[HongKongMomma2B]

A couple of months ago, after a lot of research, I finally picked what country I want to adopt from and which agency I was going to use to do so. After contacting the agency a couple of time with various questions, I received another email last night saying that I shouldn't do too much research until I get closer to the age requirement because the Hague Convention is going to cause substantial changes in international adoption in 2007.

All I know about the Hague Convention is that it regulates international adoption. Can someone please tell me more about this so I can understand a little more clearly WHY I shouldn't research yet? The only reason I emailed this agency was so I could see *about* how much I would need to save in the next couple of years.

Thanks in advance!

[sak9645]

Since 1893, countries have been coming together in the Hague, a city in the Netherlands, to hammer out treaties (international agreements) on a wide variety of subjects. At present, there are 65 countries participating in the development of the treaties.

Currently, there are 37 such treaties, covering such topics as the recognition of marriages in one country by the authorities in another country, the obligations of countries in cases of international child abduction, and so on. You can see the list of treaties at Adoption.com - Information on International, Domestic, Child & Agency Adoptions, Stories, Laws -

In the early 1990s, some countries decided that there should be better regulation of international adoption. They wanted international adoption to continue, and felt that it represented a good option for children who could not find a permanent, loving home in their country of origin. However, they also wanted to be sure that the rights of children, their birthparents, and their adoptive parents were protected.

Adoption professionals, social workers, medical professionals, and lawyers got together with representatives of foreign governments in the Hague and, over a period of a couple of years, worked out Hague Convention #33, which is called the "Convention On Protection Of Children And Cooperation In Respect Of Intercountry Adoption."

The U.S. had not agreed to be party to an earlier treaty about adoption, called the "U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child". The U.S. had objected to the fact that the U.N. Convention treated international adoption as almost as bad as life in an orphanage, and preferred to see children stay in foster care in their own country rather than to be internationally adopted.

The new treaty was different. It said, quite clearly, that international adoption was the best option for a child who could not find a permanent, loving family in his/her birth country. Impermanent foster care might be better than an orphanage, but it was no substitute for a permanent family.

The new treaty included many provisions -- to name just a few:

1. Prohibition of monetary inducements to get a family to place a child for adoption.

2. Prohibition of contracting with a woman to place her child for adoption, before the child is born.

3. A requirement that birth families be counseled about the implications of adoption -- for example, that it totally terminates their parental rights.

4. A requirement that adoption agencies be accredited by a Central Authority in their country.

5. A requirement that people conducting adoptions should charge only reasonable fees.

6. A requirement that the Central Authority determines that a proposed adoption is in the best interests of the child.

When Hague Convention #33 was finalized, the United States was one of the first signers. Signing the treaty meant that the U.S. committed itself to pursuing ratification. Under U.S. law, ratification of a treaty can occur only if there is a 2/3 vote to approve it in the Senate. And under the Hague's ground rules, ratification could occur only when a country was ready to implement the provisions of the treaty.

The U.S. signed Hague Convention #33 in 1994. Unfortunately, it took six years for Congress to pass legislation that would allow the U.S. government to implement and ratify the treaty. Legislators disagreed on many issues -- for example, on whether the legislation should take a stand on adoption by singles or gay people, on whether accreditation should be extended only to agencies or to lawyers and facilitators as well, and so on.

The Intercountry Adoption Act, which permitted ratification and implementaton of the Convention, was finally passed in 2000. But in the U.S., legislation just sets forth a broad framework for action. Regulations must be written to support the legislation and guide implementation.

The Intercountry Adoption Act named the U.S. State Department as the Central Authority for the U.S. in international adoption matters. The State Department, not having had all that much of a role in intercountry adoption, began working with adoption experts to develop the necessary regulations and procedures for implementation.

This was not an easy matter. There were many legitimate differences of opinion among adoption professionals and adoptive families. As an example, while families wanted to see agencies carry a large amount of professional liability insurance, so they could recover money if they needed to sue their agency, adoption professionals knew that many companies will no longer write such insurance for adoption agencies, or charge prohibitively high premiums.

It took until this year until regulations were written, and accrediting bodies for agencies were chosen. And there is still much to be done in such areas as information systems for the Central Authority and so on.

The State Department is now saying that it will be ready to ratify in 2007. While some people doubt that ratification and implementation can occur next year, because there is so much left to do, that IS the schedule that agencies are working against.

When ratification occurs, adoption from non-Hague countries will not be affected. However, adoption from countries that have ratified will be subject to new rules and procedures.

The agency to which you spoke MAY have been talking about the fact that, even without considering the Hague, countries change their adoption requirements and procedures regularly and that, if you can't adopt for another few years, things could change dramatically in your country of choice. Just in the past few years, several countries have closed to adoption, and a few new ones have opened.

