2) activity of legal entities run by these persons is suspended in the Russian Federation;

3) membership in board of directors or other governing bodies of organizations, registered in the Russian Federation, is suspended.

3. Amendments into the list, provided by Part 1 of this Article, are to be submitted to a federal executive body in charge of developing and implementing the state policy and legal regulation in terms of foreign relations of the Russian Federation, by members of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, members of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Human Rights Ombudsman of the Russian Federation, political parties, the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation as well as by government bodies.

4. Procedure for keeping the list, provided by Part 1 of this Article, is determined by a federal executive body in charge of developing and implementing the state policy and legal regulation in

terms of foreign relations of the Russian Federation.

5. Head of a federal executive body in charge of developing and implementing the state policy and legal regulation in terms of foreign relations of the Russian Federation is to report on the course of this Federal Law to the chambers of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation at least once a year.

Article 3

1. In accordance with the current federal law, activities of non-governmental organizations that take part in political activities carried out in the Russian Federation or get grants in cash or other kind of property from citizens (organizations) of the United States of America or implement projects, programs in the Russian Federation or get involved in other activities that pose a threat to the interests of the Russian Federation are suspended by a federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of legal regulation in terms of registering non-governmental organizations. The federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of legal regulation in terms of registering non-governmental organizations forwards the information about the non-governmental organizations the activities of which are suspended, to the federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of legal regulation in terms of the Russian Federation’s’ international relations.

2. A Russian Federation citizen who has a United States of America citizenship cannot be a member or head a non-governmental organization, its structural division or of the structural division of an international or foreign non-governmental organization (department, branch, or representation) engaged in political activity carried out in the Russian Federation. An infringement of this ban entails a suspension by a federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of regulation in terms of registering non-governmental organizations and the activity of the said non-governmental organization or its structural subdivision.

3. Suspending of the non-governmental organization’s activity (or its structural division) in accordance with Parts 1 and 2 of the this Article entails consequences envisaged by paragraph one of Item 61 of Article 32 of the Federal Law dated 12 January 1996, No. 7-ФЗ On Non-Governmental Organizations.” As regards the property of non-governmental organizations (or structural divisions) the activities of which are suspended in accordance with Parts 1 and 2 of this Article, the said property is seized following a court ruling in response to a request of the federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of legal regulation in terms of registering non-governmental organizations.

4. If a non-governmental organization the activity of which is suspended in accordance with this federal law, stops receiving grants in cash or other property from citizens (organizations) of the United State of America or stops implementing its projects, programs or doing anything in the Russian Federation which poses a threat to the interests of the Russian Federation, the operation of this organization is resumed following a decision by a federal executive body in charge of working out and implementing the state policy and of legal regulation in terms of registering non-governmental organizations.

Article 4

1. It is forbidden to pass children, citizens of the Russian Federation over for adoption by citizens of the United States of America. Operation of organizations and bodies involved in selecting and passing children, citizens of the Russian Federation over for adoption by citizens of the United States of America willing to adopt the indicated children is prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation.

2. Due to the prohibition on passing children, citizens of the Russian Federation over for adoption by the citizens of the United States of America as imposed in Part 1 of this Article, on the part of the Russian Federation terminate the operation of the Agreement between the United States of America and the Russian Federation Regarding Cooperation in Adoption of Children that had been signed in Washington, DC on July 13, 2011.

Article 5

To amend Subparagraph 7 of part one, Article 27 of the Federal Law of August 15, 1996 # 114-FZ ‘On the Procedure for Exit from the Russian Federation and Entry into the Russian Federation’ ( Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 1996, #34, Article 4029; 2003, #2, Article 159; 2006, #31, Article 3420; 2007, #3, Article 410; 2008, # 19, Article 2094; #30, Article 3616) and lay it out in the following edition:

“7) in regard to foreign citizens or individuals without a citizenship, a decision is taken on undesirability of their stay (residence) in the Russian Federation, including citizens on the list of citizens of the United States who are prohibited from entering the Russian Federation;”.

Article 6

This Federal law and Subparagraph 7 of part one, Article 27 of the Federal Law of August 15, 1996 # 114-FZ ‘on the Procedure for Exit from the Russian Federation and Entry into the Russian Federation’ (this edition of the Federal law) is applied to citizens of countries that had taken the decision on forbidding entry of citizens of the Russian Federation to their territories, and on arresting assets of citizens of the Russian Federation based on involvement of these citizens of the Russian Federation in human rights violation in the Russian Federation.

Article 7

This Federal law comes to force as of January 1st, 2013.

Vladimir Putin

President of the Russian Federation”

Amendment to Be Introduced to Lower Parliament

“A deputy from Russia’s ruling United Russia party, Robert Shlegel, has submitted to the State Duma an amendment to a controversial law banning adoption of Russian children by American families to try to make exceptions for disabled children, Shlegel wrote on his Twitter microblog on Friday.

Shlegel said he decided to submit the amendment to the lower house of parliament because a total adoption ban would mean some disabled children might be unable to find their family.”

Russian Deputy Proposes Amendment To Adoption Ban Law

[RIA Novosti 12/29/12]

Political NGOs funded by Americans Banned; Dual Russian-US Citizens Cannot Run or be Members of  NGOs that Engage in Russian Political Activity

“The full title of the law is “On measures against persons involved in violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms, rights and freedoms of citizens of the Russian Federation.” President Vladimir Putin signed the law on Friday, December 28, 2012.

The law also provides for the suspension of “political” NGOs that receive funds from U.S. citizens. In addition, the citizens of the Russian Federation holding U.S. citizenship, are forbidden to lead nonprofit organizations under the new law.

Meanwhile, a United Russia deputy, Robert Schlegel, suggested an amendment to the “law of Dima Yakovlev.” According to the deputy, the law may not embrace the adoptions of disabled children by Americans.

When the bill was discussed in the State Duma, Schlegel was among those MPs who supported the ban on adoptions.

Until recently, according to the Russian law, prospective adoptive parents from the U.S. could adopt only those Russian orphans, who could not find Russian foster families. As a rule, these are the children with serious health problems.”

Russia’s new law on adoptions to come into force on January 1, 2013

[Pravda 12/29/12]

DOS Still Processing Applications for Some People Even Though They Can’t Guarantee the Children can Leave Russia.

DOS issued an alert on December 31, 2012. See here and pasted below:

“Alert: Legislation to Ban Intercountry Adoption by U.S. Families Signed into Law

On December 28, President Vladimir Putin signed into law Russian Federal Law No. 186614-6, which prohibits the adoption of Russian children by U.S. citizens. This law will go into effect on January 1, 2013.

In keeping with the spirit of the current U.S.-Russia adoption agreement, which went into effect on November 1, 2012, the U.S. government continues to urge the Russian government to allow U.S. families in the process of adopting a child from Russia to complete their adoptions so that these children may join permanent, loving families.

At this time the Russian government has provided no details on how the law will be implemented. The Department of State has no information on whether the Russian government intends to permit the completion of any pending adoptions.

In observance of national holidays, most Russian government offices will be closed through January 8, 2013.

Prior to traveling to Russia, we strongly encourage families, in cooperation with their adoption service providers, to confirm that Russian authorities will process their adoptions to conclusion and provide all required documents. It remains unclear whether Russian immigration authorities will allow adoptees to depart the country and whether families in this situation will encounter legal complications with local authorities starting on January 1, 2013.

The U.S. Embassy in Moscow will continue to process Forms I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative, and immigrant visa applications for children whose families have obtained all required documents as part of the adoption process. U.S. citizen adoptive parents who have completed an adoption, received a Russian passport for their child, and have filed or are ready to file Form I-600 with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and then apply for the immigrant visa at the consular section of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow should call +7-495-728-5000 or email the USCIS office at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow at Moscow.dhs@dhs.gov to request assistance.”

REFORM Puzzle Pieces

Update: I mentioned the NGO legislation that was enacted earlier in 2012 that led up to this legislation in our REFORM Talk Response to Russia Ban. I wanted to add more context to this situation because I have not seen this cited in articles discussing the recent ban.

USAID was kicked out of Russia on October 1, 2012. This was before the Bilateral Treaty went into effect. An interesting opinion was published on September 24, 2012 in Russia Today by ­Veronika Krasheninnikova, Director General of the Institute for Foreign Policy Research and Initiatives in Moscow. See here and pasted below:

“Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs gave USAID until October 1 to shut its doors in Moscow. This is an excellent decision by the Russian Government. And Washington’s immediate and virulent reaction only confirms that Russia is right on target.

The New York Times next morning on the front page cited American officials who “quickly pledged to maneuver around the Kremlin.” Even before the public announcement, on Tuesday 18 September, US Ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul and USAID leadership met with their Russian partners.

Grigory Melkonyants, deputy head of the Golos Association – one of the top recipients of USAID funding – confirmed after the meeting that the agency is “not going to leave Russia completely” and they are “brainstorming” about how to reorganize. In the meantime, Ambassador McFaul announced that “it will take at least a year” for USAID to exit Russia, according to Bloomberg News.

Brainstorming on how circumvent the Russian government’s decision – instead of how to pack up faster – is only one more demonstration of Washington’s utter disrespect for another country’s sovereignty. Indeed, there are a number of ways in which USAID can maneuver around its predicament.

Funding can be channeled directly from USAID headquarters in Washington to its Russian beneficiaries – no need to go through a Moscow office.

USAID funding can be redirected through a great number of other US institutions, beginning with the National Endowment for Democracy and its four mandated institutes; private funds such as MacArthur, Soros’s Open Society Institute, or Freedom House; universities’ Russia programs, etc.

To hide the American connection, USAID can channel funding through their partners in Ukraine, Poland or Georgia – for their very active operations in the Caucuses; in this case the money entering Russia will be Ukrainian, Polish or, God forbid, Saakashvili’s.

In October last year, USAID signed an agreement with Cisco Systems on joint 50/50 funding of Cisco Networking Academies for Public Service Program. Cisco and other major US corporations may continue running USAID programs.

A year ago Michael McFaul announced an initiative to create a new US$50 million fund, essentially an endowment for a private foundation established under Russian law for Russian civil society groups.

Washington may use any combination of these and other possibilities. One way to put an end to USAID activities in Russia is not only to close their Moscow office, but to insist on shutting down all USAID programs and funding for Russia. This is American taxpayers’ money – give it back to the American people, use it to help them pay mortgages instead of throwing families out of their homes.

Obviously, USAID cannot be allowed to stay in Moscow beyond the set date. This delay will only serve to build up additional infrastructure – people and organizations – to run operations remotely.

The main lament of the Western press has been about how hard USAID closure will hit the sick, disabled, mothers, newborns and other children that the agency helps. Well, let’s take a look at USAID leadership to see how well they are suited for healthcare services.

Director of USAID/Russia Charles North, according to its official biography is “a 2004 graduate of the National War College, with an MS Degree in National Security Strategy.”

Earlier North served as Senior Deputy Director of USAID’s Afghanistan and Pakistan Task Force, and helped launch a presidential initiative to support Mexico and Central America in battling organized crime and drug trafficking.

In Washington, Assistant Administrator for Europe and Eurasia until last year was Douglas Menarchik: a 26-year career US Air Force officer, Vietnam veteran with 211 combat missions, assistant for terrorism policy at the Pentagon, where he developed the Defense Department’s Strategic Plan for Combating Terrorism, military advisor to the vice-president of the United States with a portfolio including terrorism and low intensity conflict. Earlier Menarchik was instructor at the Air Force Special Operations School, teaching combating terrorism and counter insurgency.

But that’s not all. If you check Charles North’s bio on USAID site, you will see a new “updated” version that excludes his National War College stint. However, a cached copy of his true biography is still available – and this snapshot shows the page as it appeared on September 14, 2012. Someone was cleaning house a few days before the public announcement.

Enough tales about healthcare dispensed by US military and national security cadre. USAID – out. Russia must take care of its own civil society, ill and disabled by itself instead of outsourcing it to Washington. Russia’s shutting USAID operations is also an excellent example for any other country where USAID operatives still work on “winning hearts and minds” of the local population.”

