When a child is treated like a dog, and no one seems to care
The other night, I learned Oprah Winfrey took the time to talk to a girl made to live in a dog cage.
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.
Oprah Winfrey talks to Chelsea, girl made to live in dog cage, February 22, 2011 ]
According to the article, after she was rescued, "she was taken to foster care, then adopted, then returned to foster care." Limited information is given as to why she was put back into foster-care after the adoption.
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 the Big O 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."
Oprah's film crew was kind enough to revisit the house where the abuse took place, so the viewing audience could get a glimpse of an abused child's home environment. Videos, beginning with a portion of Oprah's interview, can be found here: Chelsea Talks About Her Parents.
Normally, I don't focus on birth-family abuse, because in theory, once a child is removed from an abusive first home-environment, it is expected the chosen foster home will be much safer for the child. It is assumed, after appropriate training and teaching, foster/adoptive parents will be able to provide appropriate care for the child who has already been neglected and abused by first-family members, or care-givers at an institution.
In countries that support foster-care as the institutional-care alternative, it is believed approved foster/adoptive parents understand the plight of children who have already been neglected/abused by parents or adult care-takers. In theory, foster/adoptive parents will respect a child's right to safety, and they will not physically harm the children put in their care, they will not demonstrate gross neglect, and ignore basic needs of foster/adopted children, nor will these trained parents put foster/adopted children in cages, or scary confined spaces, and treat them like untrained dogs.
Oh, Oprah and the rest of the world.... if only theories were facts, and adoptees were not abused and treated like sex-objects, or unwanted animals....
In terms of being treated like a dog, or forced to be put in a cage or small confined space, a child like 'Chelsea' is far from being alone. It's a very sad fact there are parents who simply do not think about what it is they are doing to a child, or the consequences those thoughtless actions will bring, eventually.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, PPL features abuse cases in which adoptees have been put in cages, "for their own good". See: Forced Confinement. I strongly encourage readers to browse that category of abuse because several common themes can be found. For instance, note how many case have more than 4 adopted/fostered children in one home. Note how adoption subsidies can play a role in abusive behavior. (Any one care for some warm yummy "doggie dew stew"?) Note the type of child caged, how is that child described? Above all, note the way in which 'alienation' takes on a whole new level in the abusive adoptive home, and ask, what sort of consequences will these actions against children bring, eventually?
These are all topics I would love a talk-show host to unfold for the viewing public, and this is why I find myself suddenly sad/disappointed Oprah is well-into her farewell season. While I don't watch her show anymore, (I used to, back when I was still in school), I know Oprah still has an enormous female-following, and with that comes power, and media presence. Oprah is not a mere talk-show host; she is a leading celebrity in America, and elsewhere in this world. For instance, when Oprah speaks about adoption, people listen.
As far as I know, the only time an abused adoptee was interviewed by a prominent media figure with a following as big as Oprah's was back in January, 2006. In fact, Oprah did that interview, on her show. The episode titled, Meet Masha, Adopted by a Pedophile, can still be found on the Oprah.com website. During that interview, Forever Mom Faith Allen was praised for nursing the sexually exploited adopted child back to a sense of healthy normalcy.
Today, Masha finally has a bedroom of her own. Though her wounds are far from healed, life might be looking up for this young survivor. "I feel really safe and happy for the first time," says Masha. "It's like starting over." [page 7]
During that same interview, Masha got to meet her sexual predator's biologic daughter, for the first time. For those who don't know, adoption agency approved Mathew Mancuso, (AKA Forever Dad), sexually abused Rachelle, but the social worker responsible for the adoption home-study did not investigate this aspect of the pedophile's previous home-life.
Meeting Masha for the first time was a gut-wrenching experience for Rachelle. "I want to tell Masha I'm very sorry," says Rachelle. "I really wish that I had said something when I was a kid because maybe Masha would have been spared this hell of a life that she had to go through."
Oprah commends Rachelle for admitting her feelings. "I want you to let go of the guilt of it," Oprah tells Rachelle. "But I really do think that it's good that you're here saying this, because I want every child out there who is being molested to know that whoever is molesting you is going to molest somebody else."
