[kacmom1]

Interesting article. I think it's so sad that it portrays Americans swarming Guatemala to get a baby. No matter what anyone's feelings are on this subject...the MOST IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER is that there are children in that country who DID NOT ask to be born and who will not be cared for or who may not survive if it wasn't for people like us.

I think it's terrible that these pregnant women are being sought out and being paid for their babies....it just turns my stomach. I just can't imagine that. But the fact is....there are so many children there who need a home. And we're doing something about that. We're helping these children who were brought into the world and need a loving home.

Now, if these women were being paid to get pregnant....THAT would be a different story!

[Kate'sMom2B]

Mary said a lot of what I was thinking.

KACMom1, during our first adoption, our referral's foster home was raided by police. Neighbors had called police while she was out and the aunt was watching the 2 children as well as the aunt's bio son. All 3 kids were taken away into orphanages, even the bio son. It took many weeks to get it straightened out just for the bio son! My referral and her foster brother were placed in orphanages. But the point I wanted to make, is that in the article in the newspaper the next day, it said there were dozens of receipts showing monies paid to *pregnant* women in our fostermom's house. Very alarming, if it was true. I should also add that the attorney was banned from doing adoptions a few months after this occurred.

I know it needs to be cleaned up down there. I'm just afraid that the cleaning up will come at the great expense of the children.

BTW, the last couple lines in the article really grated on my nerves. Yes, many of us keep our children's birthnames, or part of them. And many of us have plans to visit Guatemala in the future, and some already have met the birthfamilies.

[lyssie]

Isn't it interesting that anyone can see what they want to see in any situation? Obviously this person has a very narrow view of what is going on. It seems that people can be critical of just about anything. Also, let me tell you I have seen that NO system any country has is perfect. Our own comes to mind as having MANY flaws and quirks. Just the other day for example I made an Appointment with the local USCIS office to turn in our homestudy(to save days in the mail system). After going through security and sitting waiting for my name to be called, I was allowed to approach the glass wall that allowed access to the INS employee at the window. Our conversation was comical.
HE said "what are we doing today?"

ME: Turning in our homestudy for immigration approval...But, while I am here I did have some questions."

He: OH, Well I can't answer any questions!

Me: Really...um well since I have an appointment can I speak to someone who can?

He: Well, no she's busy but, you can write her a letter requesting an appointment, Just make it out to Mrs. ________, She'll give you an appointment....

I know I looked at him like he must be joking...because I couldn't beleive it...I decided to try him and just see if maybe he really could answer so I proceeded " Oh, it's just regarding the timeframe until approval comes and switching agencies from the one listed on the I600a form(does anyone know if this matters?) and will I receive 2 separate I-171H forms if I listed 2 children on the form?"

Sure enough he didn't know. He said He Guessed everything would be okay but, he didn't know and again urged me to write a letter to get an appointment.

Since I didn't really need answers--I thought it just crazy and just found myself shaking my head periodically when ever I thought about it.

Back to the article--I find it so interestiing that so many of these organizations that are supposed to be so noble, progressive, and trying to fix everything are not at all focused on individuals--especially not children or families. The General public is not their focus they are just serving their OWN purposes and so many times it seems just to see if they can.

[sheena7112]

Thanks for all the info. Yes all systems no matter where they are can use some help. But they are in a country that is very poor. Now that said in our country USA advertises on tv news paper about giving up your baby if you cant afford them ect. But our country has a means to help these mothers keep there babies. Like welfair. I think if a mother wants her baby by all means she should try to keep her baby. Guatemala is to poor to do what we do for teen moms ect. It is a differnt world there. We are helping that world with there children to become educated and maybe want to come back to there Country and maybe help them in some way. God wants us to love everyone and I feel this is loving our nabor as they self. We love these kids as our own and pray for the mother that gave us such a wounderful gift. Because I cant think for one min. that it doesnt hurt her to have to give up that baby. She knows that baby is going to have a future that there country canot offer. Maybe one day they might have a system that can help the moms that do want to keep there babys. That would be a good change for them. I am happy that we are adopting a beautiful baby boy from this country. I pray that what is best for the birth famliy and child may God Bless and change things that he feels that need change for everyone envolved. That is who has the real answers. Love you all and I hope that we can still adopt for this Country for many many years to come. Kim

[DFNY]

I live in NY and had 3 people write to me, telling me about this article and something that appeared in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week. They were all very concerned. Because of your posting, I had already read it when they called. Thanks for keeping us informed (we subscribe to NY Newsday and I don't even get to read that).

