Amothers excited to help others

I have been reading a variety of posts written on adoption.con, and I find myself very disturbed and upset about the "excitement" Amothers have in terms of meeting/contacting foreign B.moms for the first time, and the concerns they share re: "helping" first families with multiple children (full-siblings related to the "chosen" adoptee).

Can anyone please explain to me how anyone can rave about a birthfamily/first mom, voice a concern about living conditions (and ask what is the best way to send money to these families left-behind -- should it be through churches, charities, direct donations?) then justify adoption?


No idea if ...

this applies to the cases you mentioned,
but there have been cases of fraudulent paperwork, or misinformation of A-Parents about the family status of their adopted child. At least that's what I've read quite frequently.
In these cases, the question of a justification of adoption would not be connected to the question of concern for biological families.


Illegal adoptions

there have been cases of fraudulent paperwork, or misinformation of A-Parents about the family status of their adopted child

Indeed.  And the problem has gotten so bad, a reasonable American should seriously question the 'orphan-status' of any and all "adoptable" children found in an orphanage in Guatemala, Nepal, Eithiopia,....

But here's the disturbing glitch.  In spite of this information.... fraudulent paperwork, doctored documents, criminal investigations... many American AP do NOT step forward and ask if they have reason to believe the documents used to help finalize an adoption-plan are fake.

Now, if you go on an adoption forum, you will see many AP's, living in America, writing threads about finding Bmoms for their adopted children.  That in itself suggests to me, on some level, these women must know or fear their adoption was done illegally, but they want valid reason/excuse to help justify the decision to keep the child that may or may not be a victim of kidnapping or child trafficking.  What I see over and over again is a sense of haughty arrogance that says, essentially, "I have seen how these people live, and the child is obviously better-off in America, with me, so it's all good in the end".

Now we enter the debate:  is poverty reason enough to justify an adoption?  If it is, what message is being sent to every single poor person in the word.  [Let's think:  poor person has 4+ kids; poor person doesn't want to work his/her ass off to provide for these 4+ kids; adoption is one way to get rid of the least useful child (least able to help with labor/income for the family.)   And if adoption is "open", that means the child will come back and visit with his/her new wealthy parents;  the poor parent begins to think, "hmmm... send little Habibi away, and if we're lucky, we ALL can get a little something out of the deal".]  This "deal" is worse then the welfare system in the USA.... a welfare system so many Americans HATE because it enables slackers.

So again, I ask, how do Americans justify their role in these "charitable" adoptions?

Some of these Amothers boast how they send money to the parents, help pay for education for the siblings that remain in the godforsaken country they were born in, and do X,Y, and Z for the poor family "left behind"; some go on about the huge parties thrown in their honor when they arrive in ______village for a brief visit, and how well they were treated by birth-family members -- why, it's almost as if they still can't believe they were treated like kings nad queens... or a much-loved celebrity... for a few days, just for visiting.  [What's not to love?]  Don't these Americans see they are being used, AND a child's life had to be used as a pawn/sacrifice in order to make this charity-plan a done-deal?

This set-up is insane to me.

It infuriates me.

There are legitimate orphans in these orphanages/care systems.  There are children who have no living family members to claim them, and there are parents who are such selfish assholes, they will just leave their kids (abandon them flat) so they, the adults, can move on with their lives without the burden of another mouth to feed or body to protect.  There are children who are so badly abused by their deranged parents, they are better off living on the streets than going back home, for more.  These are the children adoption services should be helping... but instead, we have this American Adoption bullshit Story being celebrated?

I for one think it's wrong... and I see no reason to praise any of the people involved in this type of child-for-charity adoption exchange program.  There is no good reason to glorify parents who use children to get money or praise.  Uprooting a child's life like they must do for an adoption plan.... it's cruel.  Putting a child through what a child is put through, so that child can be adopted?  Do people realize what they are forcing upon a child?  Do these same people realize the chances of the adopted child getting great Aparents (who will help undo the trauma and damage) are very VERY slim?

And these rabid pro-adoption adopters go on and on about "best interest of the child"?!  Pahleese!  This garbage insults adoptees like me.

Hey, I'm all for helping your fellow-man. (Giving to others because you're a kind person is a wonderful thing... it really does feel great when you give from the heart.) If you want to help sponsor a poor family, do so, but do not require a child in return for a few checks.  Once a person takes a child in exchange for charity, that person is paying parents/family members for that child, and that individual is allowing a child to go through hell and back, all so the guilt/crisis ridden "I must do something good" individual can feel good about his/her self.  This type of adopter encourages and enables child trafficking and all sorts of corrupt, illegal, illegal, amoral activity.

[Can you tell this discovery floors me?  I'd love to know how much, in total, some of these American Adopters end-up spending, thanks to their adoption-plan, and all the guilt-based charitable donations that go with it.]

