Testimony to U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

Chairman Jesse Helms,

U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,

Date: September 30, 1999.

RE: International Adoption

We support S. 682 and would like to submit our story to you for

consideration when you are considering S. 682. It is imperative that

adoption agencies, lawyers and other child placing agencies be held

responsible for their actions. There should be recourse for families if

an agency is found to be unethical, irresponsible and or fraudulent.

Our Story:

We adopted a 12 year old girl through Nightlight

International Adoptions, Inc. of CA, in October 97. We had

heard good reports and were confident that all would go well

since Nightlight seemed to have such a good track record and

informative psychological reports.

We have 3 other children adopted from other countries and are

experienced parents. Due to where we lived at the time (outside

US in a remote locale), we were clear about what we could and

could NOT deal with post placement. No services, limited school

resources, etc.

Despite very specific questions prior to picking up Inga,

some crucial facts were NOT disclosed to us. We were shocked to

learn that she had been placed with 2 Russian families and

brought back to the home. In addition, she could not read or

write Russian (at the age of 12!). She was a smoker! AND, she

was a habitual runner. She had a history of being picked up by

the police and brought back to the home. Had we known any one

of these facts prior to traveling, we would not have proceeded.

Inga was not appropriately prepared for us to pick her up,

either. The workers feel that adoption is in the ``best

interest'' of the child and apparently avoided the necessary

emotional preparation for fear of tantrums or resistance from

Inga.

To make a very long story short, our family was devastated

and we struggled to make things work for almost a year. We

traveled back to the states in the summer of '98 and placed

Inga with another family willing to work with her. She went

through 6 families and 2 hospitalizations. All of these

families were older, more experienced, and very successful at

parenting ```difficult'' and ``hard to place'' older children.

None of them could parent her. We researched all available

resources in the US. We accessed family therapy, special

education, post adoptive support groups, and a variety of

specialists. We reached the lifetime limit on our health

insurance coverage. We contacted the Russian judge in an

attempt to dissolve the adoption. We pled with Nightlight to

take some responsibility.

We are currently trying to release our parental rights and

make Inga a ward of the state so she can get the treatment she

needs which we cannot provide. We are truly emotionally,

physically and financially depleted. This has been a tragic

story for us, many other people, and most sadly, Inga.

Furthermore, Nightlight has been reluctant to admit ANY

responsibility whatsoever for their neglect in accessing

pertinent, easily available information. Nightlight has even

stated that they can't be responsible for families who are

``not satisfied'' with the children they adopt. To be sure they

have made other successful placements, but in our case they

were neglectful in obtaining very essential facts, and now, 2

years later, Inga is in a residential psychiatric treatment

center with a diagnosis of ``major depressive disorder,

psychosis, and post traumatic stress syndrome.'' Their

recommendation is 9 more months of residential treatment and

then a group home.

Clearly, we would have avoided much of this heartache and

tragedy if consumer protection laws pertaining to international

adoption had been in place. I would be happy to speak with you

in more detail if you would like.

Sincerely,

Cilia J. Whatcott.