[sregis]

China’s New-Look Orphanages | Newsweek International | Newsweek.com

and please do comment on the site if you wish!

[Katia555]

This is one of those articles that start out with a grand statement and is unable to substantiate it with convincing and well-documented facts. "China's orphanages used to be seen as dumping grounds for unwanted children. No longer," it promises. And then, further down, it says, "the conditions of the hundreds of state-run orphanages in China are still largely unknown (...) So how do they know that the so-called "dying rooms" no longer exist? How do they know that the majority of children in Chinese orphanages are well-cared for? Fact is, they don't. But it looks good on paper.

Another claim is made in the article: "Orphanage care in China is superior to that found in any other country," says Katie Biddle of the Hawaii International Adoption Agency. Every other country??? How did that happen all of a sudden? It didn't, of course. The Chinese authorities show you what they want you to see. We were not even allowed inside our daughter's orphanage. We asked if we could see where she had spent the first year of her life. "No, it would upset the other children," we were told. In reality they were most likely more concerned that it would upset us to see the living conditions of the children there. This article sunds like pr propaganda to me.

[KarenInCa]

Katia-
Thought I'd add in here.
When we went to get our first daughter, we were allowed to visit the orphanage. At the time, we also asked if we could take pictures of another waiting child in a different ward. The director agreed. However, the child was uncomfortable with us outside of his own area, so we (unexpectedly) asked if we could go to his ward to take pictures of him playing with the other children. Again, they did NOT expect us to enter this wing. What we found was that the area was well kept and the kids were well tended to. It was cleaner than a US daycare center.
Granted, that was only ONE orphanage experience, but keep in mind that just because they wouldn't let you visit, does not mean that the reason was because it was not well kept.
It could have been just the opposite, that perhaps the director thinks it can be distruptive to the children still left behind.
We were very glad to have visited our daughter's SWI, and were equally as happy to be able to take pictures for another family, still waiting. But, it was also disheartening to see older pre-schoolers watching us come in to the SWI. They would watch us from the playground, and wave proudly, even say, "Hello" in english as we walked by them. One little girl (around 4-5 yrs old) tried to fuss with her clothes, giving us the impression that if we thought she looked presentable enough, we would take her home too. It was so very sad to see, and quite frankly, if I were a director, I might decline visits to the SWI for that reason alone. It has to be very confusing and difficult for the older toddlers to see other children leaving with someone, and after a few times of that, without seeing the child return, I'm sure they catch on.
My heart breaks when I look at pictures from my daughter's SWI, and see children that are now the same age as her. By the grace of God alone, she was chosen, and not one left behind to be a child in those pictures.

[pgruodis]

Katia - I thought the exact same thing.
They really should be better journalists!

[KarenInCa]

Paul-
Just curious as to what other info you are basing your opinion on.

[pgruodis]

Originally Posted by KarenInCa

Paul-
Just curious as to what other info you are basing your opinion on.

Sorry, I don't quite understand your question...
I am agreeing with Katia that the same points she caught glaringly jumped out at me as well.
The author does not substantiate her claims...openly admits that the conditions in hundreds of orphanages is unknown, but then reports improvements. I'm that saying that things have not improved...it is unknown. Basic, poor journalism, and am surprised no editor caught it. Possibly online articles are held to a lower standard.

[amyfk]

I have to admit I mentally wasnt strong enough to request a special needs child.(not happy about that).
However, this story breaks my heart! The children who need the families the most seem least likely to get them. Life is so unfair at times and this is an example of it.
I get many pleas for charities, but the one I give to every year are the orphans left behind. Having a loving family is the most important thing of all.
Amy K, NJ

[Couchkat]

This is just so hard to read. I often think about the children left behind.

[KarenInCa]

The editorial seemed to be saying that conditions are better than they were. I believe that is true. Many adoptive parents donate big ticket items to SWIs. Love without Boundaries, and Half the Sky have made a huge difference in the care at the facilities as well. But these are for facilities open to IA. There is no way to know about the hundreds of SWIs not open to adoption, in remote areas, that do not get $3,000 donations per child from adoptions or non-profit organizations, or donations from adoptive parents while in China. I think that's really what the author was trying to convey.
Conditions are not the best (by any standard), but I do believe that the majority of SWIs that adopt internationally are better than they were, just 5 yrs ago.