Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by Artful Dodger Linmora - I get you confused with Lizita so I could be wrong. Weren't we discussing this report on another thread?
I am so pleased that Washington looked into the spike in cases and found serious flaws in the laws/rules for homestudies. I hope they implement them yesterday.
Abuse in any home is unacceptable - I do think the outrage is stronger when it happens in an adoptive family because the checks and balances are supposed to catch the problems and ensure they don't happen. Also, part of the outrage is also due to the refusal (past or present) of having an open discussion that abuse does happen in adoptive families - because no one in the community wants to taint "adoption" - understandable but wrong to be concerned about public perception of adoption for lack of addressing the process that broke down. Too many things in adoption have been swept under the rug to protect "adoption" from being tainted. Does that make sense?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linmora
I wasn't discussing this report on another thread. In fact, just sat down and read it with my first cup of coffee this morning. I was curious to see if abuse indeed was more common in adoptive families. I'm relieved to see that this isn't the case according to this particular report. I so often see this thrown around in adoption discussions. If other reports point to this fact, I would be interested in seeing the link so that I could read the report.
Not sure if I understand your last comment about adoption issues being swept under the rug. These well publicized cases have brought the fact that abuse does happen. It is a reality in every family, adoptive or biological. The adoption cases though get the most scrutiny. I guess that I'm a realist and understood that when we adopted, it wouldn't be all sunshine and butterflies. I was an active participant on other adoption forums and went into our adoption with our eyes very much open. There were numerous parents having great challenges, especially in an international adoption. We pretty much realized that healthy children were in short supply and there would be issues. I guess that where I was surprised was confronting the reality of bringing a child home and suddenly confronting those issues when the child is all yours. You are in for a tough reality check when it actually happens to you. I could tell you stories that would make you shudder. In retrospect, it has taken quite a few years to reach a diagnosis for our daughter (reactive attachment disorder albeit a milder case). That is where I would have loved to have more adoption support. Aside from some other adoptive parents, my husband and I felt very alone. I think that this Washington study, if implemented, would help families quite a bit. In our case, the good news is that things are slowly improving.
I agree that abuse in any form is horrible. Adoptive families are indeed under a microscope if something horrible happens on their watch. It is easy (and justified) to be quite angry that the adoptive parents weren't vetted by the system. Frankly, I don't understand the severe abuse cases (linked on this thread). How parents could do that is beyond my comphrension and really has no explanation. Were there red flags that should have stopped the adoption process? Or did these parents just wack out and do some inexcusable things? I would be really curious. On the other hand, the Washington report does give a big nod to adoptive families and acknowledges that most adoptions are of a proactive nature. That, at least, is good news.
You may not have been discussing it but I was and you agreed with the points I made in regards to homestudies etc in a broad sense...
This need to refute (sweep under the rug) any critique of the adoption is seem in this statement by Tom DeFilippo of JCICS...and the stories within the article about the successful adoptions that happen. Specifically by the choice to use the "only about 19 serious incidents of abuse or death out of 50,000 adoptions" with the downplay in using the words only about...as in not to worry - the most do just fine attitude.
Okay, thank for explaining. Still need a bit of clarification though. What would you have Tom DeFilippoo say in this response? How should one respond to Russia, that Americans are killing/abusing Russian children? Do you leave out the statistics? Because out of the 50k adoptions, many were indeed without incident. Of course he shouldn't downplay the tragedy of the abuse cases that did happen or respond in an insensitive manner. Guess I will Goggle the interview to reach my own conclusions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MirrenC
I didn't throw any facts around, merely cited some horrible cases that shouldn't have happened, in my opinion. Abuse happens, and to say that abuse happens in all families is true. Many people, when posed with what to do with abuse in adoptive families, merely seem to say, "Well, it happens in biological families, too." That's not good enough. Or, "Some people will abuse, no matter what." Maybe so, but then we need to figure out a better way to keep kids away from them.
I keep thinking about adoption being this promise of a "better" life, but that's not "better." It gets back to it only being different, and possibly much worse.
Abuse is tragic. I don't think it should happen in adoptive families to the degree it does (it shouldn't happen at all), especially when biological children in the same families are untouched. There is something very wrong in the parental screening process.
Agreed. Any type of abuse is horrible and shouldn't occur. This Longview couple seem to be...insane. As I asked before, I wonder if there were other red flags. Did anyone interview their biological children? If I were a betting woman, I suspect that there was probably abuse too. And yes, adoption is different and indeed can be much worse. This case illustrates that. But to ask you a question with what I bolded. Do you personally believe that abuse is prevalent in adoptive families and just isn't seen or reported?
Can you prevent abuse in all adoption cases? Certainly not. Wackos will slip through even the most stringent screening processes on occasion. You can't prevent people from behaving badly or in a dowright evil manner. Getting back to the Washington Study though, there are certainly needs for improvements in the system to prevent these types of situations from occuring.
Has anyone seen a breakdown of the actual causes of the deaths of the 19 children much cited by Russian authorities? I know about the toddler inadvertently left in a hot car, but what happened to the other 18? Were their deaths the result of illness, accident, abuse, neglect, caused by other than the adoptive parents? No child should suffer death, of course - but deliberately killing a child is a far cry from a child's death due to disease or accidental injury such as a fall while climbing a tree or running out into traffic after a runaway dog or a ball...
How old were these children? How long had they been in the US? Did they have any underlying medical conditions or special needs?
If any one has any additional knowledge or can cite online sources of this information, I would be quite interested in seeing it - thanks. Meanwhile, it's said that more than 19 children die each month in Russia's orphanages and institutions.
