[ManyTimesBlessed]

There has been a lot of talk with the Hague stuff and everything about UNICEF and how they are against international adoption. Why is that? What do they propose instead? Can anyone tell me where to go to read more on the issue?

[KevinK]

To explain it would take too long. I highly recommend reading the report at Families Without Borders.

Kevin
Guatadopt.com

[Clare'sMom]

From what I understand......

They believe that a child is better raised in the community/country of their birth. If it is not economically/socially possible then and organization such as itself should help.

Great theory, people do need to help both monetarily and in education. Not a practical idea for the children who need help ASAP. And this organization will not help until International Adoptions are stopped.

So before they will help it's gonna get a lot worse. and I don't think the little 6 figure offer even going to chip that icebreg......

[ManyTimesBlessed]

Thanks both of you for the posts. Kevin, I will check out that site.

[mummi2be]

I always wondered that too. Many of my ex colleagues worked with UNICEF and I have done training with them and it was always a very soar point for me.
Like Clare's mom said - great in theory but what happens to all the children, babies and families until a huge turn around happens - and let's be honest its not possible, or at the very least would take hundreds of years.
Even in developed countries (like US, Canada, France, England) we have children who can not be raised by their natural families!

[GuatMommy2Be]

Ok I may get bashed for this..... But I'm sorry. I think children need to live with FAMILIES. It may be naive of me to believe, but even if it is an intercultural family, family is family. Plain and simple. It is much better for these children to find permanent homes then continue living in an institutionalized setting!

[Dachshund]

When your "business" is building schools and orphaneges you need to keep them "stocked", which means keeping the kids in their countries. If they get adopted out then Unicef will have no starving little kids to make them look good to the general community... Just my two cents...

[jpns]

Originally Posted by Dachshund

When your "business" is building schools and orphaneges you need to keep them "stocked", which means keeping the kids in their countries. If they get adopted out then Unicef will have no starving little kids to make them look good to the general community... Just my two cents...

Well said.... Dachshund

[praying4rlittl1]

I'm no expert by any means, but my assessment is the same as Daschund...you need the poor in order to keep your business afloat. Maybe I'm way out of line, but what happens to UNICEF if adoptions continue? IMHO, it's all about the bottom line...

[Mary Mulcahy]

Okay, I just posted this on the other thread. I will qualify that UNICEF has done some good, however the machine sucks up money without accountablity.
here is my other post. This is my hot topic and as Kevin suggested reading families without borders is a good start!
Mary
Laura Jean, so glad you brought up UNICEF!
They get money from all kinds of places, but your tax money (if you are a tax payer from the US) supplies UNICEF with tons of money. They are everywhere from corporate sponsors (IKEA, Pier One). They suck up money and spread their political agenga like a tidal wave with out regard to the truth. For several years since I have been on this forum, I have posted about where the money comes from and where it goes. UNICEF is all about their own agenda and full of fluffy ideas with no means to implement their agenda. As a tax payer, I cringe everytime I think about the money going to UNICEF that could be used to help women with job skills, staff health clinics and buy medicine, but we really don't know where the money is going. We all know that there have been problems with the money going for famine relief ect... SO until I can see a detailed description of the budget, I cannot support them.

As you know Halloween is a biggie for collecting money for UNICEF, I suggest you tell your local stores and kids why you won't give. They money we all gave and the money collected now is NOT going for health care, medicine, work skills, but promoting goals and plans without means to implement them.

They keep dangling the money in front of Wendy Berger (the first lady of Guatemala) who has tried numerous times to stop IA from Guatemala. The former member Mr. Bruce Harris has insulted every ethical adoption and has stated even DNA doesn't stop baby stealing. They are strong and it looks like they will win at last with the US implementing the Hague. By the way, Mr. Harris was fried from UNICEF for having a relationship with a yourng boy in Costa Rica. They ride around these developing counties in their fancy SUVs while the majority of the people cannot even afford the bus ride.

Lets not give them more money to work with, Mary
Sorry to rant and rave but UNICEF leaves me with a sick feeling.

[praying4rlittl1]

Mary ! Couldn't have said it better myself!

[saranbr]

I agree with the previous posters about the money issues, etc.

In addition, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't UNICEF part of the UN? The UN rarely supports anything that benefits the US or her people (not to say by any means that international adoption is done for our benefit, but many of our citizens are richly blessed by the experience and children). Not only that, the UN is rarely involved in projects that actually do much to solve problems in the long term and often, in fact creates as many problems or more than it solves. Recent reports about the UN peacekeepers in Africa, Oil for Food (billions to Sodom, et al), their success in the Congo come to mind without any significant thought or research. I would be suprised to see the UN supporting anything that has a really significant positive impact in the lives of children-- placing them with forever families who can/will love them and care properly for them, for example.

Sorry for being so down on the UN but their track record is nothing to write home about.

[CareBears82]

I think I'm glad after reading this that what I convinced the directore at the daycare I work at... She wanted to do some type of drive for the needie. She was thinking of doing something with Unicef, but I was talking to her about something my friend and I had talked about the week before.

The fecilitator from my friend's adoption stared a community in Guat to help single moms, but they are in desperate need of anything. So after talking to my boss she desided to do a clothing and toiletrie drive in November (the month of giving thanks).

[ez4me2remember]

If you do a google search for the words UNICEF and abortion you will find very interesting information. I always thought UNICEF was there to feed and help hungry children, but after I researched a little, I found other agendas. Very sad.

[intladoptionblog]

Can I just jump in here with one brief comment?

UNICEF, like the rest of the UN, is totally committed to keeping itself going so the people working there can continue to have high paying jobs, wear Armani suits and drive around poor countries in brand new white LandCruisers.

In short, the EVIL INSTITUTION come to mind...often.
I have a category on my international adoption blog dedicated to trashing the UN. I do it every chance I get.

Even so, however, I'll never be a match for the mega-million-dollar PR machine they just keep rolling along over the truth as they manufacture their version.

Okay, that was more than one comment, and not brief.
Sorry...