[mshackelford13]

Okay. So we have written countless letters and made innumerable phone calls trying to get help for our Embassy. Many of us signed the online petition to let our representatives know that something needs to be done. So far they have only been able to make small changes that do not seem to have improved the process but in fact it seems to have made things worse. So here is my new idea:

Our Embassy is under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security. This is where their funding comes from. In order to institute permanent meaningful changes, our embassy needs the DHS to allocate the money for it. I was looking at the DHS website (you can Google it or PM me for it) and they have a "Contact Us" page. If you go to that page you have the choice of calling them (good luck with that) or emailing them. If you choose to email them, there are selected topics to pick from including "Immigration". Yes, I know this is not exactly our problem BUT it is an issue that would be dealt with by our Embassies and indirectly effects us. My latest suggestion is that we start contacting their (get this) customer service department and see if we can get our point across. Over 500 families signed the petition that went to our representatives, if we can get anywhere near that number of families to contact DHS and let them know our problem, it will have to get it some sort of attention.

So everyone understands, I do not go out of my way to be a troublemaker (really.....no seriously......do I hear laughter ). It just bothers me that so many people have had such a horrible time dealing with our own Embassy and all these delays have caused so many of you undue heartache. If you don't feel like this is something you feel strongly about supporting I understand completely.For those who do feel strongly about this I am just inviting you to voice your opinion in a different manner in the hopes of making this process more organized and less painful.

[linda512]

Something has to be done. Maybe if we all go down to Guatemala to the embassy, or stage a protest in DC or wherever the department of homeland security is. It is so clearly outrageous. Anyone do documentaries??

[pvellozo]

michelle. you are my favorite person on this boeard.
we all air our individual heartaches, but you are actively looking for ways to solve them.
i think this is a good idea, although getting more money out of washington seems like a long shot.
if the people at the embassy/fc/pgn would devise a system to facilitate rather than impede adoption cases, that would help all of us.
i do not think money is the issue, we pay a lot for each form we submit, fingerprints and so on. the attitude should be more friendly to adoptive parents and children, which sadly it is not.
i am still very hopeful that continued contact with the congresspersons and senators will end up helping us all.

[4abrightfuture3]

I am interested in hearing views on this from all the smart people on this forum. I love that you are trying to come up with solutions to an obvious problem for all families dealing with the Embassy. I think if we all team together we CAN make a difference. So do we think emails or more Congress contact ??

[linda512]

On a more serious note than my last post, I was frustrated when I contacted my congressmen- they wanted to help ME and try to move my case along, which I appreciate, but they did not seem as interested in trying to correct the problem. It's like putting a bandaid on a gaping wound.
I would be happy to do anything that people think would be helpful.

[guatmom4113]

I think we should go on a hunger strike and chain ourselves to the Embassy gate. I am almost at that point!!!!

[pvellozo]

guatmom. great idea. let us do it.
lol

[brink]

A bunch of well dressed Americans chaining themselves to the Embassy gate because we have to wait longer than we'd like to legally take Guatemala's children out of the country to raise as our own for the rest of our lives? It's not that I don't agree change can or should be considered, but the contrast between what we are gaining and what Guatemala is or has already lost is more than a staggering statistic in my mind. You bet we hate to miss any time with these children. But what about these children's first mama? How much time is she going to miss with her child? How much future is Guatemala losing, because families can't raise their own children due to extreme poverty and/or lack of education and opportunity.

Do what you feel you can to help improve the process, but don't ignore some of the uglier issues which surround adoption in third world countries. Somewhere along the way, many have come to believe that adoption should happen across international borders at a very quick pace. Do people stop to think of the ramifications of expecting this process to proceed at a rapid pace or what might be construed as the world see Americans completing quick adoptions? Where is the safety for women and children in a system like that? How are ethical adoptions guaranteed under such timeframes? Sometimes I think we need to take a step back and think about the truth behind why some cases move so quickly through the process. Should all move that quickly? Or are some things going on behind the scenes which are making the quick ones move that fast? No one likes to consider these things, but I believe we do well to serve our children better in the long run if we think beyond our own goals for this process.

Someone used the term "in limbo" in another post to refer to these children waiting to come home. In the majority of cases in Guatemala, because of the foster families used and the smaller orphanages than you find in other countries, these children are not suffering or realize that their future adoptive parents are waiting for them.

