[johnny]

I think that is great Jen. (Truly)

Good news for the families, the orphanage and the child/ren of the families however, it sound more like a halfway house for extremely impoverish families rather than an orphanage? What about other orphanages that don’t accept non-orphans? Moreover, what about the children that are qualified for the Intercountry program? And what about the children that should be qualified for the program but due to semantics are ruled out and deemed not qualified?

Reading the posts on this forum it is obvious that the adoption policies as well as the Laws need reform. The rules are not structured to real life situations. Yes, the people working the system deserve a pat-on-the-back for the effort they put forth, but painting a picture that all is well, does not address the problems.

My opinion is that many children are cared for that are not under the Jurisdiction of the Social System. They may actually be according to the rules, but people that just care for the children in need of a home, are not concerned about Jurisdiction. The adoptive families of these children that cross boundaries are forced, to either take the long road of domestic adoption to legalize the relationship in the eyes of the Judicial System and the policy makers or they simply use alternative means to keep their family together. Since these rules have been enacted, families have been kept apart. I assume there are no stats published to say how many people use alternative methods rather than follow the rules. It takes people like Larryman with enough integrity to follow the rules for the system to be exposed for what it actually is. “A failure” Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying ICAB is a failure, I’m saying the system fails the children.

When Chuck posted this thread, I was not sure of the statistics. I didn't thing to rummage through ICAB's web site because I had never seen any stats except for outdated ones on the State Department's web site and it is not all inclusive. I don't know when they posted it. There are three categories of numbers; I may have been hasty in assuming that there were 496 total adoptions because the category is “Children cleared for InterCountry Adoption” it does not say “completed adoptions”. It is a little to involved for me to try to analyze the numbers. Although the number of Matched children is 427 so how could it be that 496 were completed? Also, the number total of matched applications says 369 so how can it be that 496 were completed. Some one figure this stat chart out please!

Diane’s 1991 date is too far back, the rules, which apply today only, go back to 1995 for ICAB and were revised in 1998. I think this is the reason we see the jump in the number in 1999. Correct me if I wrong guys, but Both Chuck and Larry are of the opinion that the hold up is due to preference. I think they just need more help and reform.

Johnny