The USAID exit announcement

“Over the last twenty years, the USAID Mission in Russia has worked with Russian government officials and Russian non-governmental organizations to achieve a remarkable record of success.

USAID programs, always developed in cooperation with Russian partners, have contributed to improving public health and combating infectious diseases, addressing child welfare issues, protecting the environment, developing a stronger civil society, and modernizing the economy. Most recently, USAID has helped to facilitate contacts between our two governments and societies in many of the working groups of the Bilateral Presidential Commission.

The examples are numerous. Working with Russian officials in Krasnodar during the disastrous summer 2010 fires, USAID arranged for the delivery of 225 pieces of emergency equipment to the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations to help extinguish the massive forest fires that remain a recent memory.

USAID helped non-governmental organizations dedicated to helping disabled children have a future.

In the area of health, USAID’s work supported the broad spectrum of the Government of Russia’s own priorities, such as increasing treatment success rates for tuberculosis and ensuring that Russian health care providers adhered to international best practices.

USAID was here helping with the environmental clean-up of the Amur River immediately after a major chemical spill.

USAID facilitated mutual learning about best practices regarding prison reforms.
USAID also collaborated with effective Russian non-governmental organizations including business associations from across the country that are dedicated to increasing transparency and exposing corruption. Many of these Russian partners also work with the Government of Russia’s own Open Government initiative.

USAID also contributed to the efforts of these Russian partners in the struggle against child exploitation and trafficking in persons.

In its essence, USAID mostly facilitated the exchange of information and ideas. In other words, USAID supported education and knowledge, be it by providing technical experts to the Ministry of Finance from the early 1990s through 2011, or more recently by providing support for seminars, exchanges, and publications from all kinds of learning institutions and civil society organizations. Many Russian government officials, as well as leading scholars, business executives and civil society leaders have been the beneficiaries of this knowledge exchange.

USAID has been careful never to take sides in Russia’s internal political or economic debates, but instead have provided technical assistance to those helping to strengthen the rules of the game for political and economic development. USAID and its partners have not provided direct financial support to political parties, movements, or individuals in Russia. In the programs in which we shared lessons from the experience of the U.S. in political party development, USAID’s partners have invited all Russian parties to participate, giving them all an equal opportunity to do so.

Abroad, USAID and the Government of Russia joined efforts to deliver concrete results in numerous areas, including eradication of polio in Central Asia and the rebuilding of southern Kyrgyzstan after the horrible violence there in 2010. All these efforts were the product of interaction between Russian and international specialists, funded through USAID, for the benefit of all Russians.

Many people have asked me whether USAID’s departure will mean an end to our support for these important initiatives. It will not.

Our relationship with Russian partners – in both the government and private sector – continues to offer promising avenues to address our joint challenges. We will look to the Russian government to build on our investments in maternal health, disabilities, combating human trafficking, the environment, and wildlife protection, among other fields, and we will continue to encourage private sector actors – Russian and American – as well as private foundations to also provide more support for these activities.

And our commitment to supporting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law remains steadfast. Although USAID will cease to function in Russia, the Obama administration will continue to look for new ways to work with our partners in Russia, and build on the legacy of the USAID mission in Russia. ”

USAID leaves a remarkable legacy of achievements in Russia

[Russia Beyond the Headlines 10/2/12 by Michael McFaul]

Other Russian Shut-Out Decisions and Adoption Shutdown Prediction

USAID and Russia Adoption Ban are hardly the first US NGOs shut out of Russia. The following article

Why USAID is leaving Russia [GlobalPublic Square Blog/CNN 9/20/12 by Matthew Rojansky] lists a few more:

“In 2002, as Putin constructed the “power vertical” and clashed with Washington over the impending invasion of Iraq, Russia put an end to Peace Corps activities on its soil, suggesting that the program was a front for U.S. espionage. Two years ago, Russia pulled its support for the International Science and Technology Center, a multilateral institution chartered in 1992 primarily to coordinate and distribute assistance to former Soviet weapons experts who might otherwise have sold their unique services to rogue states or terrorist groups. Russia’s position was that after 18 years of assistance, it could take responsibility for its own scientific community, and in any case did not need Westerners sniffing around its most sensitive facilities.”

Furthermore, it states a long-term hatred for the US State Department. In fact, IT PREDICTS ADOPTIONS COULD CLOSE IF THE US DIDN’T TURN THINGS AROUND!

“The Kremlin has made USAID and the State Department its main scapegoats in the struggle against foreign-backed political unrest in part because of America’s outsize role in world affairs and the Russian popular consciousness, especially since the start of the so-called Arab Spring. U.S. rhetoric heralding the political awakening of the Arab world as a march toward self-determination and democracy has provoked bitter cynicism from the Russian leadership, who accuse U.S. officials of orchestrating everything from the pre-election protests to the Pussy Riot video. It is easier for many Russians – on both sides of the protest movement – to believe that Washington harbors a grand strategy for regime change in Russia, than to accept the reality that Russia factors very little into U.S. politics or policy. After all, if Americans are prepared to invest billions of dollars and thousands of lives in democracy-building projects in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya, surely they would lavish support upon Russia’s pro-American liberal opposition.

If the end of the USAID mission in Russia heralds a new round of tit-for-tat retaliation between Moscow and Washington, there is a serious risk that foundations for cooperation painstakingly built over the past two decades – to say nothing of more recent progress on visa facilitation, adoptions, and free trade – will crumble. In U.S.-Russia relations, everything is linked, and a blast of wintry wind from USAID’s shutdown could have a chilling effect on bilateral cooperation in other spheres, from nuclear security to supplying NATO forces in Afghanistan. There may be no going back to the halcyon optimism of the 2009 “reset,” but as this year of elections and protests draws to a close, both sides should take a hard look at recent history, and think hard about the future. We can’t afford to let our lingering differences destroy the progress we have made.”

Update 2: Russia has announced that they will follow the treaty by giving one year’s notice on the ban, making it effective January 2014.

Russia’s ban on American adoptions won’t go into effect until next year

[Washington Post 1/10/13 by Will Englund]

An amendment will be proposed to the Duma in three weeks banning all international adoptions.

“The State Duma has developed a bill totally banning foreign adoptions of Russian children except by nationals of the countries with which Moscow has signed bilateral agreements on child adoption.

So far, Russia has signed such treaties with France, Italy and the USA.

However, Moscow had informed Washington of its intention to suspend the bilateral adoption agreement and the document will only remain in force for another year – till January 2014. That comes after Russia imposed a ban on adoption of its kids by US families, also known as the Dima Yakovlev law.

Now the Russian lawmakers suggest introducing amendments to the country’s Family Code that would prohibit adoptions by all foreigners. The bill will be submitted to the lower house in about three weeks, one of the authors of the initiative, United Russia’s MP Evgeny Fyodorov told Itar-Tass news agency.

“In fact, [adoptions of Russian orphans by foreign families] is a purchase. None of the civilized countries are involved in slave trade, or sell their children abroad,” the Duma deputy pointed out.

Fyodorov noted that foreign adoptions are outlawed in the majority of European countries. In fact, that is one of the requirements for accession into the European Union.

Russian Children’s Rights Ombudsman Pavel Astakhov is an ardent proponent of the initiative. In his view, it is a “disgrace for a country when its children are taken abroad and paid money to boot.” The ombudsman is confident that all Russian children should remain in their home country.

“We should create conditions here that would be better than those in France, Italy, America, Spain and other countries. We can do so and we must,” Astakhov underlined.”

Russia may ban all foreign adoptions

[Russia Today 1/11/13]

Update 3: Four updates to report.

First, DOS issued an alert after giving another stakeholder’s meeting on Friday January 11, 2013. See here and pasted below:

“Alert: Families, Agencies Report Difficulties in Completing Russian Adoptions

On December 28, President Vladimir Putin signed into law Federal Law No. 272-FZ, which  went into effect on January 1, 2013.  The law bans the adoption of Russian children by U.S. citizens, bars adoption service providers from assisting U.S. citizens to adopt Russian children, and requires termination of the U.S. – Russia Adoption Agreement.

The United States continues to urge the Russian government to allow U.S. families already in the process of adopting a child from Russia to complete their adoptions so that these children may join permanent, loving families.  The Department is aware of  the recent public comments by the Kremlin spokesman and the Children’s Rights Ombudsman that cases in which a court ruling exists will be permitted to move.   We remain actively engaged with the Russian government and are seeking further clarity   on what this means for pending adoptions and   how   the law will be implemented.

Since the law went into effect, however, the Department of State and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have received reports from families and adoption agencies on difficulties encountered in Russia during the final stages of the adoption process.  The difficulties include the postponement of court dates, delays in the issuance of adoption decrees, birth certificates, and Russian passports for adoptees, and confusion on the part of the Russian authorities over the release of children into the physical custody of adoptive parents.  In addition, Russian authorities in some regions have told families and agencies that they are waiting to receive guidance on implementing the new law from the Ministry of Justice and Russian Supreme Court; officials in those regions have said they expect the Ministry of Justice and Supreme Court to issue instructions within 30 days.

The United States will continue to urge the Russian government to provide details on how it will implement the new law.  But prior to traveling to Russia, we urge families with pending adoption cases to consider the above reports and, in cooperation with their adoption service providers, to attempt to confirm that Russian authorities will process their adoptions to conclusion and provide all required documents.

U.S. families in the process of adopting a child from Russia may continue to reach out to the Office of Children’s Issues at RussiaAdoption@state.gov. The Office of Children’s Issues will reach out directly to families as additional information becomes available.  Further information regarding intercountry adoption from Russia will also be posted on www.adoption.state.gov.

We strongly recommend that U.S. citizens traveling to or residing in Russia enroll in the Department of State’s Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) at https://step.state.gov/step.  STEP enrollment gives you the latest security updates, and makes it easier for the U.S. embassy or nearest U.S. consulate to contact you in an emergency.  If you don’t have Internet access, enroll directly with the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate.”

Second, fundraising families continue to fundraise for their adoptions despite this alert. At least one family traveled anyway despite this alert.

Third, there were coordinated protests in Russia about this law on Sunday, January 13, 2013. Russia reports between 7500 to 9000 protesters in Moscow. Media reports 20,000 protesters in Moscow. Some adoption groups have claimed 50,000 to 100,000 protesters in Moscow. Most reports are using the 20,000 number for Moscow. While that is a large number, it is merely 1/5 of the number of protesters again Putin last winter. St. Petersburg only garnered 1000 protesters and other cities, just dozens. The following article cites the 18,000 waiting Russian domestic prospective adoptive parents figure that most media articles do not dare report as that would take away from the talking points that Russians don’t want to adopt.

“Thousands of people marched through Moscow on Sunday to protest Russia’s new law banning Americans from adopting Russian children, a far bigger number than expected in a sign that outrage over the ban has breathed some life into the dispirited anti-Kremlin opposition movement.

Shouting “shame on the scum,” protesters carried posters of President Vladimir Putin and members of Russia’s parliament who overwhelmingly voted for the law last month. Up to 20,000 took part in the demonstration on a frigid, gray afternoon.

The adoption ban has stoked the anger of the same middle-class, urban professionals who swelled the protest ranks last winter, when more than 100,000 people turned out for rallies to demand free elections and an end to Putin’s 12 years in power. Since Putin began a third presidential term in May, the protests have flagged as the opposition leaders have struggled to provide direction and capitalize on the broad discontent.

Opponents of the adoption ban argue it victimizes children to make a political point. Eager to take advantage of this anger, the anti-Kremlin opposition has played the ban as further evidence that Putin and his parliament have lost the moral right to rule Russia.

The Kremlin, however, has used the adoption controversy to further its efforts to discredit the opposition as unpatriotic and in the pay of the Americans.

Sunday’s march may prove only a blip on what promises to be a long road for the protest movement, especially in the face of Kremlin efforts to stifle dissent. But it was a reunion of what has become known as Moscow’s creative class, whose sarcastic wit was once again on display on Sunday.

