When a child is treated like an unwanted animal, and no one seems to care - v2
At the age seven, a little girl named Chelsea was rescued in the town of Brillion, Wisconsin. She had been living for all of her life kept in a dog cage in her parents' basement while her brothers were also abused upstairs. Oprah Winfrey featured Chelsea's story on a show called "Tortured Children" back in April of 2000. Now 21, Chelsea appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show Tuesday to let her and the audience know how she is doing.[From: Oprah Winfrey talks to Chelsea, girl made to live in dog cage, February 22, 2011 ]
After Chelsea was rescued by police, she was sent to foster care. She says she lived in several different homes before she was adopted, but she was eventually sent back to foster care. "[That life] was just as bad, except it was emotionally abusive. Not physically. It was just scarring—scarring as in 'I'm going to have to deal with that for the rest of my life,'" she says.
[From: What Happened to the Little Girl Forced to Live in a Cage?, February 22. 2011 ]
Eleven years later, follow-up with Oprah revealed Chelsea (the name she now goes by) has been in and out of therapy, but is not seeing a counselor at this time. In addition, she admits, "I try not to think about those memories much."
One has to wonder what type of scars form on the child treated like an unwanted animal by her own parents.
In countries that support foster-care, it is believed licensed foster/adoptive parents understand the plight of children who have already been neglected/abused by parents or adult care-takers. In fact, many states require foster/adoptive parents to attend X amount of hours of a special parent-teaching program before a license to foster/adopt is granted.
In theory, people who take the time to take parenting classes and open themselves up to a homestudy are the type of people who will respect a child's right to safety, and will not physically harm the children put in their care. In theory, licensed foster/adoptive parents will not demonstrate gross neglect, and deprive a foster/adopted child any basic needs like food, clothing, hygine, education, and health-care. In theory a licensed/trained foster/adopted children will not put their foster/adopted children in cages, or small scary confined spaces, and they will not treat their fostered/adopted children like untrained, unwanted animals.
That's all theory. Reality tells us there are many adopted and fostered children who have been treated like sub-humans by their chosen foster/adoptive parents.
Imagine if 'Chelsea' had been sent to live with people as bad, or worse than her own biological parents. Where would someone like Chelsea be?
PPL features abuse cases in which adoptees have been put in cages, "for their own good". The cases in this Forced Confinement category show eery similarities, and more eery differences, too. For instance, many case have more than 4 adopted/fostered children in one home. more accurate will be the cases that show the birth children were left alone, but the fostered/adopted were abused. Adoption subsidies play a role in abusive behavior, and the fostered/adopted children in these cases are often described as emotionally disturbed, as if it is somehow there own fault they are being mistreated. I want to hyper-link "adoption subsidies play a role in abusive behavior", but the link we have for adoption subsidies sucks -- http://poundpuplegacy.org/posts?cid=20567 you know we have more cases that belong in that section.
Although PPL's collection of abuse cases is 'impressive', it is very limited too. Not every abused adoptee case gets reported to the news and not every abusive home situation is reported to authorities. Oddly enough, identifying whether a case took place in a biological or an adoptive/foster family is often not known until much much later, if ever.
By no means should these 'limits' and relatively small number of abuse cases post placement dismiss or minimize the terrors so many fostered/adopted children are forced to endure. To date, PPL does present enough cases to start asking the more serious questions abused adoptees have, like:
-
Why is a person's previous history not a reason to disqualify a candidate for adoption?
-
When does post placement monitoring end, and who makes that decision?
-
What will it take for Aparents to understand violence and extreme deprivation are not healthy ways to discipline any child?
-
When will unlicensed"parent coaches" and "life leaders", like Nancy Thomas (author of "When Love is Not Enough"), be given limited approval to instruct parents how to discipline a child with complex emotional/behavioral issues?
-
Why do so many law-makers protect the rights of radical fundamentalist groups, knowing protecting the rights of any one extreme group will eventually become a danger to others?
It is not wise for the general public to believe the pro-adoption sentiment, "Abuse in adoptive homes is rare", and "The vast majority of internationally adopted children thrive in their loving, supportive families.", if long-term study and on-going family investiagtion is not required.