We adopted orphans "rescued" from crap care-systems do NOT need game-playing people messing our disadvantaged lives.  These parents are not saving us from hardship, or sparing us from deep and profound pain; they are not doing us favors.  Really. And in this case, I blame the "poor" parents for this horrible mess.  If parents realize another child is too much to have, and there are no decent family members or friends to help assist and care for the burden.... do the child and society a favor... abort the pregnancy.  Knowing what the adopted child put in-care has to go through, an abortion plan is much more merciful... especially if you happen to be the type of adoptee who fits PPL page criteria.

True true....

SO TRUE!!! I have spoken to searchers/investigators and can VERIFY that many of the birthfamilies just care about the $$$$ that they will receive, they don't care about the picture of the child. The child was used to attain $$$ and future entry into the US. The APs are taken for a ride...again.
The APs fuel this and in the end, a child is used by both the birthfamily AND the AP to satisfy their own selfish needs.

The sad thing is that there are so many TRUE orphans and children suffering malnutrition who come from unhealthy homes but very few of them ARE adopted. WHY??? I blame the APs because they pay for HEALTHY HAPPY newborns as was the custom in Guatemala, to receive a referral of a newborn or child under the age of 6 months.

I know of only a handful of children who were malnourished and were adopted out of Guatemala! Look at the medical reports!!! Only a few over the age of 2. Only a few over the age of 5. The stats for the US visas out of Guatemala do not lie. ALL the rest were healthy newborn referrals, keep in mind that actual age of exiting Guatemala differ but the MAJORITY of children OVER MANY years were under the age of 2.

The bcs are false in the sense that the children do have FATHERS, their names were never put on the bc in the first place so that the child could be placed for adoption, you can thank the attorneys and hogar directors for that anytime. Look at your documents APs!!! If anything, after visiting the child's wonderful extended family, you do have to wonder (like the other poster stated)...."why was that child placed in adoption in the first place?"

Better/Worse Case Scenarios

The bcs are false in the sense that the children do have FATHERS, their names were never put on the bc in the first place so that the child could be placed for adoption,

In the past, I have been criticized and attacked for voicing my disgust that OBC's are "amended" by authorities.  I have been told by those who have their arrogant heads up their self-absorbed ass no real sense of what takes place in Adoptionland, these changes are made "for the sake of the child."

Yea, for the adopted child.

<rolling eyes>

In a best-case scenario, readers can see how the returned adoptee can have an upsetting yet confirming reunion experience, ala Aparent involvement.  [Keep in mind how mind blowing a search and reunion "adventure" can be for a foreign born adoptee who is too immature to understand the ways of the world...]

she asked him many questions about what had happened to her and the other children during the time of the rebel invasion of Makeni in 1998. Kelfa did not have a lot of details, as he was not working with HANCI at that time. She told Kelfa that the visit had been very healing for her and she wanted to help other families connect with their children as well and asked him what she could do. He mentioned that it might be helpful if she were able to meet with the Minister of Social Welfare, just to verify that she had actually been in Sierra Leone and had come safely back to visit her family and then returned safely back to her family in the US. He thought this might help to stop some of the rumors that the children had been sold into slavery and prove that they had been adopted into loving families who were caring for them well. Adama agreed that she'd like to do that, if it might help other families find peace. We did not want to do it, however, unless both her adoptive mother in the US and her biological father in SL agreed to that meeting. In the end, both of them agreed. At first Mr. Kamara was reluctant. He told me he did not want people to know that his daughter had come from the US, because people would assume that she was sending money for him and he would be constantly bothered by people for financial assistance. Since she is just a child and still in school, she is not in a position to send financial assistance to her family. And the families who adopted the children in the US are not wealthy families; they are just average families who wanted to help a needy child. When they adopted these children, they were not anticipating any financial responsibility to the child's biological family. In fact, most of them had been told that their children were orphans and had no living relatives in SL.

"A meeting was arranged between Adama and the Minister of Social Welfare on the day that she left to go home to the States. It was a brief meeting, wherein the Minister asked her questions to verify that she was in a good home and was happy and healthy and well cared for. She assured him that she was very happy where she was, and was also glad that she'd had the opportunity to meet her biological family and have some long-asked questions answered. After they visited for a few moments, he left. I then got Adama to Lungi and she flew home.

[From:  Sierra Leone: Opinion - Over HANCI-MAPS Adoption, Who is Deceiving Who?, May 2011]

Let's fast-forward 10-15 years, and let's assume no hanky-panky or domestic violence was taking place in that great loving Ahome.  Let's say Little Adama gets a little curious, and tries drugs with a few friends.  No big deal... kids live and learn from scary experiences like getting stopped and questioned by a local police authority.