“Parliament deputies to orphanages, Putin to an old people’s home,” read one poster. Another showed Putin with the words “For a Russia without Herod.”

Putin’s critics have likened him to King Herod, who ruled at the time of Jesus Christ’s birth and who the Bible says ordered the massacre of Jewish children to avoid being supplanted by the newborn king of the Jews.

Russia’s adoption ban was retaliation for a new U.S. law targeting Russians accused of human rights abuses. It also addresses long-brewing resentment in Russia over the 60,000 Russian children who have been adopted by Americans in the past two decades, 19 of whom have died.

Cases of Russian children dying or suffering abuse at the hands of their American adoptive parents have been widely publicized in Russia, and the law banning adoptions was called the Dima Yakovlev bill after a toddler who died in 2008 when he was left in a car for hours in broiling heat.

“Yes, there are cases when they are abused and killed, but they are rare,” said Sergei Udaltsov, who heads a leftist opposition group. “Concrete measures should be taken (to punish those responsible), but our government decided to act differently and sacrifice children’s fates for its political ambitions.”

Those opposed to the adoption ban accuse Putin’s government of stoking anti-American sentiments in Russian society in an effort to solidify support among its base, the working-class Russians who live in small cities and towns and who get their news mainly from Kremlin-controlled television.

Putin has turned his back on the new Internet generation in Moscow and other large cities, exacerbating a divide in Russian society that seems likely only to deepen in coming years.

Protests against the adoption ban were held Sunday in a number of other Russian cities, but in most places only a few dozen people took part. In St. Petersburg, about 1,000 people turned out to show their opposition to the law and to Putin. Some held up a poster that read “Don’t play politics using children.”

French actor Gerard Depardieu, who took Russian citizenship this month and considers Putin a friend, spoke out against the opposition in an interview shown Sunday on Russian state television. “The opposition has no program, nothing at all,” the actor said, echoing Putin. “There are very smart people like (former world chess champion Garry) Kasparov, but that’s only good for chess. And that’s it. But politics are a lot more complicated.”

The adoption ban also revived anger over the December 2011 parliamentary election, which independent observers said was won by Putin’s party through widespread fraud. A column of marchers on Sunday held a banner calling for the State Duma, the elected lower house, to be disbanded.

“The Duma that now adopts these kinds of laws is illegitimate. It was formed with the theft of 100 million votes,” said opposition leader Vladimir Ryzhkov, a former Duma member who lost his seat when independent members were ousted in 2007. “It doesn’t have the moral or political right to adopt laws for us. The disbanding of the Duma and the overturning of the law: That’s why people, including me, came out today.”

At the end of the protest, marchers dumped the posters of Putin and parliament members in an industrial-sized trash container that had “for disposal” scribbled on it.

Sunday’s protest had been authorized by the city government, which was one factor behind the high turnout. Several protesters were detained for what police said was violating public order, but all were later released. The Kremlin has sought to stifle dissent by imposing steep fines on those who take part in unauthorized protests and opening criminal investigations against popular protest leaders.

Just ahead of the weekend demonstration, Putin’s spokesman sought to ease anger over the adoption ban by announcing that some of the dozens of adoptions already under way could go forward, allowing children who have already bonded with American adoptive parents to leave the country.

UNICEF estimates there are about 740,000 children not in parental custody in Russia, while about 18,000 Russians are on the waiting list to adopt a child. Since the law banning American adoptions was passed, Russian political and religious leaders have been encouraging Russians to adopt more children.”

Thousands march to protest Russia’s adoption ban

[Associated Press 1/13/13 by Lynn Berry]

Fourth, on Monday January 14, 2013 “Russia’s Lower House has refused to take action on the public petition to cancel the amendment to the Dima Yakovlev Law that bans US adoptions of Russian children.

The head of the State Duma’s Constitutional Committee, Vladimir Pligin, explained to reporters that though Russia currently has a rule that obliges parliament to treat any petition supported by at least 100,000 citizens as a legislative initiative, the law lacks detail and cannot be carried out. The parliamentarian added that he and all his colleagues respected the request nevertheless.

Pligin also noted that as the submitted signatures were collected in electronic form through the internet there were problems with verifying them and the procedure rules on such documents were simply absent. The official promised, however, that his committee would start working on the necessary rules so that the consideration of public initiatives would no longer be a problem.

The MP noted that on Tuesday the Lower House will hear the full report by the Constitutional Committee.

The petition with the demand to cancel the amendment banning the US adoptions was submitted to the Lower House in late December on the day when the Dima Yakovlev Law passed its third reading. Journalists from the Novaya Gazeta daily, who managed to collect the 100,000 signatures in support of the request, initially claimed the State Duma office somehow lost their petition but this was quickly refuted as the Duma chairman ordered the profile parliamentary committees to consider the document and prepare suggestions on possible legislative action.

Some Russian media also suggested that a large part of 100,000 signatures were duplicates and fakes, but given that the Constitutional Committee treated the document as valid, these were simply rumors.

Despite protests from the public, media and even officials, such as the Foreign Minister and Minister of Science and Education, the Dima Yakovlev Law was approved by Parliament, signed by the President and came into force on January 1 this year.

At the same time, Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters that the Russia-US adoptions agreement will remain in force for another year and those orphans whose adoption procedure had already started still had a chance to find new families in America.

On January 13 several thousand protesters marched through Moscow saying they wanted the parliament that drafted and approved the adoptions ban dissolved. The same was suggested in another petition that Novaya Gazeta had prepared which has already collected another 100,000 signatures, according to the daily.

However, the protests and the second petition received a much colder reception from the authorities.

While commenting on the subject in a televised interview, Dmitry Peskov said that the calls to dissolve the parliament deserved neither attention nor respect. He stressed that the government had “nothing to talk about” with the people who disrespect the country’s legislative branch of power. Peskov added that recent opinion polls showed that the majority of Russians supported the ban.

Putin’s spokesman also noted that the people who expressed concern over the fate of Russian orphans were absolutely right. But he called upon them to understand that the legislative measures were not limited to a simple ban, but also included a whole package of measures seeking to simplify domestic adoptions and increase the state aid and tax bonuses for the adoptive parents.”

State Duma dismisses plea to reverse US adoptions ban

[Russia Today 1/14/13]

Update 4: Five more updates

(1) Look at Russia’s population implosion in relationship to the Ban

Russia’s adoption ban may be way to boost population

[Washington Times 1/13/13 by Cheryl Wetzstein]

(2) UNICEF Statement can be found here and pasted below

“Statement by Anthony Lake, UNICEF Executive Director, on the proposed Russian adoption ban

NEW YORK, 26 December 2012 – “While welcoming Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev’s call for the improvement of the child welfare system, UNICEF urges that the current plight of the many Russian children in institutions receives priority attention.

“We ask that the Government of Russia, in its design and development of all efforts to protect children, let the best interests of children – and only their best interests – determine its actions.

“We encourage the government to establish a robust national social protection plan to help strengthen Russian families. Alternatives to the institutionalization of children are essential, including permanent foster care, domestic adoption and inter-country adoption.

“All children deserve an environment that promotes their protection and well-being. Russian children – indeed all children – need to be in protective and loving families or family-like environments.”

(3)Adoption Policy and Reform Committee statement is published on January 14, 2013. See it here.

(4)Fair Russia submits its petition to parliament to rescind ban
“Members of the Fair Russia faction have officially asked parliament to cancel the legislative amendment that bans the adoption of Russian orphans by US citizens.

Three MPs from the opposition leftist party submitted the legislative initiative to the State Duma on Tuesday even though on the same day the Lower House’s constitutional committee announced that no action must be taken on a similar petition prepared by the Novaya Gazeta daily and signed by over 100,000 Russian citizens.

Support of over 100,000 people officially obliges the parliament to treat any petition as a legislative initiative, but the head of the Constitutional Committee stated that there was no effective way to verify the signatures that had been submitted via the internet and therefore no further action would be taken.

Fair Russia’s support by-passes the loophole and forces the Lower House to again consider the fourth amendment to the Dima Yakovlev Law that bans all adoptions of Russian children by US citizens as well as the participation of any US organizations in such adoptions. At the same time, any changes to the law are highly unlikely as in late December the State Duma deputies unanimously voted in support of the bill that contained the ban.

“We want the State Duma to discuss the issue once again. This bill will definitely influence public opinion. Water wears away the stone, every new petition, every rally and every discussion bring us closer to changes,” one of the authors of the proposal, MP Dmitry Gudkov, said in an interview with Novaya Gazeta.

Fair Russia MPs said that they would suggest the Constitutional Committee consider their proposal at its session on Friday, January 18.

Fair Russia MPs added that they based their legislative proposal on the same petition from Novaya Gazeta. The original document reads that the suggestion to cancel the ban on US adoptions is based on the necessity to protect the orphans’ right for adoption and life in a full-pledged family, regardless of ethnicity and citizenship of the adoptive parents. ”

Fair Russia submits parliamentary request to annul ban on US adoptions [Russia Today 1/15/13]

(5)More statistics explained. Domestic Adoption provisions explained.
“In terms of supply and demand, Russia was an “adoptee’s market” with over 128,000 children waiting for adoption and only 18,000 families ready to take them, Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets has said.

Of that number, 105,000 are in so-called “children’s homes” or orphanages, while the others, who are 14 and above, are in special vocational institutions and living in dormitories, she said.

In 2011, that number was 82,000, while just 7,400 were adopted by Russian nationals that year.

Golodets has publicly opposed the adoption ban that came into force Jan 1 as part of Russia’s response to the US’ Magnitsky Act, which introduces sanctions against Russian officials suspected of involvement in human rights abuses.

Late last year, President Vladimir Putin signed the ban into law and issued a decree mandating the simplification of the adoption procedure for Russian nationals.

The new procedure should lower the requirements on housing conditions for prospective adoptive families, reduce the list of adoption-related documents to be submitted to government agencies, and provide legal, organisational and psychological support to adoptive families.

Opponents of the ban say it effectively condemns Russian children in state care to lives of misery in what they say are under-funded and sometimes brutal institutions.

The ban will affect almost all of the children – some with serious illnesses – now at various stages of the adoption process by US families, which the US State Department estimated last week at 500-1,000.”

Adoptions in Russia: Supply exceeds demand

[Zee Nes 1/15/13]

Update 6:

(1) Mirah Riben responds to the ban. See here. The total of children in orphanages is estimated to be 105, 000 to 120,000 at this time, not the 650,000 that she mentions -those are in other types of placements including foster care.

(2)Russian Ombudsman says the ban won’t be lifted no matter how many protest, but those US APs who have received their court decrees would eventually bring their children home.

“Russia’s children’s ombudsman vigorously endorsed the ban on U.S. adoptions Thursday, saying there was no chance it would be lifted no matter how large the protest. However, the 50 or so American families who have received court decisions will be able to take their children home, he said.

In a combative news conference, Pavel Astakhov, the ombudsman, said he has been opposed to U.S. adoptions ever since 2010, when a Tennessee woman put her 7-year-old alone on a plane bound for Moscow accompanied only by a note saying she was returning him because he was violent and unstable.

But he repeatedly said the families with court decrees can take their children, even though regional officials have apparently been refusing to finish the adoptions. “We are talking about 52 families,” he said, “maybe more, maybe less.”

He conceded that some of those families have been denied the final paperwork and promised to intervene personally in those cases. [Oh no! That destroys the “evil guy” narrative that the self-absorbed have!]

“Judges are afraid, employees of migration offices are afraid,” he said. “Everyone’s afraid. That’s the reality, unfortunately.”

Russian official: U.S. adoption ban will stand

[Washington Post 1/17/13 by Kathy Lally]

“The child rights commissioner, Pavel A. Astakhov, said that Americans whose adoptions have already been approved by a court would be allowed to complete the process, and would be issued the birth certificates, passports and other documentation needed to leave Russia with their new children after a required 30-day waiting period.