In addition, the argument is made that adoption supports the rights of children, and serves a child's best interest, and this too is often untrue. These rights are profoundly outlined in The Convention of the Rights of Children (UNCRC, 1989), a United Nations treaty ratified by all countries in the world except the United States and Somalia. Even though the United States is one of the principal authors of the treaty. When looking at the inter-country adoption system through the lens of the UNCRC, it is evident children's rights are neither respected nor protected by the current system.
Foster/adoptive parents are not average parents. Before a child in-care can be put in the home of a foster/adoptive parent, that parent-figure must have a license to care for the child put in his/her legal custody. Foster/adoptive parents should be monitored and pass standard requirements, set by the government, just like any other licensed entity.
The following table presents several articles of the UNCRC and describes how current adoption practices are in violation of the Convention. The United States is included in this overview, though strictly speaking it can not violate the Convention, since it doesn't recognize the legitimacy of the UNCRC.
| Article | Description | Comment |
| 2.2 | Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members. | The one-child rule, as it is enforced in China, discriminates against children born in Chinese families that already have a child. This discrimination is even more pronounced given the the preference given to male children in China. In addition, in countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, children born to unwed mothers are also discriminated against. Rather than supporting the mother-child bond in this single-parent relationship, the infant is punished with removal and to add insult to injury, put into the care-system, where more than likely, that infant will be forced to adapt to the living conditions found in an orphanage. |
| 3.2 | In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. | Given what we know about Guatamalan history and the way in which children have been made available for international adoption, how can anyone think the push to make adoptions easier for foreigners is in a child's best interest... especially if a baby is placed in an orphange, and then neglected? |
| 4 | Parties shall undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention. | Most poor countries don't have the money to properly implement the articles listed in UNCRC. This is most apparent when looking at countries like Nepal, Vietnam and Ethopia. Furthermore it is impossible to determine if China lives up to the UNCRC, since that country doesn't allow members of UNICEF within its borders. |
| 6.1 and 6.2 | Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life; Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child. | Some of the most hideous examples of human indecency, poor vetting, preparation and training, and missed opportunities to protect a child from further harm can be found among the pages that feature children killed within their adoptive family. While the US is exempt from this rule, the killing of children is not acceptable, and will be punished, as US law dictates. |
| 7.2 | The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents. | While forged/fake documents, and 'lost' adoption records, are nothing new to those familiar with The Closed Era of Adoption, it's imperative international adopters and adult adoptees understand the way in which birth certificates and death certificates are issued and registered in some foreign countries. |
| 9.2 | In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known. | Birth parents in countries like Nepal or Philippines, (and elsewhere) have NOT been given fair warning (or full disclosure) from authorities before a formal adoption-plan was made and executed. Many adoption practices seem to overlook the value of informed consent, putting many children in situations that can be very harmful and dangerous, causing long-term negative consequences, if not properly monitored. |
| 19.1 | Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child. | In several case Child Protective Services knew about ongoing abuse in foster/adoptive families but didn't intervene until it was too later, see eg: Victor and Nubia Doctor |
| 19.2 | Such protective measures should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of social programmes to provide necessary support for the child and for those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judicial involvement. | Many times, foster/adoptive parents are given more rights - more leniency and more protection, than those outside a particular network of providers. In addition, often times the arguement to defend chosen placement is because the parents have bonded with the child in a custody battle, regardless of a Aparent's questionable past. The value of a back-ground check and home-study conducted by those who benefit from the rewards that come with meeting or exceeding adoption targets and quotas, should be questioned. |
| 20.1 | A child temporarily or permanently deprived of his or her family environment, or in whose own best interests cannot be allowed to remain in that environment, shall be entitled to special protection and assistance provided by the State. | While the vetting of foster/adoptive parents is done as a special protective measure for adoptable childen put in-care, child abuse in the foster/adoptive home as a result of , negligence and oversight on the part of those facilitating an adoption proves more needs to be done for the sake of the child. [See: "Let's Review (part 2)", as it relates to the home-study phase of the adoption process ] |
