This can of course not be the case, as you state in the FAQ section of your website, as well as in the press kit for the year 2013:
CCAI does not lobby on behalf of any individual piece of legislation or government program. CCAI does not take official positions on issues related to adoption and foster care, but rather seeks to provide policymakers with the resources they need to make informed decisions.
The bill is intended to counteract the decline in inter-country since 2004, a trend that has many prospective adopters worried and cuts heavily into the revenues of adoption service providers.
The inter-country adoption lobby has been in full blown panic over this decline for several years now.
Already in 2009, a legislative attempt was made to curb the downward trend by means of the Families for Orphans Act. This effort failed miserably, but now the adoption lobby has regrouped with new blood and fresh money.
A comprehensive history of inter-country adoption has thus far not been written. Some adoption websites give a brief summary of the history of inter-country adoption, and there are several books trying to do the same, but a thorough study into the origins of inter-country adoption is still awaiting scholarly initiative.
In the book Intercountry Adoption: A Multinational Perspective, by Howard Alfstein and Rita James, the following is said about the history of inter-country adoption:
Earlier this year a study was published, analyzing the European Union's reversal in approach towards inter-country adoption from Romania since 2007.
The study sheds some interesting light on the motivations behind this radical shift and serves as a warning when it comes to the politicization of child protection.
Initially we wanted to write a review about this fascinating, albeit very dense study.
However, while researching the topic of the Romanian adoptions early 1990s, we felt compelled to write about a subject only touched upon in this study: the political influence of adoptive parents.
We will use the Romanian adoption crisis as a backdrop for this article, although it should be noted that similar patterns emerged around adoptions from Vietnam, Guatemala, and Ethiopia in more recent times.
This week, Adoptionland has been in turmoil over the publication of a series of articles by Reuters and NBC-news.
The articles portray the drain of the adoption system, the practice of informal re-homing of adoptees who are no longer wanted by their forever family.
Just like it is with every abuse case and every trafficking case found in Adoptionland, the mouth pieces of the adoption industry are quick and ready to down play the situation. The good name of adoption MUST be preserved, at all cost, even if doing so leads to more abuse, more disruptions, more dissolutions, and more child trafficking for adoption purposes.
It's that time of year again., Labor Day behind us, kids back to school, the sun no longer at its apex, time for the nominations of the Demons of Adoption Awards.
We are all too aware, our regular readers, like us, have nail-bitingly anticipated this moment all summer long. For us hard-core adoption critics, this is the highlight of the year, the defining moment of the annum.
An important decision needs to be reached, dear Pound Pup Legacy readers. Who is the most deserving villain in Adoptionland, for 2013? While we can think of some really deserving candidates, we want our readers to nominate and decide who eventually has the dubious honor of actually receiving PPL's 2013 Demons of Adoption Award.
You, our reader, can make your voice heard. It's in your hands now who receives the worst of all honors in Adoptionland. Until September 30 the nomination process will be open. After that date PPL will post a poll where readers may vote for the nominees.
My oldest is leaving for her second year of college this Sunday.
I have been bracing for this week, since May.
Thankfully, last year's experience was a very positive one. My daughter made frequent home-visits, and made Dean's List each semester. She made the loss and absence easier, because she not only came back, she came back as a better individual.
But the departure... the going-away... it has never been easy for me.
Niels you asked, "I wonder if your agency advertized with statements like: "finding families for children"."
The answer sadly, is yes.
We were told that the reason that the biological mothers relinquished is because they could not take care of the children nor care for them.
At no point did we ever imagine that 7 years later we would find our children's biological family, intact and doing well, albeit poor.
Which brings to mind the question of when is poverty ever a criteria to give up a child for ICA?!
Letter #1: I read this thread http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/45548#comment-25698 (several times). I feel that I have to chime in, as I find myself in a position I never thought I would find myself in. I have no help, no one to turn to, only a few close friends to hear me out. It has been a downhill roller coaster ride for awhile now.