[bdaddy]

These rules, published in the Federal Register on February 15, take effect March 17.


here is a link:
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2006&m=February&x=20060216142905mvyelwar c0.1766016&t=livefeeds/wf-latest.html

Can anyone tell me how this will affect those of us waiting? Since it lists Russia as a non-Hague Country?

Thanks.

[cathvash]

HHmmm. My take is it does not apply... Anyone with more in-depth knowledge about this?

[BrandyHagz]

I know that Hague Compliant countries CAN NOT place children in countries that are NOT Hague Compliant - but not sure what happens when is the other way around.

For example, almost two years ago, Guatemala adopted the Hague and adoptions STOPPED for several months - then the ruling was overturned and adoptions started again.

Not sure what it means if we (US) become Hague compliant.

I think Canada is Hague Compliant and they still do International Adoptions with Russia, correct?

[gabsdot]

Here in Ireland the government is just about to ratify Hague. This will mean that Irish people will no longer be able to adopt from countries that have not ratified, unless there is a bilateral agreement. This mean Irish people won't be able to adopt from Russia unless a bilateral agreement is aranged. There is a grandfather clause for those who have previously adopted from a particular country that they can adopt again from that country. It's a real blow and will mean that Irish people will only be able to go to China, Vietnam, Philippines or Thailand because there are bilaterals in place there.

[cathvash]

Wow! Interesting info. from Ireland...

Has anyone in the States seen anything indicating that US citizens may NOT adopt from countries not part of Hague (like Russia)? I would think this is not the same as in Ireland, or certainly we would have heard more fireworks going off by now...

[Ktates]

Here's a link to a story posted in the WSJ in 2003 - it explains some more about the Hague but doesn't really answer the question if Americans could adopt from Russia should it be ratified...

Article in WSJ today (long)

[Ktates]

according to this link at the jcics it only affects other Hague countries...

http://www.jcics.org/Hague.htm

[calikismet]

I got the full Fed Reg as a part of my normal daily events (I work in immigration) and have scanned through all 99 pages, plus the supplement on the preservation of records. I have also done some background research on events that have taken place thru JCICS and can summarize the following:

The Hague Convention (I will call it HC for short) is an international treaty that countries sign/ ratify. We also have our own "component" of the HC, called the Intercountry Adoption Act (IAA), which will amend our Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Finally, we have our working regs, which have yet to be created.

The HC will only affect those transactions (i.e. adoptions) in which both countries of the transaction are signatories to the HC. The US to date has not been a member. Russia also is not. HOWEVER, Russia has stated that it will sign once the US has -- it had been holding off signing b/c the US had not (Russia has also been rather adament that they wanted us to sign). Now that the US has signed, I think it is reasonable to expect that Russia will as well.

The HC sets forth demands that certain procedures be followed in order to ensure that children being adopted across international lined (i.e. intercountry adoptions) be proper -- free from child trafficking, child abduction, improper births (i.e. women being paid to give birth so that their children could be adopted internationally). It also places demands on the receiving country to properly follow-up on the child and ensure that the placement is proper (prob thru the use of mandatory post-placement reports, etc). The HC also places limits on WHO can facilitate the adoption: it demands that any non-profit or for-profit entities involved in the placement of children be properly screened, accredited, regulated, etc.

The IAA, our procedural "arm," sets forth WHO in the US will accredit US agencies for participation in international adoptions. The US will likely go with a specific entity, the name of which I will not reveal now, as it is not set in stone (entities had to apply to become accediting agencies). So in other words, there will be a master entity here in the US who then accedits all agencies and gives them the permission to participate as a Hague agency (and remember, the HC demands that ALL agencies who place children be so accredited). The accreditation of the US agencies will be harsh - it requires things like policy and procedure manuals, etc. The JCICS has been working at conferences for about 3 years to begin preparing agencies for the acceditation process. It is unlikely, given the demands under the IAA and HC, that small agencies will make it -- the demands are just too much. Certainly, US-based facilitators will be eliminated completly; and many smaller agencies (single director with 1 person, for example) will also not become accredited. The actual accreditation process has yet to be determined, so this is all speculation. BTW, they estimate that once final procedures are written (which could take months), there will be a delay of maybe 12-18 months before they will become effective to give agencies a chance to do what they need to do to get themselves accedited under the IAA.

The million-dollar question: how will this affect international adoption for US citizens? For those adoptions with countries that are not signatories, nothing will change at all. However, it is anticipated that the US may put pressure on other countires to sign. At this time, Russia is not a signatory; but that will very likely change, as Russia was pressuring us to sign. If the particpating 2 countries are members, then the entire transaction will have to be done by accedited agencies, per the HC. No facilitators, unaccedited agencies, etc can have any hand in the adoption.

Regarding Russia, I expect that if Russia signs, that will spell the end for indepedent adoptions. Period. And it will prob eliminate the ability to umbrella. Finally, we may find that many smaller agencies here in the US cannot get acceditation thru the IAA, so they will also have to cease operations in Russian adoptions. I expect that it will greatly reduce the number of agencies who ultimately complete Russian adoptions. The question will be what happens in the interim: if Russia signs, and now both countries are parties, will Russia halt all adoptions to the US until we become HC and IAA compliant (which, honestly, will take at least 12-18 months, maybe more)? Those in the adoption community hope not.

A final word about Guatemala, since that was brought up. When Guat. signed the HC, it stopped all adoptions. This was b/c their system makes extensive use of private attornies and in-country facilitators. Technically, this should not happen under the HC (which, again, demands only accredited agencies and for-profit entities). So it went to court. And was tried. And was debated. Finally, a court ruling said that, for now, it was okay to continue to use private attornies. This may change now that the US is a member of the HC - the US may demand that Guatemala also fall in line with the HC.

For better or worse, this change is supposed to protect the kids.

Hope that helps! I will pass on addiitonal info as I come across it.

[calikismet]

Originally Posted by BrandyHagz

I know that Hague Compliant countries CAN NOT place children in countries that are NOT Hague Compliant

Brandi:

This is true only if both countries are HC members. If one is not, then it has no impact.

[bdaddy]

Thanks calikismet

[Kasey]

Wow great explanation--thanks so much!!

[Jensboys]

I think Canada is Hague Compliant and they still do International Adoptions with Russia, correct?

Canadians are able to adopt FROM non-Hague compliant countries, but others are NOT able to adopt FROM Canada because we ARE Hague complaint. Make sense?

Jen

[britton]

FYI......When reviewing the regs, the language states that this will not be in effect for the US until 2007. My agency confirmed this as well.

Brit

[sarahdavek]

FYI - Guatemala's joining of the Hague was ruled unconstitutional as the Congress does not have the power to ascede to a treaty. In order for Guatemala to become a signatory party, it would have to ammend its Constitution.

[charles2004]

Canada did sign the Hague treaty - but I am not sure what it means??

But i remember this when I was adopting from Belarus - both countries were Hague but it did not affect us??