[stephjoel99]

I think unless we get a reasonable explanation for why this statement says that the Protocol ceremony is Friday - and why the US DOS sounds freaking giddy about it - I think we need to INUNDATE them (i.e. Christopher Lamora) with calls tomorrow. We need to find out why we are getting the runaround -and why they are yanking the chains of the adoption community "higher ups" like Hannah Wallace and JCICS. The DOS told these people today - this morning - that this was postponed. Why then would they put up a release that says it's happening?

Kevin, I"m sure, is working on getting to the bottom of this - but unless there is a harmless explanation like they let an intern post this and they were confused and/or high - something along those lines - we need to go full tilt on them tomorrow.

We are voting members of this country - and enough "we're monitoring it and please check our website" - we checked it, DOS, and we no likey. You can crush this with one finger. Crush it.

[b_fettes]

As a UK adopter I can't help on this one but I really hope and beg all you US adopters to do just that.
Answers are needed.
Mary

[Mamarama]

Hello StephJoel,

I'm probably misuderstanding so please feel free to set me straight - but are you implying that our government has the power to get involved in the executive branch of another country's government? What exactly is it that you think the United States has the power or the inclination to "crush?"

I have studied the First Lady's protocol and I do not think it can be implmented and work in the best interest of the children in Guatemala so I don't support it. But I do not agree that a foreign government should come in and "crush" her right to present it publicly if she believes in it. Laws in Guatemala cannot be changed without legislation. And I will fight any effort to impose the practices in the protocol in an illegal way. But I will do so within the legal framework of Guatemala.

In international relations, certain things do tend to get vetted through diplomatic channels, but I sometimes think people get emotionally wrapped up and forget that there are borders that divide countries and once we cross them, we respect the governments that are in place there versus trying to impose the U.S. way.

Respectfully,
T

[avoel]

Thank you T.

I don't think we can forget that our DOS is the same entity that is putting pressure on Guatemala to enact changes to become Hague compliant before the US finalizes its own Hague changes or we will no longer allow adoptions from Guatemala to the US. So we cannot "crush" every attempt or mention of possible change in Guatemala in the upcoming months since we are indeed the ones insisting on such change.

[stephjoel99]

Originally Posted by Mamarama

Hello StephJoel,

I'm probably misuderstanding so please feel free to set me straight - but are you implying that our government has the power to get involved in the executive branch of another country's government? What exactly is it that you think the United States has the power or the inclination to "crush?"

I have studied the First Lady's protocol and I do not think it can be implmented and work in the best interest of the children in Guatemala so I don't support it. But I do not agree that a foreign government should come in and "crush" her right to present it publicly if she believes in it. Laws in Guatemala cannot be changed without legislation. And I will fight any effort to impose the practices in the protocol in an illegal way. But I will do so within the legal framework of Guatemala.

In international relations, certain things do tend to get vetted through diplomatic channels, but I sometimes think people get emotionally wrapped up and forget that there are borders that divide countries and once we cross them, we respect the governments that are in place there versus trying to impose the U.S. way.

Respectfully,
T

Respectfully I must disagree. The PARENTS IN PROCESS (which are the ones contacting the US State Department) have a LEGITMATE INTEREST in pending legal maneuvers in a country that will affect our interests. That is why the US State Department exists - to interact with other governments to protect the interests of the US and its citizens.

I see from your signature that you are not currently in process for a child because yours is at home, so with all due respect, the issue as to whether parents who have a legitimate interest in the region ask the US State Department to intervene on their behalf is not your concern. You have no interest at stake right now.

And if I used the word "crush" - perhaps I was being a bit bold. You see I've been waiting for 10 months for my daughter - and she may not come home. Forgive my lack of intercountry diplomacy skills.

[arthymom]

I'd just like to remind those of you with babies home that when news breaks in Guatemala and your child is there and not here, it is impossible to not be emotional.

I think phone calls to DOS asking the DOS to communicate to the Guatemalan government how morally and ethically wrong it would be to disrupt cases in progress should be ALL of our priorities.

If I had a baby home, I would support this. And when I have a baby home, I will continue to support change done in a morally and ethically sound way.

[allerseelen4]

I just don't get it.
The director of my agency put up a post on another board saying that everything was fine and the meeting was postponed (when the DOS website says it is happening), and asking parents not to call the DOS. Why is it so bad to call the DOS? Obviously, my agency seems to be one of the misinformed groups out there....

[stephjoel99]

Originally Posted by allerseelen4

I just don't get it.
The director of my agency put up a post on another board saying that everything was fine and the meeting was postponed (when the DOS website says it is happening), and asking parents not to call the DOS. Why is it so bad to call the DOS? Obviously, my agency seems to be one of the misinformed groups out there....

It's not bad to call them - let's just wait and see what tomorrow brings in the way of an explanation for the DOS statement. If it's a harmless mistake, then no big shakes. If it isn't, call DOS. Our agencies aren't the ones with children in Guatemala.

And for those who are delurking and always seem to just magically appear any time Hague issues arise just to let us know that we cannot interfere with another country's sovereignty, that the US is holding Guatemala to a higher standard, blah, blah, blah. Yeah, we don't care. Our babies are there and we want them home. So your comments are pretty much falling on deaf ears. And one more comment - it is EASY to sit on the throne of righteousness with your little Guatebaby sitting on your lap - at home in the United States.

[BrandyHagz]

Personal attacks are a violation of our Terms of Service - I have posted an open warning to all the members participating on this forum.

Being emotional is not an excuse to attack others because they disagree with you!