[JillnChris]

Articles like this just enrage me and I am convinced that it is UNICEF who makes sure that they get printed. They made it sound like all we have to do is go pick up our baby when we get the phone call. What about the months of paperwork we do here in the U.S. and the waiting and waiting and waiting here.
I promised myself I wouldn't read any more of these aritcles, but here I go again....

[afl]

They ran this article today in the Orlando Sentinel.

Makes me sick how one-sided these articles are.

And knowing our friends and families will read this junk and privately wonder about how we got our daughter home really saddens me.

[jeannecr]

I also was disappointed that the New York Times, which wins Pulitzer Prizes for their investigative journalism, should publish an article so full of inuendo and hearsay. Give us real facts, not allegations!!

I wrote a letter to the editor, and I encourage others to do so also.

[AnaM-H]

Very well said.

[luv2teach2]

I'm by know means agreeing with the article, but after going through this process for a long time, I've often wondered where my money went. I don't think it is unlikely many of the mothers are getting paid to give up their babies and sometimes I wonder if those mothers who produce siblings almost immediately after giving up one baby are being paid to have another. I think all countries have their problems and I'm not saying that everyone is unethical, but I've always wondered....

[pawz]

Hello, everyone. I don't often visit these forums, but after I read the NY Times article today, I had to seek out other people in the process of an adoption from Guatemala. (We are pretty much just starting the process.) This darn article makes me question the entire system and is so disheartening. It helps to hear what you all have to say. It worries me that our family and friends will think negatively of our decision to adopt from Guatemala.

What's even worse is that this article is not the first one of its kind. I read another article on a different website about a month ago that was similar in tone and message. You all may have discussed this one, too - I need to go check the archives.

Anyway, thanks for listening. Just had to vent a bit. This negative press is so frustrating, and, as you said, very one-sided.

Take care.

[3beansmom]

I listened to the audio of "Backstory", an interview with the author of this article. It was SO strange that his tone in the interview was very measured, and his description of the situation in Guatemala seemed quite a bit more realistic (though I would still say somewhat uninformed and biased).

It leads me to believe, if I didn't already, that the NY Times wanted this story to be simplistic, sensationalistic drivel. What ever happened to newspapers wanting their journalists to investigate, to present some complexity?!

I am disgusted with the NY Times and sad for the children and families who have to answer to the kind of ignorant assumptions this article and others like it give rise to.

Lisa

[Mom2to]

I was stunned by the condescending and adolescent tone of the NYT article. To read so much sarcasm, rumor, and sensationalism in a paper that holds itself up as being a bastion of "serious journalism" was shocking. Like many of us, our family has done a lot of soul searching about adoption and one of the reasons we chose Guatemala was precisely because all of the procedural safeguards (DNA tests, Family Court, PGN, etc.) The "reporter" made it sound like a family could just fly down for a weekend and "pick out" a child. Just disgusting.

I also want to mention something that the article didn't mention and that is the wealth of information about how much better for children it is to be cared for in family foster care rather than institutions. I think it is laughable that the journalist is holding up China and Russia as international adoption models that are good for birth families, children, and adopting families. I am not trying to slam these other countries or families that chose them, but from my many friends that have adopted internationally (and domestically for that matter) it seems that this process is frought with troubling questions no matter what.

I guess enough said. Just really disheartening.

[maccafan]

Thank you, Sharon, for such an eloquent response! My birthmother (I am adopted, and have had a very good relationship with her for 18 years) just sent me a link to the NY Times article tonight. I feel so upset, not only by the article, but because it feels like a criticism of our decision to adopt from Guatemala. I feel defensive, but haven't come up with the words to explain my feelings or position. After reading your post, I have the words to explain to my birthmother why DH and I feel that we, as well as the Guatemalan birthmothers, are doing the best thing possible for these children.

[knarfmo]

Okay, it's been two days since I read this one and one over at worldpress.org by a different author but eerily similar in composition and perspective.

What I am noticing is a lack of interviews of birthmoms. One article had a quote from a 12 year old birthmom about submitting for DNA, but I don't find a lot of quotes about "someone made me give my baby for adoption" or "someone paid me a bunch of money, but now I regret it".

I find this very strange, because there are likely cases such as this out there. Government officials, lawyers, adoptive parents (gee, we sound like a bunch of doting idiots, don't wee) are all interviewed, but nothing substantial from birthmoms. This would have really helped in both cases. The author of the worldpress.org article actually has a whole book on this subject, so perhaps it is in another chapter. But why not mention such quotes in the summary? I think it would be some of the most compelling evidence.

Names can be changed to protect the birthmoms from harm. Why not seek them out and include them?

And for what it's worth, the adoption process is far more streamlined in many US states than in Guatemala, and there would certainly be the potential for abuse.