Theoretically, some of those adoptions could be derailed by the normal procedures that existed before the ban took effect on Jan. 1, but Mr. Astakhov said that was unlikely and that officials would make no special effort to interfere.

“All children on whom there is a court decision will leave the Russian Federation for the States,” Mr. Astakhov said at a 90-minute news conference where he also fiercely defended the adoption ban and complained angrily about cases of physical and sexual abuse of adopted Russian children in the United States. His comments were certain to provide reassurance to several dozen families in the late stages of adoption, some of whom are already here grappling with uncertainty and battling bureaucracy that can be maddening even under the best of circumstances.

But State Department officials have estimated that there are as many as 500 families somewhere in the middle of the lengthy and expensive process. Many of those who do not already have a court approval in hand seem likely to be disappointed.

Mr. Astakhov also acknowledged that there had been substantial confusion and chaos as local and regional officials were in many cases uncertain about how to carry out the ban, and whether they should block adoptions that had already received court approval. “Yes, there is a problem — a transition period,” he said.

He conceded that some officials had tried to deny parents a copy of their new child’s birth certificate, which is needed to obtain a passport and leave the country. This occurred in one case involving parents from the Rocky Mountain region who are in Russia now to adopt a 3-year-old girl who has H.I.V.

After being stonewalled on Tuesday, the girl’s father said he received an apology and the requested birth certificate on Wednesday, and was told that her passport would be ready on Friday.

Rebecca Preece, who is in Moscow to adopt a boy with Down syndrome, said that despite Mr. Astakhov’s comments, the judge in her case refused again on Thursday to sign a decree finalizing the adoption by certifying that the waiting period was completed. The judge approved the adoption last month. “We are still quite confused but much more hopeful than we were this morning,” Mrs. Preece said by e-mail.”

“Although abuse cases are rare, Mr. Astakhov suggested that adopted children were just as likely to fall into the hands of an abusive predator as to find a loving home. Of the latter, he cited Jessica Long, a gold-medal-winning Paralympic swimmer who lost her legs as an infant because of a congenital condition and was adopted from Siberia.

Mr. Astakhov complained of “perverts who tortured 11 boys” and a “pedophile” who raped his adopted daughter for two years. “This is how our children lived in America. And who knows who a disabled orphan will become? Jessica Long, who became a Paralympic champion, or Masha, who was sexually exploited?”

Russia to Let U.S. Adoptions in Final Stages Go Through

[New York Times 1/18/13 by David M. Herszenhorn]

(3) Seven children from St. Petersburg get approved

Seven Russian kids to beat adoption ban

[First Post 1/19/13]

(4) Quantity of disabled children adopted by US citizens and Adoptions from the “Far East” region are brought up in this article

“Americans have adopted more than 60,000 Russian children since the Soviet collapse in 1991, according to the U.S. State Department. From 2000-2010, the figure was above 1,000 every year, with a high of nearly 6,000 in 2004.

Campaigners say most orphans with disabilities never find parents in Russia, making Americans or other foreigners the best hope for escape from Russia’s troubled state children’s homes.

But Astakhov said that of 3,400 Russian children adopted by foreigners in 2011, only about 5 percent were disabled.”

“Defending the ban, Astakhov gave a detailed description of alleged sexual abuse of a Russian-born child by its adoptive American parents and said “child brokers” were trading Russian children in the United States.

“There are not that many countries left in the world today that export their children, let alone sell them,” he said. Foreign adoption agencies “are involved in (child) trade,” he said.

U.S. adoptions of children from Russia’s sparsely populated east, where some Russians fear encroachment by China, were aggravating Russia’s demographic problems, he said.

“Why is the Far East (of Russia) so popular? Think about that for a second. The Far East, where the population halved in 15 years. And still they are carrying children away from there in great numbers,” he said.”

Russia won’t revoke U.S. adoption ban: Putin adviser

[Reuters 1/17/13 by Gabriela Baczynska]

(5) Politicizing Disabled Children by those Against the Ban

Listen to this 12 minute interview with a Russian Adoptee and Professor Smolin here.

Professor Smolin at about minute 6:07 says that there are problems with trafficking in international adoption, “but they do not involve Russia”. He does not at all discuss the trafficking of children away from domestic placements to international placements by way of large sums of money in the international fees. Instead, he focuses on postplacement reports.He then talks about the horrible child welfare system in Russia.He, like so many others who are against the ban, focus only on the past and does not lend any credibility too how they are now trying to fix it-the goals that Russia has set-starting with the appointment of the Ombudsman three years ago and the foster parent schools being set up nor the regions that we discuss in our response where foster care covers almost all the children. There is no mention about certain US-adoption-agency-dominated regions in which there are lopsided international placements versus domestic placements.

At about 8:14 he says that they need to “have a foster care system”. Well, they actually already have one. Six out of seven children in state care are not in orphanages.Two examples that I stated in my response: there are 2000 foster families in Krasnodar Territory allowing 9 out of 10 orphans to be in families. In Tyumen region, 89 percent of children are in foster families. Does this need to be spread to all other regions? Of course, it does.

At 11:05 he again says “Adoption trafficking does happen,  not from Russia.”

I was shocked to hear that twice-denial of adoption trafficking in one interview along with how Russia does not have a foster care system.

Adoptee Alexander D’Jamoos mentions that “one option” for disabled children in Russia is to go to adult nursing homes. Yes, that is correct…but not only for disabled children in Russia, but disabled children, teens and young adults in the US.

I think the following US statistics need to be recognized: From an October 2012 NPR interview, there are 6,000 disabled children under age 21 in the US in adult nursing homes.

In fact, in Florida, placing disabled children in adult nursing homes is so bad that the federal government has issued a warning to Florida. See this September 2012 article “

Justice Department investigators visited six large nursing homes in Florida where over 200 children with a variety of disabilities are housed. They also spoke with parents, many of whom indicated that they would prefer to care for their kids at home, but have been unable to secure assistance from the state to do so.

In many cases, kids living in the facilities are limited to specific areas and spend little time outside of the homes which resemble hospitals, investigators said. Some children are hundreds of miles from their families.

While the average length of stay was three years at the locations visited, investigators found kids who had been in nursing homes for more than a decade.”

This 2010 article discusses the scope of this issue in the US.”Many families are forced to institutionalize their disabled children in nursing homes because of many states don’t have the resources to pay for in–home care.

This puts parents in the difficult position of funding expensive home care on their own or having their child live in a nursing home, surrounded by elderly adults, and many families simply cannot afford the cost of in-home care workers and nurses.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that about 4,000 children live in nursing homes in the U.S. and that number is steadily growing as health care resources are increasingly spread thin.

Thousands of children with disabilities end up living in nursing homes because of insufficient coverage for in-home care by state governments and a shortage of skilled home care workers. In 2000, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services estimated that 4,886 children lived in nursing homes; of these children, 1,222 suffered from mental retardation or a developmental disability.

Medicaid guarantees long-term care for all people with disabilities, including children. However, many disabled children, who would be adequately served by proper in-home care, end up in nursing homes despite higher costs for nursing home care than in-home care.”

A 2002 statistic on US children in adult nursing homes can be seen here.

Page 61 of this colossal pdf shows that 4.2% of those in large institutions are under 21. Pages 65 and 67 give other tables of statistics. Page 68 mentions the type of disability: 6.7% of those in large facilities are deaf; 15.3% are blind;22.8% have cerebral palsy; 45.1% have epilepsy;43.9% have psychiatric disorders; 48.4% have behavioral disorders; 66% have multiple conditions;13.1% autism

Update 7: Nine  new items to share

(1) US citizens Sanctioned by Russia

“Alexei Pushkov, chairman of the foreign relations committee in the lower house of parliament, said Friday the list as drafted last month initially included 11 U.S. officials involved in running the prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and other sites allegedly used by the U.S. and its allies as secret prisons to hold terrorism suspects. The list was expanded this month to 60 people, he said.

Among U.S. officials added to the list were “judges, investigators, justice ministry officials and special services agents who were involved in Russian citizens Viktor Bout’s and Konstantin Yaroshenko’s legal prosecution and sentencing to long terms of imprisonment,” he said.

Pushkov also said that the list included members of Congress and American citizens allegedly guilty of the maltreatment and death of Russian orphans they adopted, as well as “judges who passed wrong rulings on those cases and psychiatrists who asserted that those children had inborn defects and serious development deviations which caused their deaths.”
The list may be expanded to include other U.S. officials, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told RIA Novosti.”

Russians draft ‘Guantanamo list’ to sanction U.S. officials

[Los Angeles Times 1/18/13 by Sergei L. Loiko]

(2) Factually Incorrect Piece about Russian Orphan Abuse

While I am glad they mention some of the high-profile cases, they bizarrely include at least 2 that are NOT Russian international adoption cases and one is not even involving any Russian child. He lumps the Anton Fomin case in here which was Russian parents giving     guardianship over to Russians (not international adoption at all ) and bizarrely states  that Jorge Barahona adopted Russian twins and that case was from 2005 [They were twins from US foster care and it occurred February 2011 and has yet to be tried] .

The facts about Russia’s new necessary US adoption ban

[Pravda 1/23/13 by  George Green]

(3)US Ambassador to Russia makes lame attempt to throw postplacement report followup back into Russia’s face

It’s not like US adoptive parents or providers were providing this prior to the ban. Duh! That has been part of the problem to begin with. Russia has maintained a blacklist for years over the missing postplacement reports.

Russia’s lost opportunity to monitor orphans adopted in US – Ambassador

[Russia Today 1/22/13]

(4)Opinion in Russia Article brings Adoption Tax Credit, cost of adoption, lack of certain treaties and safety in America into the argument for the ban

The list of treaties the US hasn’t signed that pertain to human rights: “the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Mine Ban Treaty, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.

The US is the only country in the world, other than Somalia, that has not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the most widely and rapidly ratified human rights treaty in history. As for the CEDAW, it is one of only seven countries including: Iran, Nauru, Palau, Somalia, Sudan and Tonga that has failed to ratify the convention.

One might argue that the US has ratified the Hague Conventions on International Adoptions, however there is no recourse for violations to the conventions and they are largely ignored.”[Of course the reason is that adoption agencies put this treaty together with its own financial interests in mind.]

Foreign child adoption as sound “investment” and business for Americans, or why Dima Yakovlev Law is necessary to protect Russian children

[The Voice of Russia 1/23/13 by John Robles]

(5)Russia Supreme Court Confirms that cases that passed court will be allowed to proceed

“Russian children whose adoptions received court approval before January 1, 2013, must go to their adoptive parents in the United States even if the decisions formally take effect after that date, the Russian Supreme Court ruled this week, clarifying how to implement a ban on adoptions of Russian children by Americans.

“Children whose adoptions by US nationals were approved by courts before January 1, 2013, and have come into force, including after January 1, 2013, must be turned over to their adoptive parents,” the deputy chairman of the Russian Supreme Court said in a letter addressed to lower courts and posted on the court’s website on Tuesday.

The decision should ease the confusion and red tape encountered by a number of American families who have come to Russia in hopes of taking home adoptive children whose cases had already been approved by Russian courts.

“In accordance with Clause 3 of Article 125 of the Russian Family Code and Part 2 of Article 274 of the Civil Procedure Code, the rights and duties of adoptive families take effect as of the day the court’s approval of the adoption comes into force,” says the letter, signed by deputy chairman Vasily Nechayev.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who initially expressed doubts about the ban, defended it Wedneday, saying it “reflects our assessment of what’s happening in the US adoption system overall.” He added that in many cases American parents have rejected their adoptive children.

It is not clear how many families have been affected by the ban. The US State Department has said that between 500 and 1,000 American families had been at some stage of trying to adopt Russian children when it took effect on January 1. Russian officials, however, have said the number is smaller.”

Russia’s Top Court Clarifies Adoption Rules for Americans

[RIA Novosti 1/23/13]

(6)Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov Defends Adoption Ban citing Lack of Access to Maxim  as proof treaty wouldn’t work

“Lavrov, speaking at an annual news conference summing up the year in foreign policy, also defended a controversial ban on American adoptions, citing the reported abuse and deaths of some Russian children adopted by families in the United States.