Your screen name suggests that you may want to adopt from Hong Kong. Even without the Hague, there could be issues with Hong Kong. At this point, although Hong Kong was formally returned to Chinese rule in 1997, after a century of British rule, it is still allowed to have its own adoption sytem, currency, and so on. Technically, it is supposed to be allowed to have these things for 50 years. But it is possible that China will take a hard line on some aspects of Hong Kong's independence.

As an example, it could demand that Hong Kong bring its adoption system into conformance with Chinese law. China has a wonderfully ethical adoption system, but it is very different from the system in Hong Kong. There would be huge implications for adoptive parents wanting to adopt from Hong Kong if its adoption system was made subject to Chinese law.

The agency could also have meant that adoption from Hague countries, in general, may have some new rules, and that some of them might be more favorable to you, while others might be less favorable.

Interestingly, China has just ratified the Hague, so if Hong Kong's adoption system became part of China's system, you would have to deal with Hague procedures and regulations. However, China's adoption system is already very Hague-like, and it is not clear that it will change dramatically from the way it is currently.

However, there could well be a more significant problem if the country of your choice happens to be Guatemala.

A few years back, Guatemala ratified the Hague. Soon thereafter, however, the courts in Guatemala ruled that the ratification was unconstitutional. Implementation of the Hague was never carried out.

At this time, Guatemala considers itself to be a non-Hague country. As a non-Hague country, it could continue to place children with Americans under today's rules, after the Hague is implemented in the U.S.

HOWEVER, the authorities in the Hague still consider Guatemala to be a Hague country, as Guatemala did not go through any procedures necessary to withdraw its ratification. The authorities in the Hague, more importantly, consider Guatemala to be a NON-COMPLIANT Hague country, since Guatemala's adoption system does not conform to Hague requirements.

This has important implications for the U.S. Right now, Guatemala is the #3 country from which Americans adopt. Nearly 4,000 children a year come to U.S. families from Guatemala.

However, since the Hague considers Guatemala to be a non-compliant Hague country, it will not allow other Hague countries to adopt from it. And the U.S. State Department, as the Central Authority in this country, has stated that it will honor the Hague's requirement once the U.S. ratifies.

The bottom line, therefore, is that Guatemalan adoption could cease once the U.S. ratifies the Hague.

Many people are working to prevent this from happening. They feel, quite rightly, that there are so many children in Guatemala who need homes and cannot find them locally, that a total shutdown of U.S. adoptions from Guatemala would not be in the children's best interests

Some people want Guatemala to work with the Hague to withdraw its ratification, so adoptions can proceed as they currently do. Others say that the Hague would prevent some of the abuses that have occasionally gone on in the country, and that Guatemala should move towards full implementation of the treaty that it ratified.

At this time, there is no resolution. But I think that the heat will be kept on, and that adoptions may NOT come to a screeching halt in 2007.

I hope this helps.


Sharon

[specialk4b]

Thanks Sharon! I needed that little primer.

[sak9645]

There are some good websites for getting more information about the Hague Convention on intercountry adoption.

I mentioned, above, the website Adoption.com - Information on International, Domestic, Child & Agency Adoptions, Stories, Laws -. This website contains the full text of all of the Hague Conventions, including #33, the one that discusses adoption.

The website also contains a list of all of the nations that have ratified or acceded to the Convention, as well as those that signed, but have not yet ratified. Americans having an interest in a particular country may well want to check the list to see if that country has ratified or acceded, because there could be changes in the way adoptions from that country will be handled when the U.S. ratifies.

Another good place to go is the website of the U.S. Congress, at THOMAS (Library of Congress). There, you can find the text of the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000, and see the framework it created for Hague implementation in the U.S.

One of the best places to go is the website of the U.S. State Department, which devotes a good deal of space to the Hague Convention on intercountry adoption. It even contains a handbook for prospective parents on what to expect. Since the State Department will be the Central Authority for the U.S. under the Convention, its website should be considered authoritative. The specific part of the website dealing with the Hague is at Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption.

The Joint Council on International Children's Services devotes a section of its website to Hague issues. While many of the articles on it will be of interest to agencies, more than to parents, some parents may want to learn about such things as what agencies need to do to become an accredited provider under the Hague Convention.

Sharon

[devildogwife]

Thanks for the explanation Sharon.

[HongKongMomma2B]

Wow Sharon...thank you for the explanation! You answered all my questions about the Hague Convention. It's funny that you said something about Guatemala because that is my 2nd choice.

Thank you very much!