However, since 9/11, immigration rules and profiling procedures have changed a bit.

Foreign looking people have to have authentic documents.  Legal papers.  Proof of identity.

What happens if the adoptee stopped and questioned learns there's a problem with the papers?  

See:  Adoptee Deportation.

Where are dear ol mom and dad on the OBC, and how is that language barrier working NOW for the lucky adoptee "saved" by American Adopters?

The adopted bastard ain't feeling so lucky and glad after deportation, is he/she.

["Thanx mom, thanx dad, thanx adoption lawyers, and all you senators helping Americans fast-track adoptions in troubled countries!"]  I'd love to read those letters from prison detention centers, wouldn't you?

Instead, we can read this:

Haynes was adopted by an American couple in 1989 at the age of seven. However, her experience in 50 different foster homes was traumatic, she has stated.

DNA had first reported Haynes’ case when she moved the Bombay high court seeking action against her adoption centre, which did not complete the necessary formalities at the time of her adoption and after being booked for a drug felony she was deported to India, 20 years after she had seen it last.

Her husband Justin and children Kadafi, 7, and Kanassa, 6, live in Chicago. Haynes, however, without a passport of either countries, lives in India with no family, no source of income and no documents to avail a job.

“Never did I think I was not an American citizen until I was arrested for a minor drug charge and sent immediately for deportation. Your country which had promised me so much hope, instead treated me like an object to be discarded like damaged goods,” Haynes had said in her letter.

“Can you please help me?” Haynes has asked president Obama. She has also said, “Now I am an American without a country; a lost child who was sent away from my home, my family and my children.”

[From:  Deported from Chicago, she waits for Barack Obama, November, 2010 ]


There are some things that AP families need to take into consideration when sending money to the birthfamily, it may hurt them. Some may not even know that a child was relinquished, others may use the new found money as a way of blackmailing the birthfamily. One really has to take into account the realities that some of the birthfamilies live in, hopefully an investigator with a reputable background will provide that reassurance. Interesting tid bit of information.... now that ICA has closed in many parts, many adoption folks have turned into "birth searchers".

One also has to take into account that an AP is going by what is on their documents, which may or may not be true, which may or may not be either black or white, but somewhere in the middle or invented and thus false. There is no REAL way of knowing if the birthfamily that the APs and adoptee is meeting is REALLY the true birthfamily. Maybe another DNA test at a reputable university lab with no ties to the adoption biz would be a wise thing to do in order to lay rest to any uncertainty that may arise in the future.

It still boggles my mind that in this post-911 era that we are living in, that some APs have not yet applied for their child's COC (US certificate of citizenship). Some are duped into believing that getting a new BC in the US will suffice, well it doesn't. The new BC does not provide proof of citizenship, nor does the SS card, nor does readoption or name changes NOR getting a passport. Only the DOS can issued a COC that proves proof of citizenship. Passport expire anyways. A COC does not. If a child entered the US on an IR-4 Visa that child entered the US with a Green card, that Green card is valid for only 10 years...after that, EXPIRES, leaving the child on an "illegal" status. Now keep in mind, the rush then can be made to get the COC afterwards, but that is only if no laws have been broken. An AP has to file for the child's COC, it would be a bit harder for the adoptee, if their APs were dead. Deportation is a reality that adoptees without a COC face but can be avoided.

The birthfamily is great! Huh???

Jared, good point, yes there is a difference between misinformation that was given to Aparents about the relinquishment and the history of the child, the Aparent might chose to verify that information via an investigator. Completely different than that and what I think Kerry is puzzled about is, how can Aparents rave about the birthfamily/first mother/biosiblings when they visit the family in x-country post-adoption, and still justify that the adoption was in the best interest of the child. How can that be? This is a very good question Kerry. If the birthfamily is great and raising several siblings of the adoptee, why was the adoptee given into ICA in the first place? Now, that question does bear some looking into.

I do hope Aparents who have visited their adopted child's birthfamily in a foreign country and loved the birthfamily and saw that the birthfamily are
good people, chime in with some insight

Agreed ...

"I think Kerry is puzzled about is, how can Aparents rave about the birthfamily/first mother/biosiblings when they visit the family in x-country post-adoption, and still justify that the adoption was in the best interest of the child. How can that be? This is a very good question Kerry."

Here, I agree completely.

I assume that any  Aparent who has visited the child's birthfamily and found them exactly  the way depicted here would not justify that the adoption was in the best interest of the child. 


$upporting the First Family

I DO NOT think it's appropriate to hire a "professional searcher" to do a "discreet" search. IMHO, if your orphanage has on record that the birthmother welcomes contact, go for it and search. If the orphanage does not have her consent on record, I say just leave her alone!