The foreign minister said that Russia has not received similar reports of mistreatment of Russian children adopted in European countries and that those adoptions would continue. He spoke optimistically, however, about future relations with the United States, saying Russia wants constructive dialogue and cooperation with Washington even though he stressed that any acts that Moscow considered unfriendly would be met with a stern response.

Lavrov oversaw long negotiations on the adoption issue that resulted in an agreement with the United States that went into effect in the fall. By December, however, Russia’s parliament had decided to nullify the agreement and halt U.S. adoptions.

At first, Lavrov counseled against the ban. But he quickly abandoned that stance. On Wednesday, he avoided answering a question about his personal feelings on the issue.

Instead, he criticized U.S. authorities for not allowing Russian officials access to adopted Russian children, citing the case of 6-year-old Maxim Babayev, who was removed from a Florida home because of child abuse charges. Consular officials were not able to visit the boy last year, Lavrov said.

“It was a telling situation,” he said. “We saw no willingness to help us.”

Lavrov said he understood very well that the vast majority of the children adopted by American families find loving homes. But he said that, according to Russian estimates, dozens have been abused and that at least 19, including a toddler left in a vehicle in Northern Virginia in 2008, have died.”

 

Russia denies plans for mass evacuation from Syria, defends U.S. adoptions ban

[The Washington Post 1/23/13 by Kathy Lally]

(7)Russia may treat child adoption for cash as trafficking

“Adoption of children involving payments will be considered by Russia as trafficking, according to a new bill debated in parliament.

Russian Deputy Interior Minister Igor Zubov revealed Wednesday: “If the legislature is approved, cases of child adoption and of taking them under guardianship or patronage for money will be subject to this new law.”

The Russian parliament’s lower house, the State Duma, was debating the bill aimed at combating child trafficking and slavery as well as child prostitution and pornography.

The new bill under discussion in the State Duma proposes a fine of up to one million rubles (over $33,000) for the organization of child slavery and trafficking and distribution of child pornography.

According to data from the Unicef around 1.2 million children annually are victims of child trafficking, the minister said.”

Russia may treat child adoption for cash as trafficking

[The Province 1/23/13 by RIA/Novosti]

(8)Russia debates other child welfare measures as part of the larger picture of this ban.

“The Kremlin’s recent halt to adoptions to the U.S. has opened a rancorous debate that extends beyond the country’s orphans—to the tens of thousands of other children who have been separated from their living parents and sent to state orphanages.

On Wednesday evening, Russia’s government-run Channel One devoted an hour of prime time to a raucous talk show about an impoverished family that has become a reluctant national symbol of the issue.

On Dec. 21, three Russian welfare officials entered a tumbledown log cabin occupied by Irina Voskresenskaya and her husband in a village about 120 miles from Moscow, according to social workers, a family friend and the televised account. Their four children—all under the age of five—were sleeping on dirty sheets or bare mattresses. While the temperature outside was minus 30 degrees Celsius (minus 22 Fahrenheit), the wood-burning stove was cold because the family had run out of firewood, according to the welfare workers.

Welfare officials put Ms. Voskresenskaya and her two younger children in a hospital and sent the older two to an orphanage, according to regional officials and Vladmir Akimkin, a family friend and attorney. The welfare officials said they intended to ask a court to determine whether the family or an orphanage should get custody of the children, according to these people.

The seizure fell on the same day that Russia’s parliament passed its law banning U.S. adoptions. The report and similar accounts have ripped the bandage off a long-festering question: Why does Russia have as many children up for adoption as the U.S., a country twice its size?

In Russia’s vast and poor agrarian regions, which have largely failed to recover from the collapse of Soviet collective farms, unemployment and alcoholism are rampant. Many parents there leave infants at the hospital because they can’t afford to care for them, especially if the children have chronic illnesses or birth defects.

But critics of Russia’s orphanage system say the state also has enormous discretion on when to take children from their parents. A 2008 law strengthened the mandate by specifying that the government can take custody when parents are a hindrance “to the normal development of the child.”

The wording gives government officials “a very broad mandate to take away a child,” said Elena Alshanskaya, founder of a nonprofit group Volunteers for Orphaned Children. With Russia so far offering few subsidies to families who offer foster care, many such children end up in orphanages.

Ms. Alshanskaya and other critics say officials in the resource-rich country could take small steps, like helping to buy firewood. Instead, these people say, officials are spending money to put infants in dormitories, where every new child means an addition to orphanage budgets.

The Kremlin has promised new aid to families and incentives to adopt or become foster parents, under its “Russia Without Orphans” initiative. In an interview with a Moscow newspaper, President Vladimir Putin’s adviser on child rights said one Siberian region, Kemerovo, has already pioneered some of the plans.”If every region followed it, I assure you we will solve this problem in two years,” the adviser said.

As for the recent seizure, the government was obliged to intervene, said Vladimir Babichev, a top welfare official in Tverskaya Region, where it occurred. Given the bitter cold, the matter would have ended in tragedy, he said in an interview. “The issue was saving their lives,” Mr. Babichev said.

The family denied the house was dangerously cold, saying they had been burning trash but the fire had burned out overnight, according to Mr. Akimkin.

Russia has some 600,000 children not in parental custody—who live in orphanages, with foster families or relatives—the government says. About 80%, it says, have living parents. According Russia’s education ministry, the number of children sent to orphanages fell to 82,200 in 2011, from as high as 133,000 in 2005. The reason for the reported decline wasn’t immediately clear.

While many in Russia support the government’s recent adoption ban, critics say it will make it that much harder to help some 120,000 children in Russia who are up for adoption. According to Russian government databases, there are fewer than 20,000 prospective families for these children inside the country.

Reports of official seizures of children, many of which couldn’t be confirmed, have nonetheless struck a nerve. Russian news outlets have come alive with reports of abandonment and seizure of children. In the Ural Mountains, officials have threatened to confiscate children because a family’s apartment is sparsely furnished, or the refrigerator is empty, one news site reported.

Ms. Voskresenskaya, a former dairy worker, met her husband, Alexei Zaitsev, while they worked on a farm, according to welfare officials in the region and Mr. Akimkin, the family friend and attorney. The couple settled in their village of Kuznetskov in part because the village administration offered them a vacant log cabin, these people said. Mr. Zaitsev earned about $600 a month as a handyman in the region, and the family was entitled to about $200 a year in government aid, Mr. Akimkin said.

The family appeared on welfare officials’ radar in 2010 when their then-two-year-old son, Pavel, was hospitalized with burns after he sat in a bucket of water his mother had boiled on the wood stove to wash clothes, according to Mr. Babichev.

The late December seizure came to broader attention after Mr. Akimkin appealed to local authorities to return the couple’s children, saying he would provide firewood and monetary help. Welfare officials refused, he said, saying the matter had already been referred to a court.

Mr. Akimkin publicized the issue in blogs and in local newspapers until the family was invited—along with neighbors, friends and the welfare officials who visited thehome—to appear on a state-run channel where such dialogue has been spare.

The studio audience of Wednesday’s pre-recorded broadcast—a rambunctious, Jerry Springer-style talk show called “Pust Govoryat,” or Let Them Talk—viewed images of the family’s home, a dirty scene of bare beds, trash and a grimy bathtub filled with ice. Host Andrei Malakhov pointed a finger at the weeping 26-year-old Ms. Voskresenskaya, calling her a feebleminded drinker and “a danger to the life of her own family.” An audience member shouted that the children shouldn’t be returned to a pig sty.

Ms. Voskreskenskaya, now pregnant with a fifth child, sat mostly tongue-tied. Mr. Zaitsev said he loved his wife and his children even if they lived poorly.

The welfare officials who sought to confiscate the children, and the government, also came under fire. “Any man with dirty pants can have his children taken away,” shouted audience-member Mikhail Bondarev. “In France, if you have three children, the state supports you.”

Mr. Akimkin confirmed that the house and laundry often was dirty when welfare officials arrived, because the family simply lived under tough conditions. With no running water in the house, it was difficult to wash or dry laundry in the winter.

At the end of the show, the state welfare officials insisted they had done the right thing by seizing the children. But they also promised to reunite the family.

“It was really clearly hurting the mother to lose her four children,” Mr. Malakhov, the host, said after taping. “But she has to show she has enough brains to fix her stove.””

After Adoption Law, Russia Debates Seizure of Children

[The Wall Street Journal 1/23/13 by Alan Cullison]

Update 8: Two new items

(1) Four US PAP families file a complaint with the European organization  European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

“The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has communicated to Russia the complaint filed by four families from the United States who were unable to adopt Russian children, their lawyer Karina Moskalenko told RAPSI on Tuesday.

The complaint over Russia’s recently passed adoption ban was filed on January 22 by four families, who have been left stranded in the middle of their adoption process. The ECHR registered the complaint on January 23. The plaintiffs are represented by Moskalenko’s International Protection Center in Moscow.

The court urgently considered the complaint on January 28 and requested a reply from the Russian authorities, Moskalenko said. The court expects a reply no later than February 18.

In Moskalenko’s view, the enactment of the law banning adoptions violated the requirements under the European Convention on Human Rights. She named Article 3, which prohibits torture, Article 8, which provides for protecting one’s private and family life, and Article 14, which safeguards against discrimination.”

ECHR processes US adoption complaint against Russia

[RAPSI News 1/29/13]

“According to Moskalenko, the complaint was filed on January 22 by four families who had not yet received court orders permitting their pending adoptions of Russian orphans when the law entered into force.

In Moskalenko’s view, the law’s enactment was repugnant to the minimum requirements required by the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention). She specifically raises claims under articles 3 – which prohibits torture, 8 – which provides for protection of one’s private and family life, and 14 – which protects against discrimination.

The claimants don’t only want the breaches that they assert they suffered personally to be fixed; they urge the enactment of amendments to the law.

They further argue that Russia lacks an effective mechanism to allow them to launch an appeal. As a result, the families further assert a violation of Article 13 of the Convention, which protects the right to effective remedy.”

[Wow! I want! I want ! I want! TORTURE? Seriously?]

Four US families file claims with ECHR challenging Russian adoption ban

[RAPSI News 1/24/13]

(2) 3-Page PDF response of Ambassador-at-Large Konstantin Dolgov to Senator Mary Landrieu. See here. He specifically mentions lack of access to Maxim Babylev [Traylor of Florida] and Ranch for Kids.

Update 9: DOS Russia Alert of January 24, 2013

See here and pasted below:

“Alert: Russian Supreme Court Letter on Implementation of Federal Law No. 272-FZ

On December 28, 2012, President Vladimir Putin signed into law Federal Law No. 272-FZ. This law went into effect on January 1, 2013. It bans the adoption of Russian children by U.S. citizens, bars adoption service providers from assisting U.S. citizens in adopting Russian children, and requires termination of the U.S.-Russia Adoption Agreement.

On January 22, the Deputy Chairman of the Russian Supreme Court issued a letter to city and regional courts explaining the implementation of Federal Law No. 272-FZ. The letter states that for adoption cases in which court decisions involving U.S. citizen parents were made before January 1, 2013, (including those that entered into force after January 1, 2013 following the 30-day waiting period), the children should be transferred to the custody of their adoptive parents. [Note: the original letter in Russian can be found athttp://www.supcourt.ru/Show_pdf.php?Id=8403; an unofficial English translation is available at http://moscow.usembassy.gov/adoptions-supreme-court.html.]

We understand that several U.S. families have already obtained final adoption decrees in accordance with this guidance. The Department of State continues to strongly encourage U.S. families, in cooperation with their adoption service providers, to seek confirmation from Russian authorities that their adoptions will be processed to conclusion, prior to traveling to Russia.

The United States continues to urge the Russian government to allow all U.S. families who were in the process of adopting a child from Russia prior to January 1 to complete their adoptions so that these children may join permanent, loving families. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Consular Section at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow continue to process Forms I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative, and immigrant visa applications for children whose families have obtained all required documents as part of the adoption process.

