Adopted Boy Sent Back To Russia

[luchog]

To my mind, and to everyone I know, an adopted child is no different to a biological one. If you can't understand that then you simply shouldn't have children. Adopted or biological.

That's fine in theory; but lacks a lot in real-world practicality. Especially if an adopted child is substantially misrepresented by the adoption agency; a high likelyhood when the child comes from somewhere with such an ingrained culture of corruption. The only analogy I can come up with right now is the Mariel Boat Lift. It's a way for these countries to offload children they are incapable of or unwilling to provide adequate care for.

And for all the pontificating, there is, in fact, a huge difference between biological and adopted or fostered children. In the case of a biological child, you made the decision and effort to bring a child into the world, and because of that you're responsible for that child. Any problems the child has are going to be 99.9% the result of your genetics and your care. The situation with adopted children is not nearly so black-and-white; and the shades of gray widen dramatically with the age of the child upon adoption. There's a reason that adoption rates inversely proportionate with the age of the child; and drop almost exponentially once the chld is beyond toddler age.

 

[Helen]

I am no expert om the legalities of the matter, but here in Sweden at least, adopting a child is no different from having a biological child, as far as the legal aspects are concerned. You have the same responisbilities and the children have the same rights. You cannot "unadopt" a child, any more than you can renounce your biological offspring. Fostering a child is very different from a legal standpoint here, and not at all a permanent arrangement. I would assume this is the same in the rest of the world?

You do run a risk when adopting a child, and the risk does increase with the age of the child when adopted. Does this mean that you should be able to return the child to where it came from (if this is even practically possible)if it does not turn out as you expected? Or does it mean that you have to be aware of the risks, and act accordingly when you adopt?

There are risk when you have a biological child as well. It may be severly disabled. Your responsibiliteis towards your child do not end because of that. Nor should they towards a child you have adopted.

 

[rwguinn]

I am no expert om the legalities of the matter, but here in Sweden at least, adopting a child is no different from having a biological child, as far as the legal aspects are concerned. You have the same responisbilities and the children have the same rights. You cannot "unadopt" a child, any more than you can renounce your biological offspring. Fostering a child is very different from a legal standpoint here, and not at all a permanent arrangement. I would assume this is the same in the rest of the world?

You do run a risk when adopting a child, and the risk does increase with the age of the child when adopted. Does this mean that you should be able to return the child to where it came from (if this is even practically possible)if it does not turn out as you expected? Or does it mean that you have to be aware of the risks, and act accordingly when you adopt?

There are risk when you have a biological child as well. It may be severly disabled. Your responsibiliteis towards your child do not end because of that. Nor should they towards a child you have adopted.

The same is true here in the US, but only after the adoption is finalized. It takes nearly a year from the time the child comes home until the judge issues the papers and files the certificate of adoption.
The usual home study warns the parents that the medical certification may not be correct, and that there will be issues, both physical and mental. We were lied to, as were most we know (a friend called his son "spec" because he wasn't what the paperwork specified) but we love them anyway, and raised them as our own.
Sometimes, adoptions fail.

 

[Helen]

Sometimes, adoptions fail.

Yes, they do, and it is of course a very difficult situation for all those involved, heartbreaking, more often than not. But this is no different from having biological children either - sometimes that relationship fails as well... Perhaps less often than with adopted children, but it does happen.

Children do not come with a guarantee, whether adopted or not.

 

[applecorped]

caveat emptor

 

[iknownothing]

Could be the boy was psychotic, many kids raised in orphanages have serious attachment disorders. It's really easy to see the orphanage or other people involved lying about the child, one to get rid of their own responsibility and two, purely for profit.

Parents who adopt and were lied to about the children's health and/or mental condition are still treated like a parent who won't care for a child who goes on to develop problems no one knew about at the time of the adoption. That isn't totally fair.

It sounds like this family made an attempt to return the child at least with some consideration. The news media is quick to call legal services obtained online as "turning the child over to a stranger you met online". That's a total mischaracterization. And a formal letter explaining the circumstances is reported as a note like one pinned to a kid's shirt.

I can sympathize with this, but...there's something off about the mother & grandmother here. The adoptive mother doesn't seem to be the one making the decisions or making statements. Some of the things the grandmother says imply she was the caregiver.

It makes me wonder how honest their side of the adoption was. How much of any of it was really the mother versus grandmother?

 

[Travis]

Well heaven forbid the child not be "perfect." What would the parents have done if the child was biologically theirs and had these issues? Would it have just disappeared one day only to have a child skeleton mysteriously appear in the woods a year later?

 

[DallasDad]

I have two children adopted from Ukraine. There was (and is) no "finalization" that needs to take place in the U.S., unless the children come to the U.S. on an IR4 visa. When you bring a child to the U.S. on an IR4 visa, you already have full, permanent, legal custody of the child. The child's passport has been redone to show you as the birth parent. Readoption in the U.S. is required solely for U.S. immigration purposes, to convert the permanent residency to proper citizenship. Even on an IR4 visa, the child is already yours before you step foot back into the U.S.

However, when a child travels on an IR3 visa, no readoption or finalization is required. The child becomes an American citizen upon setting foot on U.S. soil by action of law. Many parents choose to readopt (or have a formal "Recognition of Foreign Adoption" judgment) in order to get a U.S. birth certificate, change the child's name, or comply with state laws. As far as the U.S. itself is concerned, the child who arrives on an IR3 visa is a citizen.