I'm sorry that this may seem OT and less than supportive of honest attempts to improve the process at the Embassy, but I become concerned when we look at adoption and timeframes from only the waiting American adoptive family point of view. I also get very concerned that in trying to make things better by our standards and for our own gain (being priveleged to not just parent a child, but an even younger child), we might be missing some vital issues, issues which we might not fully understand. Maybe it's because I totally trust my agency, which has been doing ethical Guatemalan adoptions for over two decades, when they tell us that this process is very unpredictable. I think it's when we go into this thinking we can and should be able to bring home another mother's child in short order, that we make this harder for ourselves. And when we forget that any failed referrals or infertility and loss are not the fault of either Guatemala or our US government, it's easy to take our frustrations out on either or both.

[calikismet]

Originally Posted by mshackelford13

Our Embassy is under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security. This is where their funding comes from. In order to institute permanent meaningful changes, our embassy needs the DHS to allocate the money for it.

I hate to be the technical one here, but the US Embassies and Consulates are not under the DHS; they are instead under the Department of State. Yes, CIS is a part of DHS. But when DHS was created, the embassies and consulates were left under the realm of the Dept of State (in fact, they were never in the same "arm" of the govt as the INS, which was always the Dept of Justce). It is a tiny technicality, but also important, b/c it changes the funding, oversight, hierarchy, personnel chain of command, etc. So petitioning the change to come at the DHS level is the wrong tree to bark up...

For those of you who don't know (which is prob most of you, as I am a butter-inner from the Russian boards), I am an immigration attorney. I have contacts and liaisons that are not normally available to the public. I will contact that consular liaison and see if I can get some answers to what may be going on, proposed changes, etc. I cannot guarentee that the answers will be what you all want to hear, but I am happy to solicit some input from him as well. I will be happy to report back here about whatever I hear.

[brink]

There is a very informative article by Kelly on the guatadopt site. It sheds much light on the subject of Embassy issues. After reading that, I am even more convinced that sometimes our impatience and high expectations as adoptive parents only causes us to shoot ourselves in the foot. Please read her article and her response to the comments.

[Paparama]

I generally agree with Brink that adoptive parents do a disservice to themselves and everyone involved in adoption when they behave selfishly and without regard to cultural differences. And I also think the question of whether wealthy countries (like the U.S.) should devote their resources toward improving the efficiency of international adoption as opposed to, say, assisting in eliminating the economic and social conditions in developing countries that force women into the heart-wrenching position of relinquishing their children to be adopted, is far more compelling than, say, how long any particular adoption might take. Adoption is not and should not be a race. Nor is it a solution to the problem of systemic poverty.

However, I do think that, given that international adoption is happening on a pretty broad scale, the goal of placing children with adoptive families as quickly as a reasonable process will allow is itself a component of an "ethical" adoption process. Stated another way, there is essential "delay" in Guatemalan adoption, but that doesn't mean non-essential delay should be tolerated. Stated yet another way, if everything else is equal, and an ethical adoption can happen in x months, an adoption that takes longer than x months because of curable inefficiency is less ethical than an efficient x-month adoption.

And here, I think we are probably talking not about an essential delay that is a product of a well-placed desire to improve the adoptive process (for example, the U.S.-initiated DNA requirement), but curable inefficiency. And I also think Michelle's initial post (with calikismet's clarifications) probably gets it pretty much exactly right.

Yes, the "American" mindset of "I can solve any problem with money" is inappropriate in many, if not most, phases of the adoption process. But here, it may very well be precisely the correct mindset. For better or worse, the sheer number of adoptions from Guatemala by U.S. citizens has increased by almost 400 percent in the past five years. But the number of staff devoted to processing those adoptions at the U.S. Embassy in Guatemala has not changed. That is, the same number of people are now expected to do four times the amount of work that they had to do five years ago. No matter how improved the internal processing may be (and it is reasonable to expect bureaucracies to improve over time), I don't think it is realistic to expect the embassy to be able to handle the massive increase in volume without some corresponding increase in workforce.

And surely there is room in a trillion-dollar budget for $100,000 to pay for a couple of additional staff persons to help with the logjam at the embassy.