U.S. families in the process of adopting a child from Russia may continue to contact the Office of Children’s Issues at RussiaAdoption@state.gov. The Office of Children’s Issues will reach out directly to families as additional information becomes available. Further information regarding intercountry adoption from Russia will also be posted on www.adoption.state.gov”

Update 10: Some US Senators meet with the Russian Ambassador to the US.

“Senators failed to extract any significant concessions from Russia on Wednesday after an hourlong meeting about the country’s ban on adoptions from the United States.

The meeting with the Russian ambassador was spearheaded by Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), both parents of adopted children. They urged Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to press Russian leaders to revisit the law banning Americans from adopting Russian children and to ensure that adoptions currently under way can be completed.

“I wouldn’t say the meeting was overly encouraging,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told reporters after the meeting. “There is a law. And our request was, within that law, and the international adoption agreement [Russia] signed that requires a year’s notice, let’s find some opening that allows these adoptions to be completed.”
The Russian parliament enacted the ban last December in retaliation for U.S. travel and financial sanctions against alleged Russian human rights violators as well as several incidents involving adopted Russians. U.S. lawmakers are trying to get Russia to allow some adoptions that have already commenced to go through.

“We discussed with the ambassador that there are two issues on our mind,” said Landrieu, the co-chairwoman of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption. “One, finding a way to continue to process the cases of children — there are about 500 or less out of thousands in the pipeline — that have already been matched with parents … [and] how to fix this in the long run.”

Kislyak said he was grateful for the conversation and remains open to further discussions.

“I reassured them that everything that was said to us will be conveyed to the capital,” he said.

Kislyak was accompanied by the embassy’s senior legal counselor, Sergey Chumarev, who helped draft the U.S.-Russian adoption agreement that was signed in 2011. The agreement spells out the legal process for adoptions but does not require any to occur.

The ban is part of a series of actions by Russia that demonstrate a sharp deterioration in U.S.-Russian relations since Vladimir Putin’s contested reelection last year. In the latest example of the failed “reset” with the Obama administration, Russia on Wednesday terminated an agreement with the United States on law enforcement cooperation and narcotics control.

“We obviously regret that decision because under our agreement we’ve had a fruitful cooperation with Russia,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.

The ban is widely seen as retaliation for last year’s passage of the Magnitsky Act, which targets Russian human rights violators. Asked whether senators had offered any political concessions to the Russians to get them to overturn the adoption ban, Blunt responded, “I have nothing to say on that topic.”

But he made it clear Congress won’t be revisiting the Magnitsky Act.

“We didn’t talk about that,” he said.

Landrieu, for her part, extended an olive branch on the issue of adoptions. Russian officials have complained that some U.S. judges have blocked Russian consular officers’ access to Russian children suspected of abuse or negligence, and she vowed to work with Russia to address the country’s concerns.

“The country of Russia has not been able to get all the information that they need, and it’s caused them some concern,” she said. “I am committed to work with them in the long run to see what we can do to re-establish relations.””

Russia refuses to bend on adoption ban

[The Hill 1/30/13 by Julian Pecquet]

“U.S. Sen.Jack Reed Wednesday urged Russia to reverse a new law that bans Americans from adopting Russian children,

Reed, who met with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., also asked the Russian government to allow any pending adoptions to go forward.

While the Russian adoption ban is not effective until 2014, Reed said he is concerned that hundreds of families that have already started the adoption process will be left in limbo.

“I appreciate Ambassador Kislyak taking the time to meet with us and hear our concerns. We don’t want to see innocent children used as pawns in political disagreements,” Reed said.”

Sen. Reed urges Russia to reverse adoption ban

[Providence Journal 1/30/13 by Paul Davis]

Chairman of Russian Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin,  invites US Attorney General to talk about Russia abuse cases

“In a letter to the US Attorney General, the Chairman of the Investigative Committee describes the abuse of adopted Russian children in the United States as an acute problem, urging for talks to facilitate probes into such crimes.

­Aleksandr Bastrykin said in his letter that when he met US Attorney General Eric Holder in Moscow in May 2012 they both agreed that violence against Russian orphans adopted by US families was a serious problem.

The two officials then agreed to make this problem one of the primary areas of cooperation between the Russian Investigative Committee and the Department of Justice in the United States.

The Russian official says that since this meeting, the situation regarding the health and wellbeing of the Russian adoptees has not significantly improved.

The head of Russia’s top law enforcement body requested the US provide information on state attorneys’ positions on a number of cases in which US adoptive parents are suspected of abusing their adopted Russian children.

Bastrykin presented a list of family names – which include the Russian names of the orphans before their adoption, and their new American names following the adoption process – suspected of child negligence and possibly abuse.

In addition, the head of the Investigative Committee asked the US Attorney General to inform Russia on what measures were taken by state attorneys to prevent the abuse of the adopted children in the future.

Bastrykin invited the Attorney General to pay a working visit to the Russian Federation at any time so they could discuss both the current situation and ways to solve the problem. Russia’s top investigator also expressed his readiness for future cooperation in the sphere of law enforcement.

Russian authorities have repeatedly criticized America’s handling of parents who are accused of abusing their adopted children, pointing to light sentences handed down to convicted abusers, as well as the reluctance of US officials to allow Russian consular workers to meet with the victims.”

Top Russian investigator invites US Attorney General to discuss abuse of adopted children

[Russia Today 2/4/13]

Update 11: “Russian officials have said that moves by the British and French governments to approve same-sex marriage in their respective countries will preclude couples of such unions from adopting Russian orphans.

“The British and French parliaments have legalized same-sex marriages,” Konstantin Dolgov, human rights envoy at the Russian foreign ministry, said, according to the Telegraph. “This narrows the chances of citizens of these countries adopting Russian children.”

Pavel Astakhov, Russia’s children’s rights ombudsman, specifically said same-sex couples in France would not be allowed to adopt Russian children in a recent statement, according to Russia Today.
Astakhov cited the Russian constitution’s strict definition of marriage as a “union of a man and a woman,” as the reason for this policy.

“The official position on gay marriages is stated in Russian official documents, the family code and the constitution,” he said. “They put it straight that the marriage is a union of a man and a woman. We do not have anything else. Period.”

Boris Dittrich, advocacy director for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Program at Human Rights Watch, said his organization disagreed with the Russian officials’ statements and that, although it is within the Russian government’s jurisdiction to decide who can adopt children from within the country, “the best interest of the child” should be considered.

“The sexual orientation of the parents is irrelevant,” Dittrich said. “So long as the parents provide love and affection to the child — that is the most important.”

“This is really in line with the homophobic attitude of the Russian government,” he added, citing the recent passing by the Russian parliament of a ban against promotion of gay rights in public.

Adoption Ban For American Couples

The Russian statements follow a controversial ban on adoption by American couples, which was passed in December.

Moscow claimed that it had implemented the prohibition, because Russian children were being abused by their adoptive parents in the U.S., citing the case of Dima Yakovlev, a Russian toddler who died in 2008 after being left in a locked car for nine hours by his adoptive father.

The ban, however, has been widely viewed as retaliation for the U.S. approval of the Magnitsky Act two weeks earlier, a law that allowed the U.S. government to sanction Russian officials suspected of human rights violations.

Russian legislator Leonid Kalashnikov, who was not present for the vote on the U.S. adoption ban, described the law as vindictive.

“The Kremlin didn’t really want to spoil relations with the United States but couldn’t leave an unfriendly act unanswered,” Kalashnikov said, the Los Angeles times reported. “So they let off steam by using the fate of thousands of orphans as a lever of political pressure.”

There are currently more than 700,000 orphans in Russia, increasing at a rate of 113,000 children every year, according to the Russian Children’s Welfare Society based in New York.”

Nyet! Russia May Ban Adoption For Gay Couples In Britain, France

[International Business Times 2/6/13 by Ryan Villarreal]

Update 12:

(1)Putin is for Russia domestic adoptions and panel about US abuse of Russian adoptees will meet in Fall 2013

“President Vladimir Putin believes orphaned Russian children must be adopted in Russia.

The US has agreed to cooperate with Russia’s Investigation Committee on cases in which American adoptive parents are suspected of abusing orphaned Russian children.

This came Friday in an announcement by IC’s spokesman Vladimir Markin.

On February, 6 Committee’s head Alexander Bastrykin submitted a letter describing the issue to the US Department of Justice.

The same day the letter was passed on to US Attorney General Eric Holder, who agreed that violence against adopted Russian orphans was a serious problem and expressed willingness to cooperate.

US-Russian panel on adopted child abuse set for Moscow

The next panel on violence against adopted Russian children in the United States will be held in Moscow in autumn 2013, the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office has said.

A working group has been set up by the US Department of Justice and the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office to deal with bilateral legal cooperation on US-Russia adoptions. The latest session of the experts’ panel is wrapping up in Washington.”

‘Adopt Russian orphans in Russia’ – Putin

[Voice of Russia 2/9/13]

(2) Moscow Envoy Speaks of Adoptee Abuse and more

“Russia’s ban of adoptions by US parents was enacted solely with the welfare of Russian children in mind, Moscow’s top envoy to Washington said this week, despite widespread perception among Americans that it was a retaliatory political act.

Speaking in an interview with RIA Novosti, Ambassador Sergei Kislyak lamented an unwillingness among many in the United States even to listen to Russia’s case for halting US adoptions, evidence of a polarizing dynamic he said speaks to deeper dysfunctions in the relationship between the two countries.

“I wouldn’t call it a reaction to Magnitsky. It wasn’t,” said Kislyak, referring to a US law crafted to punish Russians deemed by Washington to have violated human rights. That law was passed days before Russia imposed its ban and media in both countries characterized the latter as strictly tit-for-tat retaliation.

“It coincided because people were discussing the issue of human rights” in both Washington and Moscow, Kislyak said, “and that was kind of the trigger of the reaction of many people in the Duma,” the Russian parliament that overwhelmingly approved the US adoption ban in December.

“Russian kids who are being adopted here sometimes are not properly cared for,” he said. “And we also have a feeling that we cannot get enough access to information about the kids.”

Tragic Cases of Abuse

Kislyak, 62, a large and jovial career diplomat with an easy smile and a fluent command of English, said he recognized that many Russian children adopted by American parents over the past two decades had been taken into loving families and given a safe and healthy start in life.

But he also pointed to a number of cases – statistical aberrations that have received extensive media coverage in Russia but little in the United States – that caused real alarm in Moscow and that he said testified to problems specific to the United States that Russia has grappled with in its efforts to ensure the well-being of its children.

Kislyak cited a recent situation in Florida, a notorious case in Virginia involving an adopted child whose Russian name – Dmitry Yakovlev – was attached to the adoption ban law, and questions about a facility for Russian orphans in Montana that has been the focus of intense Russian scrutiny in recent years.

“We called in advance, we tried in advance, we wanted to seek cooperation of the ranch,” Kislyak said, describing efforts by Russian officials to visit the Montana facility that has developed a reputation for helping Russian adoptees who have faced serious difficulties with their new American families.

“It was never shown to us,” he said. “The question I ask is, why? Is it a problem for them to allow the kids to meet with their compatriots? It’s amazing. And we certainly have a lot of doubts about what is happening” at the facility.

US media outlets have visited the ranch and have published glowing reports about the work with Russian orphans done there. But in the incident last year to which Kislyak referred, a group of Russian officials was turned away at the gates, an episode that got prominent coverage by Russian media.

[Contacted by RIA Novosti, the director of the Montana facility, Joyce Sterkel, took issue with Kislyak’s account. In a telephone interview, Sterkel said she was uneasy from the start about the Russian delegation’s visit. An official from the Russian consulate had recently visited the facility on two separate occasions and “we could see this was a political move,” she said, without elaborating. Sterkel said she proposed arranging the visit at another time and made clear to the Russian officials that they would not be permitted to enter the facility if they insisted on showing up at the time of their choosing.]