"Not only when you speak up do you save yourself, you get to save a whole lot of other people, too," says Oprah. [page 6]
Ah, as only Oprah can put it: "Not only when you speak up do you save yourself, you get to save a whole lot of other people, too," What made this statement so powerful and great was this: Oprah knows damn well what it feels like to be young, and sexually abused by a family member. Survivors know: we can't stay silent, because silence kills.
Masha is now eighteen, and in a new home, getting on with her life, for the fourth time in eighteen years. Very little "behind the scenes" has been aired by the media since 2006. In fact, I doubt many of Oprah's cult-like followers got a more honest glimpse of Faith Allen, and Judge Cheryl Allen after that 2006 show. I doubt many can begin to fathom the way in which an abused adoptee is treated and 'helped' by the legal system, mental health services, religious organizations, and adoptive parent replacements. Some of the untold facts in the Masha case have been updated in the post, The untold story of Masha Allen, but after a while, people fascinated with a case or story need to be reminded, victims of abuse need privacy, and that need must be honored and respected.
I don't think it is right or appropriate to always focus on the Masha Allen case when the term "Abused Adoptee" gets mentioned. It's not fair to Masha, and it's not fair to all the adoptees abused before or since that case has aired on national television. All one has to do is spare a little time and interest, and see just how many other adoptees have been sexually abused by a member of the adoptive family or sexually exploited by an adoptive parent.
Although PPL's collection of abuse cases is 'impressive', it is very limited in the sense that we at PPL know not every abused adoptee case gets reported to the news and not every abusive home situation is reported to authorities. Oddly enough, when it comes to identifying which abuse cases were at the hands of a birth parent or adoptive parent, that large detail is often not known until much much later, if ever. For example, on the PPL pages, we have a few situations where a child abuse story did make the local news, but reporters failed to mention the abusive/negligent parent was in fact, an adoptive parent. If not for other reporters covering the same story, we would not have known a new case can be added to our growing collection.
By no means should these 'limits' and relatively small number of abuse cases post adoption 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? [Conversly, when will those who work with children, (educators, social workers, teachers/teacher's aids and clinicians) recognize classes taught by a lay-parent (with no scientific evidence or emperical study) are not prudent professional decisions?]
-
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?
I understand the general public wants 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."
I can even understand, as long as international adoption practice exists as it currently does, adoption advocates will insist the lives of adoptees are "immeasurably enriched" by the many new opportunities given to them through their birth and adoptive families, (and yes, an adoption agency).
I can also understand, as long as the international adoption community insists not only is the adopted child far better-off in life than the child consigned to institutional care, but the child adopted by foreign parents is more enriched (than his domestic-adopted counterpart), there really is no room for child advocates to insist/argue radical adoption reform is necessary.
The biggest barrier working against parents and children is the lack of transparency in Adoptionland.
People need to realize, many children separated from parents/family-members are not placed in Eastern-bloc-esque institutions; they are placed in private foster-care homes, which, in some cases, can house as many children as any small institution. Far too often these foster-carers are NOT vetted properly and are NOT supervised or monitored as they should be, and as a result, far too many foster home environments turn out to be more brutal and barbaric than anyone would like to imagine. [At PPL, we tried to document all the abuse-in-foster-care cases, but we found there are just too damn many!!]
The argument that adoption is better than foster care and private foster care is better than any form of group/institutional living can only be a theory, since it's a fact vetted foster/adoptive parents do abuse and neglect their foster/adopted children.
In addition, the argument that adoption supports the rights of children, and serves a child's best interest, as outlined in The Convention of the Rights of Children (1989), can be argued if we take a look at the various ways and instances a child's rights are neither respected nor protected once he/she becomes a resident of the state/country that refuses to honor the treaty created in 1989.
Although the breakdown will seem lengthy, I do hope readers will see and appreciate the many different ways members in child placemement services and foster/adoptive parents fail children put in their care. Please note where the USA continues to fail children unfortunate enough to be put in-care.