Yes, international adoption involves many complex ethical questions that should not be disregarded out of mere impatience. And yes, the "ugly American" syndrome is a huge problem at many levels. But not all "delays" in the process are there for good reason. If there is an "unnecessary" delay in the process, I'm all for fixing it. And I think Michelle may be onto something here.

[pvellozo]

thank you paparama for a balanced and reasonable post.
i do not agree that the adoptive parents on this forum are selfish for wanting reasonably smooth processing of their adoption cases. the babies are not helped by waiting 6, 12 or 18 months or longer in a limbo. yes it is limbo.
once it is determined that their is a reasonable likelihood that a baby is to be placed with an adoptive family, there is nothing to be gained by dragging out the process.
i do not think guatmom was seriously suggesting we chain ourselves to anything. but i do not think she is being unreasonable to want a reasonably quick resolution of her case.

[csw]

Well said Paparama...when our agency took 5 months to send our POA to Guatemala..I was devestated..this was a totally unecessary wait..and I don't agree that prolonging their time in foster care or a hogar is beneficial or not harmfull in any way..our daughter was not fed properly, had a peeling bleeding diaper rash etc..and at 8.5 months old when I went to foster she had a heck of a time..on my previous 3 visits when she was younger..we sailed through the sep. anxiety etc..the first 2 visits there was none and the 3rd visit was mild..but by the 4th time..wow...but even with outstanding foster care..it is still in my opinion, better for them to be in their forever families as soon as possible..

Some folks who have had bio children maybe don't understand the intense desire some people have to have their babies home at a young age..since they have already gotten to experience the newborn and early infant ages..I am all for an honest, ethical system..
But when I was living in Peru for 6 months and one of the reasons it took so long was because the courts would go on strike, or because the final signature we needed took so long because the judge's term was up and he didn't care if he signed or not..these things need to be worked on..It has nothing to do with me thinking I am "rich" (Ha-I wish) or because I am American it should be done faster..I just really don't believe a court of law should be allowed to always go on strike!

It sounds as if the Embassy workers are stretched very thin and I honestly feel they are doing the best they can..I had heard they hired some new folks?

I did feel one of the most frustrating parts of both our adoptions was dealing with BCIS..fingerprints not turning out..and them taking 3 months to let us know..those kind of things..and boy, was it hard to ever get a "real" person when you call..I would be in tears by the time I finally got someone on the phone..

I agree with Paparama that hiring 1 or 2 more people at the Embassy certainly should be looked into..that way we can keep adoptions ethical, yet do them in a timely manner..

[linda512]

I also don't think that anyone is advocating anything unethical. Expecting a process to be streamlined and efficient may be an American goal, but I don't think it is unreasonable. I don't want my congressman to fix MY problem but THE problem. The embassy is at it's worst right now, according to my agency person in the States who has been doing this for 13 years. Why is that? Why are people being treated badly, sent away to get yet another form, etc, etc. Why is is that I have preapproval but can't get the papers? It does not seem right. And I agree that it is not necessarily entirely benign for the children. Many, if not, most of them are being well taken care of, but some arent' and even those who are will have a harder time the older they are when they come home.
Clearly a demonstration in Guatemala will not help, but I think working within the system to affect change is entirely reasonable.

Calikismet- I think it would be great if you use your contacts and see if you can get us accurate information. That is the starting place to more action.
THanks for offering.

[katsco]

Everyone has great informative posts on this issue. I think everyone is beginning to understand that the Embassy is short staffed. I am not sure if just hiring more people will solve the problem though. We need them to change the procedures. The majority of people who are complaining about this issue are the one's who have been delayed or waiting for a long while. The one's flying through DNA don't have an issue. That is why we need to change the procedures.

When they get handed a file, they should look at the WHOLE file, then tell the attorney ALL the things that need to be fixed. Numerous kickouts on the same case to have DNA authorized is crazy. Then they should have a special line or special hours for resubmitting these cases. For the attorneys to stand in line, spend the night at the embassy or what ever they do to get in the top 40 is crazy to be able to submit a case that was already presented. Especially, when other newer cases get authorization first. I feel pending cases should have more priority then new cases.

Sometimes it isn't the number of people you have working, but how they spend there time doing the work.