New Treaty ‘Wasn’t Working’

Whatever the circumstances surrounding the Montana ranch episode, it is precisely this kind of follow-up verification that a new US-Russian adoption treaty was supposed to foster for Russian officials who want to check on the welfare of Russian children adopted by US families.

That bilateral pact only went into effect on November 1 last year and optimists in both Russia and the United States had high hopes that it would resolve thorny adoption issues faced by both countries.

Unfortunately, said Kislyak of the treaty, “it wasn’t working. … We didn’t have one single good case to report that, yes, after the approval of this agreement we did see a new situation” in Russia’s ability to check on the welfare of Russian adoptees in the United States. “Nothing changed.”

He cited in particular the Florida case last December in which a US couple was charged with hitting and trying to strangle the six-year-old Russian boy they had adopted. A police report also cited evidence of ongoing physical abuse and possible sexual abuse.

Kislyak said that under the new adoption agreement the authorities in Florida should have ensured unimpeded access of Russian officials to the court proceedings.

“It was after the treaty came into force,” he stated. “And we were not welcome there. According to the agreement, government authorities would be trying to facilitate our access. But this didn’t happen.”

The case ultimately resulted in probation for the adoptive parents. The Russian boy, whom Russian officials still have not seen, was placed in foster care.

Part of the problem can be attributed to an apparent disconnect on the issue of citizenship. Kislyak said Russia considers its adoptees to be Russians with dual Russian-US citizenship, a status that typically entitles a country to have consular access to its citizens when they are on foreign soil.

The US position on this particular question is not clear. Officials from the State Department and the Homeland Security Department contacted about this issue this week offered contradictory guidance on how to interpret US law.

The text of the treaty stipulates that both Russia and the United States entered the agreement with the best interests of the adopted children at heart, but it does little to clarify the rules on this point.

‘Russian Roulette’ For Kids

“It feels like ‘Russian roulette’ for kids,” Kislyak said, describing the unhappiness that has been building for years among Russian legislators, policymakers and the general public about cases of Russian adoptee abuse in the United States, rare though they may be.

“We have a sense that maybe some of the parents might think: ‘if it’s a Russian kid, you can afford to dispense with it the moment you do not like it’,” the ambassador said.

Talking of the Montana facility, he added: “The whole idea of a ‘camp’ for kids that were adopted then at some point people lost their love for them and they sent them to a camp to grow up … it’s not what we approved by court decision in Russia.”

And referring to Dmitry Yakovlev (Chase Harrison, as he was renamed by his adoptive parents), the Russian adoptee toddler who died in Virginia after being forgotten for nine hours in a closed car on a hot summer’s day, Kislyak said the tragedy had been a source of profound national anguish in Russia.

“He wasn’t even recognized to be guilty,” Kislyak said of the boy’s adoptive father, Miles Harrison, who was acquitted in 2008 for the death.

“For the Russian mind, for the Russian soul, for the Russian legal system, it’s incomprehensible,” he said.

Specific US ‘Psychological Climate’

During the hour-long conversation in a reception room at the Russian embassy in Washington, Kislyak, the father of an adult daughter, seemed genuinely passionate about Russia’s obligation to protect its orphan children wherever they are and acknowledged many have been well treated in the United States.

He was visibly moved in recounting how, on expressing his gratitude to one American woman who adopted several Russian children she turned the tables and instead thanked him, saying that bringing those Russian children into her family was among the happiest experiences of her life.

But he insisted the Russian adoption ban was imposed to protect Russian children and said American parents had been singled out not for political reasons but because Russia had encountered concrete problems specifically in the United States that it did not face, for example, in Europe and elsewhere.

“I wouldn’t like to characterize American people as ‘different’ from others,” said Kislyak.

“But the system that works here, the legislation, sometimes the way Americans live is different. The level of violence, the number of weapons in free flow in the country, we hear each and every day, it’s also part of the psychological climate that is somewhat different.

“We also have our own share of problems with criminals and terrorists, but I think that overall the feeling of security for kids in Russia is still there,” he said.

Critics of the Russian adoption ban accuse Moscow of ruthlessly playing politics with the lives of its own children and of inflicting small-minded, mean-spirited pain on the many who do good in punishment for the transgressions of a very few.

Kislyak, echoing comments from other Russian officials and activists, countered however that math and morality must not be confused on this emotional topic and that while high-profile cases of adoptee abuse are well known, Russia has reason to question if other cases lurk below the opaque surface.

“We are not sure that we know all the statistics because nobody here in the States is collecting them and nobody even tries to inform us about this,” said Kislyak.

He declined to be drawn into the debate over specific number of abuse cases involving Russian orphans in the United States, saying: “Whatever we know is usually from reading the newspapers. … But we cannot be indifferent to what’s happening to these kids.”

“I’m not going into statistics, because each and every life of a kid is so valuable in its own right. Our problem was to see to it that each and every kid that goes to the US is happily adopted there. And it’s not the case.” He paused and repeated himself emphatically: “It is not the case.”

Broader Problems in Russia-US Relationship

Behind the weight of numbers and the inflamed passions over the adoption issue, Kislyak said, it demonstrated that there is a larger and deep-seated psychology at work in the relationship between Russia and the United States that often favors angry finger-pointing over calm discussion of problems.

“You Americans make a decision as to who’s right and who’s wrong in Russia,” asserted Kislyak, referring to the US Magnitsky Law – named for Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian whistle-blowing lawyer who died in prison – whose passage immediately preceded Russia’s decision to ban adoptions by US parents.

“You decide to announce who is guilty and to punish for things that you have no precise knowledge of and that people do not even care to look into. That is kind of an attempt to extend American legislation on Russian sovereign territory,” he said.

The Russian ambassador described the passage by the US Congress of the Magnitsky Law as intentionally and “absolutely offensive” to Russia – of demonstrating “ultimate disrespect, even unwillingness to look into matters of substance,” a lingering Cold War hangover.

And Kislyak pointed to the angry US reaction to Russia’s recent decision to suspend imports of American beef and port which contain a feed additive – ractopamine – that is forbidden in Russia as further evidence of what he said was Washington’s refusal to offer the basic respect that it demands for itself.

“We have had many long discussions with our American colleagues as to why we cannot accept” the US meat, Kislyak explained. “Our scientists say it’s dangerous, it’s a medicine. And it’s prohibited.”

In response, however, “we are told that material wasn’t harmful to Americans so it won’t be harmful to us,” he said, adding: “We do not buy this argument. And, by the way, we have our own laws.”

Ractopamine is permitted in trace amounts by international standards and in slightly larger amounts in the United States. It is however prohibited in Russia.

Despite tensions between Russia and the United States on the recent adoption ban and a number of other issues, Kislyak affirmed that Moscow has the desire and the hope for the bilateral relationship with Washington to improve – on surer footing and with a basic quotient of mutual respect.

“We would like to see indications that the president of the United States is interested in promoting normal, fruitful relations with us on the basis of equality and mutual respect, and our respective interests,” said Kislyak.

“We need to be more respectful of each other and care more for this relationship.””

Adoption Ban: Children Russia’s Top Priority, Says Envoy

[RIA Novosti 2/14/13 by Maria Young]

Update 13:

(1) Domestic adoption commission

“As Russia tries to boost the number of domestic adoptions, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev on Thursday suggested creating a special commission, headed by a deputy prime minister, to deal with the orphanhood issues.

“We can try to establish a separate structure, neither a ministry nor a department, but a commission that would consider the problems that have accumulated. Such a commission should be headed by a deputy prime minister, then it can work,” he said during a meeting with the Krasnoyarsk branch of the ruling United Russia party.
Medvedev didn’t elaborate on who might head this commission.

On Thursday, Medvedev also signed a decree that is expected to encourage Russians to adopt children, the government’s official website reported.

Foreigners adopted 3,400 Russian children by the end of 2011, the latest official data available said.

Some 130,000 orphans have been deemed eligible for adoption or foster care in Russia. More than 60,000 Russian children have been adopted by American families in the last 20 years, including 962 last year, US State Department figures show.

Russian officials said the adoption ban was justified because at least 19 adopted Russian children died in the custody of their US parents last year.”
Medvedev seeks commission to help Russians adopt orphans

[Zee News 2/14/13]

(2) Fall out from Max Shatto death case

Follow the updates at How Could You? Hall of Shame Max Shatto case post.

The governor of the Pskov region where 3-year-old Max and his 2-year-old  biological brother Kirill were adopted from on October 23, 2012 has stopped all adoptions as of now.

Additionally, there have been calls by other legislators to stop other US adoptions that were proceeding. Gladney is the placing agency of this sibling adoption.

Update 14: Russia IS reforming its domestic adoption system.

“Authorities intend to significantly raise monetary allowances for Russian citizens who choose to adopt orphaned children —  particularly, for those adopting older children and children with special needs. In addition, the government has proposed lifting the age requirement for unmarried persons who wish to  adopt a child.”

““The government has passed a number of resolutions; however, some acute problems have remained unsettled. We have to eliminate all impediments that hamper citizens willing to adopt a child,”said Russian President Vladimir Putin at a President’s Council meeting for the implementation of priority national projects and demographic policy.

In late February, the government introduced a bill with amendments to the Domestic Relations Code, the law On Guardianship and Trusteeship, and other valid acts to the State Duma. The bill pays special attention to disabled orphans and children reaching school age. According to government data, in 2011 Russian citizens adopted 7,434 children: only 38 of them were disabled and only 466 were above seven years of age. ”

“Thus, it was decided to considerably increase lump-sum allowances (from $425 to $3,275) given to families that adopt orphans in those categories.

The allowance has only increased for those who adopt, as the government considers adoption to be “a priority form of child care,”according to an explanatory note attached to the bill. Relatedly, the bill suggests mitigating the terms by which a child can be adopted by an unmarried person.

This is currently forbidden, if the age difference between an orphan and the person wishing to adopt is less than 16 years. The government has lifted this ban and handed the issue over to the court to decide whether the age difference should be taken into account.

Beside this, the government has also decided to spare adopters and guardians a series of bureaucratic procedures. According to current legislation, those who decide to adopt a child or become a legal guardian must undergo special training. Even those who have already taken one orphan into their care are sent for training if they wish to adopt a second time. The government believes that repeated training is unnecessary.

Authorities also believe guardians should be spared monthly reports on how they have spent the child’s allowance.

During the Council meeting, Putin also stated that it is necessary to develop not only adoption institutes, but also other kinds of family education, including patronage.

“It [patronage] has to be supported and modernized. Foster care in foster families should be actively developed. Such a type is in special demand when placing disabled children and children above seven years of age in families,” said Putin.”

Adoption made easier for Russian citizens

[Russia Beyond the Headlines 3/4/13 by  Alexei Bausin]

Update 15: Senator Cardin denies backing sanctions on Russians involved with Ban

“A US lawmaker on Wednesday denied a Russian newspaper report suggesting he supports punishing Russian officials who backed Moscow’s controversial ban on US adoptions under the auspices of the Magnitsky Act.

The report in question, published Wednesday by the Russian business daily Kommersant, is “based on erroneous information,” a spokeswoman for US Sen. Benjamin Cardin told RIA Novosti.

Kommersant cited Cardin, an author of the Magnitsky Act, as saying the US Congress would push for individuals who “denied” Russian children the right to an international adoption to be punished under the Magnitsky law, which sanctions Russian officials accused of human rights violations.

A spokeswoman for Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland, said he “made no such comments.”

“The U.S. law is very clear what activities are covered,” she added. “Propagating an embarrassing law that penalizes innocent children is not.”

“The Kommersant report citing Cardin’s purported support for sanctioning individuals linked to the adoption ban generated a spate of public statements from Russian officials.

Robert Schlegel, a member of the majority United Russia party in the State Duma, told Kommersant that his possible inclusion on the Magnitsky List would not impact his life.

“I don’t have any real estate there,” the newspaper quoted Schlegel as saying. “I’ve visited the United States as a tourist. I don’t think there’s anything else for me to see there. For that reason it doesn’t really upset me.”