Has anyone seen a breakdown of the actual causes of the deaths of the 19 children much cited by Russian authorities? I know about the toddler inadvertently left in a hot car, but what happened to the other 18? Were their deaths the result of illness, accident, abuse, neglect, caused by other than the adoptive parents? No child should suffer death, of course - but deliberately killing a child is a far cry from a child's death due to disease or accidental injury such as a fall while climbing a tree or running out into traffic after a runaway dog or a ball...
How old were these children? How long had they been in the US? Did they have any underlying medical conditions or special needs?
If any one has any additional knowledge or can cite online sources of this information, I would be quite interested in seeing it - thanks. Meanwhile, it's said that more than 19 children die each month in Russia's orphanages and institutions.
Good question Craig. Are accidental deaths counted and how are they even reported?
Hope I inserted that link correctly. Haven't done this before, lol. This case happened in our area and was well publicized in our paper and nationally. I do believe that they froze adoptions in Russia over this for a bit. We were starting our adoption process at the time and I remember a coworker asking me, "Are you sure you want to adopt? You won't kill them will you?" My jaw almost hit the floor at her question. This story pretty much shocked our area and illustrated the dark sides of adoption. Victor's story has haunted me for years and still fills me with great sadness.
Tom DeFilippo of JCICS confirmed there were only about 19 cases of "serious abuse or death". For the head lobbyist of international adoption he would be screaming if the 19 cases involved any accidental cases.
Quote:
“There were only about 19 serious incidents of abuse or death out of 50,000 adoptions,†said Tom de Filippo, an official with the Joint Council on International Children’s Services in Alexandria. Moreover, he said, many American families were willing to take in older, troubled or disabled children that Russians did not want to adopt. “What drove this ban was simply nationalism,†he said.
Linmora,
The link to what Tom said above was in the original post and below as well.
I believe a lot of abuse in adoptive families goes unreported, yes. Especially when there is intimidation and language barriers and the parents inculcate a sense of fear and demand gratitude. Anecdotally I know of 100+ adoptees who were abused and are trying to recover. I was not; I was so fortunate.
I do think more regulation of people certified to do home studies and more follow up would be extremely helpful. Better screening is must.
Craig, the 19 deaths were not all accidental like the poor child in the car. Many were egregious, like the Barbours. Yes, what happens in orphanages is beyond sad. But comparing the two is apples and oranges. These children were supposed to be safe.
I believe a lot of abuse in adoptive families goes unreported, yes. Especially when there is intimidation and language barriers and the parents inculcate a sense of fear and demand gratitude. Anecdotally I know of 100+ adoptees who were abused and are trying to recover. I was not; I was so fortunate.
I do think more regulation of people certified to do home studies and more follow up would be extremely helpful. Better screening is must.
Craig, the 19 deaths were not all accidental like the poor child in the car. Many were egregious, like the Barbours. Yes, what happens in orphanages is beyond sad. But comparing the two is apples and oranges. These children were supposed to be safe.
Are not the children also "supposed to be safe" in the orphanages?
Originally Posted by Artful DodgerThis need to refute (sweep under the rug) any critique of the adoption is seem in this statement by Tom DeFilippo of JCICS...and the stories within the article about the successful adoptions that happen. Specifically by the choice to use the "only about 19 serious incidents of abuse or death out of 50,000 adoptions" with the downplay in using the words only about...as in not to worry - the most do just fine attitude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linmora
Okay, thank for explaining. Still need a bit of clarification though. What would you have Tom DeFilippoo say in this response? How should one respond to Russia, that Americans are killing/abusing Russian children? Do you leave out the statistics? Because out of the 50k adoptions, many were indeed without incident. Of course he shouldn't downplay the tragedy of the abuse cases that did happen or respond in an insensitive manner. Guess I will Goggle the interview to reach my own conclusions.
That the adoption community takes every reported case of abuse in an adoptive home seriously, and we review the processes of the agency or homestudy agency that recommended the family be allowed to adopt, and ensure that to the very best of our ability that the process is fixed so bad parents aren't approved in the future.
Basically - that abuse is taken seriously - not just written off as "only" 19 of 50,000 were harmed or dead so what's the big deal statement.
In Russia's case there is more than just the 19 - there are the disruptions, the ranch in Montana etc but that isn't the subject of the thread.
Washington state reacted appropriately in saying there is a spike in cases and we need to figure out why and then studied it. That is acknowledging there is a problem and stating we want to find the cracks in the system and do common sense solutions to mitigate others slipping through who shouldn't. Quite frankly, adoptive parents should be thrilled that Washington state did this because they can then say - this is where the process broke down and how these bad guys got through - so don't assume we are all bad guys.
Americans do not have control over the orphanages in Russia and Ukraine. We do have control over adoption practices here.
The discussion we are having is about changing adoption practices, and in particular, screening potential adoptive parents; you are interjecting wanting to change the standard of care in orphanages. That is a different discussion: hence the apples and oranges.
You might say that we are screening too harshly, leaving kids to die or "languish" in orphanages, but I see that as a red herring, when clearly the screening standards we have right now are not enough to prevent deaths. Homestudies can be bought; people don't have credentials to do them. Sometimes you can buy a homestudy online! This is wrong.
As a friend of mine said, even if every middle-class American adopted 10 children from orphanages, that would leave millions more children without homes, and suffering. What of them? Are they not people, too? This is not a helpful way of looking at a problem of vast, vast proportion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and you agreed with the points I made in regards to homestudies etc in a broad sense...