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. | See: The one-child rule, as it is enforced in China, and ask if children born in Chinese families that already have a child are being discriminated against. [Note the preference given to male children in China, and how stolen babies have become a new industry in China's villages.] 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. Clearly, the days of corrupt government intervention, and forced adoptions are not over. The terms "unwanted" and "abandoned" need to be reassessed by those financially supporting the international adoption industry. |
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 mother's and 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 simply 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. However, one would be remiss to ignore the fact that the United States is exempt from implementing the UNCRC because it never ratified the treaty. |
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. | While the US is exempt from this rule, (simply because it doesn't recognize the UNCRC), the killing of children is not acceptable, and will be punished, as US law dictates. Sadly, some of the most hideous examples of human indecency, poor 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. The level of negligence and ignorance, on the part of trained educators and professionals, is astounding. |
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. In this regard, PAP's really need to question where their money is going, (for what service will cash be necessary?) especially when they are asked to bring cash to the next meeting. [See: Babies-for-sale trade faces global crackdown ] |
8.2 | Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to speedily re-establishing his or her identity. | [See above] |
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. | Unfortunately, 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. |
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. | Once again, the US doesn't have to abide by the UNCRC, because the treaty has not been ratified. Those who advocate opposition to ratification of the UNCRC voice a concern that the ammendments made will superceding any relevant, existing federal or state laws. In addition, there is the fear that ratification would limit American family law and parental rights, and put those laws and rights under international regulation and scrutiny. |
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. | The rights given to a parent and child are far too often income-based. This is painfully obvious when one looks at services that provide prevention, identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up as it pertains to domestic violence and child maltreatment. Interestingly enough, after reviewing many abused adoptee cases, a staggering trend seems to reveal itself. 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. Again, one must question 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. |
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, negligence and oversight on the part of those facilitating an adoption-plan prove more needs to be done for the sake of the child. More pre and post placement home-visits and investigations may prove to serve an adoptable child's best interest, especially if child abuse in the foster/adoptive home can be reduced/prevented. |
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. |
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. | See: Special needs abuse cases [PPL is updating case files, so readers can see if the abused adoptee had a known disablity. For example: on the page that features 76+ Children adopted by Diane and Dennis Nason, below the case description, readers will see the date of the incident, the placement type, the type of abuse, the abuser, if there were children with disabilities, if there was homeschooling, and if fundamentalist faith influenced parental behavior. |
24.1 | Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health. States Parties shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right of access to such health care services forth in the present Convention and in other international human rights or humanitarian instruments to which the said States are Parties. | See: Abuse cases that feature deprivation and neglect |
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 in Article 19.1, 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. This issue becomes more complex when one will place the right to religious practice card atop the parental right and right to privacy cards. To put this in context, a sending-country, like Russia, cannot be certain the life of an adoptable Russian child will receive the rights as outlined in the UNCRC, if the child is sent to live in either the USA or Somalia. See: List of agencies with missing Russian post-placement reports. |
27.1 | Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. | One has to question the moral lesson taught when a) a foster/adopted child is sexually abused by a foster/adoptive parent, or b) sexually abuse takes places in the foster/adoptive home, but the case does not get reported to authorities. |
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. |
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 ] |
32 | Parties recognize the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development. | |
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. | |
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. ] |
37(c) | Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age. In particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances. | If a child in-care is tortured, and a responsible adult does nothing to protect that child, who is going to ensure that child is safely removed, before that, (or another child put-in care) is killed? How does one explain a family adoption-plan is not possible because expert opinion believes the bond between foster/adoptive parents should not be broken? [See: Abuse clues in Fla. twins case put spotlight on child services ] |
37 (d) | Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legality of the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent, independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on any such action. | |
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 very little is being done about it in 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 still need attention, improvement, and updating. Transparency in adoption practice and the vetting of prospective parents are two critically important adoption issue adoptable children, and their parents, have to face.
If the adoptive home environment is not safe, and the chosen parents are unstable, what adoptee will care if his OBC was forged, (or he was abducted from living parents, or not enough minorities are adopting minority children), if that adopted child was abused by the agency approved adoptive parent? What adoptee cares about adoption issues if that adoptee is profoundly damaged, or dead?
I can understand politicians will avoid the more difficult adoption issues like the plague.
Do high-profile celebrities, Goodwill Ambassadors, and members of the press think and feel the same way, too?