US Senator Denies Backing Adoption Ban Sanctions

[RIA Novosti 3/7/13]

Update 16: “In an interview with Russian radio station, US Ambassador to  Russia Michael McFaul confirmed that the so-called Magnitsky list will be published 60 days following the adoption of the Magnitsky Act, i.e. in April 2013.

McFaul also admitted that the Obama administration had been opposed to the adoption of the Magnitsky Act.

“US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul said he  intends to discuss adoption issues with Russian children’s  rights ombudsman Pavel Astakhov and Yelena Mizulina, the head of the State Duma committee on family, women, and children.

McFaul told Ekho Moskvy on Thursday that he is  meeting with Mizulina, Astakhov and other officials next week.

McFaul earlier refused to discuss the adoptions   situation at the State Duma, saying US ambassadors, as a rule, do not take part in hearings in foreign parliaments.”

Obama administration was against adoption of Magnitsky Act – McFaul

[RIA Novosti 3/7/13]

Update 17: Incomplete international adoptions do not qualify for the Adoption Tax Credit, but this article says to apply for it anyway! Here is a thought…have the adoption agency give refunds. Ridiculously, lobbyist Chuck Johnson acts as if his member agencies have nothing to do with the high costs of adoption.
“Many have lost tens of thousands of dollars on adoption-related expenses, and now they are unable to qualify for a tax credit of up to nearly $13,000 to help offset those costs.

Kurt and Ann Suhs, from Johns Creek, Ga., had been saving for years to adopt a second child and were finally going to realize their dream.

But in December, a month before their first trip to Russia to get matched with a child, the news broke that Moscow was banning American adoptions of Russian children starting Jan. 1. The Suhs were forced to cancel their trip, and the adoption has been postponed indefinitely.

“It was disbelief at first,” said Kurt. “We just wanted to be a mom and dad.”

At least 1,000 other families have been left in limbo as well, said Chuck Johnson, president of the National Adoption Council. And, with the typical Russian adoption costing around $40,000 or more to complete, many of these families are not only saying goodbye to their dreams of parenthood but tens of thousands of dollars.

The Suhs, for example, are probably out the roughly $20,000 they spent on adoption agency fees, a home study (a screening process that entails home checks and interviews), health tests and immigration paperwork.

To make matters worse, they won’t be able to receive the adoption tax credit they had been counting on to offset some of the expenses.

The credit grants eligible taxpayers up to $12,650 per child for adoption expenses. And families with domestic adoptions can still qualify for the credit even if an adoption didn’t happen. But under federal law, foreign adoptions are ineligible unless they are finalized — meaning the final court decree must be received.

Due to this small difference in the tax code, many families who were unable to complete adoptions of Russian children before the ban will be out of luck.

“It would be a huge benefit to get some money back,” said Kurt. “We basically cashed [out] our savings.”

Kurt said an IRS agent told him he could write to the agency requesting the credit anyway, explaining his situation and expenses.

If the IRS denies him, the agent told him he could appeal the decision in court. The IRS told CNNMoney, however, that the law provides no exceptions to the adoption tax credit requirements.

Under Russia’s new law, only those in the final stage of adoption, meaning they had already received a court ruling and final adoption decree and were just waiting for the child, will likely be allowed to proceed. The State Department estimates that only around 50 families meet this description.

Certain adoption agencies will allow families to transfer fees to adopt a child from another country, but other agencies are Russia-specific so the fees can’t be recouped.

“Money is secondary in all of this, but [it’s] one more bitter pill these families have to swallow,” Johnson said.

Courtney and Natasha Fong had already spent more than $10,000 on a Russian adoption when the ban was imposed. But since they were only in the beginning stage of the adoption process, they decided to start over and adopt a child from China instead.

While the money they spent on the failed Russian adoption is lost, they expect to spend even more money completing the Chinese adoption and therefore hope to receive the full $12,650 credit.

Meanwhile, the Suhs plan to wait a couple months before pursuing a new adoption, just in case the Russian government has a change of heart. After already spending $20,000 and losing the $13,000 credit they had been expecting — which Kurt said they could have even put toward a new adoption — going down this road again will be tough.

“We’re just hopeful that the U.S. government and the Russian government will allow families who are in the process [of adopting a Russian child], who have invested financially and emotionally, to finish,” he said.”

Russia’s adoption ban costs families their tax credit

[CNN 3/15/13 by Blake Ellis]

Russia wants to enlist Interpol to prosecute US adoptive parents who have abused 
“Investigative Committee head Alexander Bastrykin said Russia will enlist Interpol to prosecute U.S. citizens responsible for the deaths of adopted Russian children.

“If the U.S. ignores these crimes, we will be tough on those individuals, get them on Interpol’s wanted list and bring them to justice,” Bastrykin said at a conference in St. Petersburg on Wednesday, Interfax reported.

Bastrykin also described the U.S. Magnitsky list, a blacklist of Russian officials suspected of human rights violations, as retaliation for Russia’s initiation of court proceedings against U.S. adoptive parents who’ve violated the rights of adopted Russian children.

“Today, the U.S. is preparing the Magnitsky list, and I am under discussion for the list. The reason for [my possible inclusion] is that we’ve recently opened 22 criminal cases against U.S. adoptive parents. If an offense is committed against citizens of the Russian Federation, then we have the right to do this: a reaction from the state should follow,” Bastrykin said.

Earlier this month, a U.S. Embassy official said that the blacklist of Russian officials to face sanctions under the Magnitsky Act would be published in March.

Bastrykin’s comments come days after a Texas court decided not to press charges against the U.S. adoptive parents of Maxim Kuzmin, a 3-year-old who died on Jan. 21, about three months after being adopted from a Russian orphanage.

The Texas court said there were no grounds for the prosecution of Allen and Laura Shatto, Kuzmin’s adoptive parents, and ruled that the boy’s death was an accident.

Pavel Astakhov, Russia’s children rights ombudsman, has said that Kuzmin died as a result of a “savage beating” by his adoptive mother.”

Bastrykin Vows to Enlist Interpol to Prosecute U.S. Adoptive Parents

[The Moscow Times 3/20/13]

Update 18: Putin orders ban on adoptions by foreign same-sex couples

“President Putin is against the adoption of Russian orphans by foreign same-sex couples, Russian media reveal. The government and the Supreme Court have reportedly been requested to come up with amendments to the law by July 1.

Most likely the order will be fulfilled by the Ministry of Education and Science, which deals with issues concerning orphans and adoptions, according to Izvestia daily. But the ministry says it has not yet received instructions on the matter.

Tensions over the issue arose in mid-February, after the French National Assembly approved a sweeping bill to legalize gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

Soon after that children’s rights ombudsman Pavel Astakhov vowed he would do everything possible to ensure that Russian orphans are only adopted by traditional, heterosexual families.

In February, the Russian Foreign Ministry reported that it planned to verify the possible “psychological damage” inflicted on Russian orphan Yegor Shabatalov.The boy was adopted by an American woman, who lived in a same-sex marriage with another US citizen. However, she concealed her relationship from Russian authorities when she filed the adoption request.

Two years after adopting the boy, the couple split and started a legal dispute over parental rights. Such a relationship is “rather questionable from the point of view of morality” and the child got drawn into this row, observed Russian Foreign Ministry’s Commissioner for Human Rights Konstantin Dolgov.

Some Russians however say that banning adoptions by same-sex couples is a half measure.  The head of the ‘All-Russian Parents’ Assembly’ movement, Nadezhda Khramova, says a total ban of foreign adoptions would be a smarter move, as “it is technically difficult to verify the adoptive parents’ sexual orientation and their legal status can be a marriage of convenience”.

Meanwhile, Nikolay Alekseyev – Russian Gay rights activist, the leader of the LGBT community – doubts Putin’s idea will have any serious consequences.

“It’s purely a political move aimed to show that the government is consistent in its decisions,” he told Izvestia.

Adoption issues have been in the spotlight for several months, following the government’s decision to ban US citizens from adopting Russian children under the so-called ‘Dima Yakovlev’ law, which came into force in January.

The controversial document split Russian society, as opponents claim that it cut of many orphans from the prospect of a better life – especially those with health problems. Critics said the government was using society’s most disadvantaged children as political pawns as the prohibition on adoption was introduced as a response to the US Magnitsky Act, which banned some Russian officials from travelling to America.

Two separate rallies were staged in Moscow by supporters and opponents of the law.

The main sponsor of the Dima Yakovlev law, MP Yekaterina Lakhova, earlier drew public attention to French adoptions, claiming that only traditional families can offer their children a proper upbringing.

“A child should have a mother and a father, rather than two mothers or two fathers,” she inveighed.

However, she said, the introduction of new regulations would take a while and no one should expect the ban to immediately come into effect.

The Russian Family Code does not allow same-sex marriage, making adoption by same sex-couples impossible. Adoption by unmarried individuals is technically possible; authorities do not require future parents to present proof of their sexual orientation

Putin orders ban on adoptions by foreign same-sex couples – report

[Russia Today 3/31/13]

Russian denounces use of foreign orphan’s organs

“The Russian Foreign Ministry announced that it has information on the use of organs for transplantation from Russian  children who were adopted and later died in the United States, reported  Izvestia daily on Monday.The daily based its report on a letter from Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabikov, in response to State Duma Deputy Alexander Starovoitov, who requested a clarifiaction of the cases already denounced, even by the U.S. media.
The situation regarding children orphaned in Russia and later adopted and moved to the United States captured public attention last year, after  new cases were reported of children who had died in situations that remained unclarified by the U.S. justice system.

Both chambers of the parliament passed the Dima Yakovlev law, in memory of one of the dead children, which bans U.S. citizen adoption of Russian children, a regulation signed by President Vladimir Putin late last December and which took force on January 1, 2013.

Ryabkov said in the letter quoted by the newspaper that Russian foreign facilities in the U.S. have information that two possible attempts were made to use the organs of dead Russian children for transplantation.

The Russian Deputy Foreign minister said that attempts were made to use the organs of 6-year-old Alexei Geiko  [aka Alex Pavlis see PoundPup Legacy’s information on his case here ] in 2003 and Ilya Kargyntsev [aka Isaac Dykstra. See his case in our archive here], age unknown [He was 21 months old] , in 2005.

However, the Foreign Ministry is not aware of the results of those attempts, the newspaper reported.

There is no way for Russia to be aware of all similar cases because official collection of statistics related to the use of organs of dead and deceased children as donors is not performed in the U.S., the newspaper reported, citing Ryabikov’s letter. ”

Russia Denounces Use of Adopted Russian Children Organs

[Prensa Latina 4/1/13]

Update 19:

(1) Russian Lawmaker sanctioned

“A Russian lawmaker is banned from speaking at the next nine sessions of  Parliament for making disparaging remarks while on a trip to the United  States.

Dmitry Gudkov, a member of the A Just Russia party, is forbidden to speak for  nine sessions of the Russian Duma, the lower house of Parliament. He had  traveled to the United States to address the ongoing tensions over adoptions of  Russian children.

While in the United States, Itar-Tass said Gudkov participated in a public  event where he called the Duma “an obedient Parliament” that has passed  unconstitutional laws at the behest of President Vladimir Putin.

Gudkov denied any of the remarks were anti-Russian and implored fellow  lawmakers not to pass a ban on U.S. adoptions.

Gudkov said his trip found very few instances of Russian children abused by  their adoptive U.S. parents — and noted Russian adoption rates have plummeted,  making for more and more children growing up orphans.

“Aren’t you interested in my trip to the U.S.A.?” he asked in a speech before  he was censured. “They tell us there is no access to Russian children in U.S.  families — it is absolutely not so! Americans have adopted 60,000 Russian  children in two decades, and there have been just 20 tragic cases. Over the same  period, adoption by Russians has decreased by 30 percent.”

The Duma went ahead with the ban, which Putin supports.”

Russian lawmaker silenced after U.S. trip

[UPI 4/9/13]

(2) Russian may not know about some abused/dead Russian Children

“Moscow assumes that the actual number of incidents with Russian children adopted in the United States may be larger than what is now known by the Russian authorities, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with the RTVI channel.