I just read the thread posted regarding searching for birthfamilies, am I reading that right? Is it me or is supporting the first family either by giving them MONEY or educating their other children isn't that like PAYING them off for taking their child? Is guilt the true reason behind this "philanthropic" act?

What's next?

A child should NEVER EVER have to go through the separation from their birthmother for money.
A child should NEVER EVER have to go through a foster setting and risk being abused so that they can be placed with an adoptive family overseas.
A child should NEVER EVER have to go through abuse in their adoptive family.

What is the NEXT stage in the game my dears...let's see if the wonderful birthfamily is so wonderful when they ask the child to sponsor them to enter the US. Let's see how if the wonderful birthfamily will be so wonderful when they keep asking for money or...asking the now grown adoptee for money. Let's see if the APs will be thrilled to live with their new and wonderful LATINO extended birthfamily in their lives here in the good ole' US of A. Hmmm.

I am sure that many Abrothers and Adads will be attracted to their sexy Latin beauties, it isn't like they are the REAL sister nor the REAL daughter you know. Don't take my word for it, just read the blogs in the future years to come. And for those of you who think this doesn't happen, just search the archives.

My old complaint/refrain

I am sure that many Abrothers and Adads will be attracted to their sexy Latin beauties, it isn't like they are the REAL sister nor the REAL daughter you know. Don't take my word for it, just read the blogs in the future years to come. And for those of you who think this doesn't happen, just search the archives.

I've no doubt at all.

I'm not so hopeful to think if our society ever dealt seriously with our legacy of chattel slavery and Indian removal, how it wantonly split up families for the profit motive, how men of privilege thought of our supposedly inferior, off-limits women (*ahem cough* Strom Thurmond), that everything will magically be fixed in Adoptopia. Not in the least. But the patterns of who is sexually available to whom, and for what purposes, to me are clear. They think of their abuse as a coveted prize and the beauties, whatever their station, to be ingrates by default. After all, they will be told, it could be MUCH worse for them...


I DO NOT think it's appropriate to hire a "professional searcher" to do a "discreet" search. IMHO, if your orphanage has on record that the birthmother welcomes contact, go for it and search. If the orphanage does not have her consent on record, I say just leave her alone!

Is that the same advise you would you give to an adult adoptee striving to be reunited with his birth family? I remember I heard that "leave relinquishing parents alone" in that context ...

Who is doing the searching?

Jared, no that would not be the same advice I would give to an adult adoptee. The link in the thread posted, they are NOT adult adoptees but young children and toddlers at best, so it is not the adoptees choice to do the search but that of the ICA AP. I am not comfortable with that.

Finders (with or without fees)

Jared, Jared, Jared... you sure ask good questions...

Many times first-mothers do NOT want to be found because the unaborted pregnancy was the byproduct of a rape, or affair no one was supposed to know about.

[There are a variety of posts on PPL, and elsewhere about a mother's perceived right to privacy in an adoption plan.... I can direct you to those Birth (mother) "rights", if you'd like....]

Of course, not many adult adoptees know much about this mother's perceived "right to privacy", until they start chatting among other adoptees who have "been there done that", and got screwed by a woman who wanted to leave the dark ugly past-in-the-past, as a result.

There's another issue that cannot be stressed enough, and it was touched a bit by another poster. 

Finders, (AKA "search angels"), who may or may not charge a fee, may find a "lost family member", but unless a DNA test is completed to verify identity, that found person can be anyone.

Imagine for a minute the scams that result in THAT fun little "search for self".  In one scenario, the searcher may be a fraud.  [See:  Warning: Free Searches/Services (with a hidden plan) ]  In another scenario, the fake found family member may be a good con-artist looking to benefit from another person's guilt/generosity/naiveté.

Pandora's Box simply gets bigger and bigger, as the adoptee gets older.

Great fun, isn't it?


Pandora's Box

I wouldn't really see any  fun in this. It is sad, in the first place, and sad in the end.
Even if there is no fraud on the part of the searcher or on the part of the  birth family involved,
the neccessity for anyone to hire a searcher in order to provide an adoptive child with
information concerning his birth family is just too sad.


You are VERY correct...

no matter how or when it's sliced, it's sad when the adoptee has to bring the various bits and pieces of' 'family history' together.  Putting the pieces together is sad... very sad... for many many reasons.

And still, we adoptees are expected to be happy, grateful, and so VERY appreciative for all that was gifted to us, through adoption.

We're not allowed to feel sad or sorry for ourselves; we're not allowed to behave like "victims".  Instead, we have to continue the lie the adoption industry insists on selling:  adoption is great and full of wonderful happy blessings.  [We're supposed to get over all the wrongs done to us, without exhibiting any form of anger, hatred, resentment or wish ALL could be very very different.]

Pound Pup Legacy