| 21(d) | Take all appropriate measures to ensure that, in inter-country adoption, the placement does not result in improper financial gain for those involved in it. | This is an amusing article, especially if one takes into account far too often a so-called orphaned adoptee is not an actual orphan, OR abandoned by family members. If one had to uncover where improper financial gain is being made by those involved in an adoption plan, one would have to first investigate hospitals and maternity homes/centers and orphanages where babies are made available for infant adoption, which has been called, The Perfect Crime. Next, one would have to determine if the salary/perks given to those secured in key positions in a very popular non-profit adoption agency is 'improper'', or over-rated. Then one would have to monitor the actions of those on a mission to help mothers and children. or those on an Orphan Crusade , and those who will do just about anything to make an adoption dream possible, without judging or criticizing another person's religious belief/practice, of course. PPL's Child Trafficking pages reveal the way in which dark forces like greed and deception can work together and create a much larger market for the international adoption industry. |
| 23.1 | States Parties recognize that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-reliance and facilitate the child's active participation in the community. | Cases of abuse of special needs children in adoptive and foster families demonstrate that children with mental and physical disabilities are placed with families that don't have the intention or the skills to properly provide for these children. Sometimes adoption subsidies have perverse effects. |
| 25 | Parties recognize the right of a child who has been placed by the competent authorities for the purposes of care, protection or treatment of his or her physical or mental health, to a periodic review of the treatment provided to the child and all other circumstances relevant to his or her placement. | As addressed before, the USA (as a receiving country) will not ratify the UNCRC. As such, an adopted child can be abused by an adoptive parent, without any authority knowing because mandatory post-placement monitoring would not fare well with those who will insist periodic review of home-life and child well-being (via social worker and professional health care provider respectively) is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. |
| 27.4 | Parties shall take all appropriate measures to secure the recovery of maintenance for the child from the parents or other persons having financial responsibility for the child, both within the State Party and from abroad. In particular, where the person having financial responsibility for the child lives in a State different from that of the child, States Parties shall promote the accession to international agreements or the conclusion of such agreements, as well as the making of other appropriate arrangements. | This financial responsibility becomes an issue when the adoptive parent (legally responsible parent) leaves an adoptee in the care of others. See: Russia to seek adoption payment and USA Today Helps Expose AT Underground Trafficking of Unwanted Children for real-life reasons to return/relinquish. In addition, consider the circumstance a couple/parent may face if it's decided the parent(s) are not prepared to take on a child, or an unexpected divorce occurs, or an agreement regarding custody could not be reached in the event of a divorce. Who should pay for the care of the child left because the parent claims, "I can no longer do this"? |
| 28.2 | Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention. | [See: Children killed or abused within their homeschooling adoptive family ] |
| 33 | Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including legislative, administrative, social and educational measures, to protect children from the illicit use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as defined in the relevant international treaties, and to prevent the use of children in the illicit production and trafficking of such substances. | [See: Wrongful medication cases ] |
| 34 | Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. | [See: Children sexually abused in foster/adoptive homes and sexually exploited childen] |
| 35 | Parties shall take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent the abduction of, the sale of or traffic in children for any purpose or in any form. | [See: Child trafficking and the use of Maternity Homes to sell babies to potential buyers. ] |
| 39 | Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child. | "Water therapy", "Rebirthing" and $84,000 a year alone from Social Security and state and federal subsidies are reasons to doubt "appropriate measures" are being promoted by Attachment Therapists, based in the USA. |
Contrary to pro-adoption sentiment, the rights of children, as outlined in The Convention, are being violated. And the consequences of not recognizing those rights are deeply felt within the USA.
Improving child welfare services and the adoption industry is an overwhelming task, but it must begin somewhere, and it must begin before the international adoption industry gets bigger.
Far too many abused adoptee cases prove, better vetting of prospective adoptive parents is STILL an issue that needs to be addressed by members in the adoption industry.
After twenty years, if US officials still fear political repercussions from a ratified UNCRC, perhaps US officials can consider smaller, more meaningful steps in adoption reform. While there are many new modern-day adoption issues coming to the media fore-front, there are still old standards that need attention, improvement, and updating. Transparency in adoption practice and the vetting of prospective parents are two critically important issues.
When a politician avoids the more difficult adoption issues like the plague, a strong message is sent: voting constituents matter more than child safety.
Often times, the best victim's ally is the person who is not a politician. Imagine how strong the voice for adoption would be if not for high-profile celebrities, Goodwill Ambassadors, and members of the press who have been adopted, or adopted, themselves.