None of this is particularly significant, however, since the child must have been adopted in the home country before either an IR3 or an IR4 can be issued. Adoption in Russia is exactly the same as adoption in the U.S. as far as the legalities go. There are no do-overs, RMAs, or easy outs if the child turns out incompatible with your family.

My heart goes out to all those who have adopted or given birth only to find that the child has severe emotional, physical, or psychiatric problems. RAD, ODD, ADHD, and other acronyms are very, very familiar to anyone who adopts -- especially an older child.

Being lied to by the agency or orphanage is, unfortunately, par for the course. It does not change the parent's responsibility. The agency and the orphange workers did not go before a judge with a petition to adopt. The agency did not accept custody of the child. All adoptions are essentially independent adoptions, despite what an agency or orphanage may say. The legal obligation is entered into by the parent, and approved by the judge. You cannot undo it by claiming false advertising or damaged merchandise. From the moment the judge bangs the gavel, the child is yours, with all the rights and responsibilities pertaining thereto.

Both of my children have post-institutional behaviors, and neurological problems caused by lack of nutrition in early childhood. They also have emotional and behavioral issues, neurological deficits, and suffer the (often life-long) effects of neglect and abuse.

If I were ever to decide they were too much for me to handle, or threatened the rest of the family, my only recourse would be to seek hospitalization, intervention by social services, private placement somewhere, or getting someone else to adopt them. They are my kids, just as surely as if they'd been born to my wife. I cannot return them with a note.

(I'll mention for the record that I am speaking theoretically about getting rid of my kids. Despite their problems, they are wonderful, and we are a happy family. The first year was very difficult, and the younger boy will probably never be fully independent, but I wouldn't even consider life without them.)

 

[rwguinn]

I think I said that, DallasDad...
ETA: However, we did have to go through the Naturalization process, as did all the kids we know of through that agency (FCVN).
My memory is hazy, but i believe that the kids were turned over to the agency in their birth country.I do know we had several visits from a social worker before they approved the final adoption, by US courts.
We then had to notify his birth country that he had been naturalized as a US citizen, so they would remove him from their records--don't want the kid being drafted by Korea, after all...

 

[DallasDad]

I was posting primarily to abate my outrage at the mother/grandmother who so clearly flouted the law and their responsibility.

Secondarily, I wanted to clear up something you said:

The same is true here in the US, but only after the adoption is finalized. It takes nearly a year from the time the child comes home until the judge issues the papers and files the certificate of adoption.

This was not true in my case, nor, I believe, in most cases these days. I had the judge's papers and certificate of adoption in hand on the flight back. No readoption or U.S. court involved.

 

[rwguinn]

I was posting primarily to abate my outrage at the mother/grandmother who so clearly flouted the law and their responsibility.

Secondarily, I wanted to clear up something you said:


This was not true in my case, nor, I believe, in most cases these days. I had the judge's papers and certificate of adoption in hand on the flight back. No readoption or U.S. court involved.

See my edit...
Different agencies, different times, different rules. I have not kept up...

 

[DallasDad]

Cross-posted. Perhaps you adopted before 2000? I believe the law granting immediately citizenship went into effect with the passage of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000.

 

[iknownothing]

Being lied to by the agency or orphanage is, unfortunately, par for the course. It does not change the parent's responsibility.

That's another thing. They (the mother/grandmother) had to have known going in that it was possible the child would have severe problems, regardless of what they were told. If not, they hadn't done their homework.

 

[rwguinn]

Cross-posted. Perhaps you adopted before 2000? I believe the law granting immediately citizenship went into effect with the passage of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000.

Ah, yeah. He's 24 now, was 9 months when he came home...
No time machines here. We're a good, science toutin' family, we are...

 

[Checkmite]

Well heaven forbid the child not be "perfect." What would the parents have done if the child was biologically theirs and had these issues? Would it have just disappeared one day only to have a child skeleton mysteriously appear in the woods a year later?

The child would in all likelihood be in a mental asylum or a juvenile prison, for murdering them. From the description of his activities given in the article, he was already trying to burn down the house. It would've happened - if not this week, then next.

 

[Jungle Jim]

The child would in all likelihood be in a mental asylum or a juvenile prison, for murdering them. From the description of his activities given in the article, he was already trying to burn down the house. It would've happened - if not this week, then next.

He is seven years old. How do you know what he will do next week? I'd be interested in knowing what professional help the parents sought on his behalf. It might also be worthwhile to learn how the parents/grandparent treated him.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Well heaven forbid the child not be "perfect." What would the parents have done if the child was biologically theirs and had these issues? Would it have just disappeared one day only to have a child skeleton mysteriously appear in the woods a year later?

There are many differences. First off, no one lied to you about the child you were going to give birth to.

Second, birth parents who give a severely handicapped child up for adoption are not necessarily condemned for that.

And third, if you bond to the child before the problems surface, it can affect for the better how you cope with serious problems.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That's another thing. They (the mother/grandmother) had to have known going in that it was possible the child would have severe problems, regardless of what they were told. If not, they hadn't done their homework.

You are saying the mother should have known she might be lied to. Not everyone operates on that underlying premise.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I have two children adopted from Ukraine. There was (and is) no "finalization" that needs to take place in the U.S., unless the children come to the U.S. on an IR4 visa. When you bring a child to the U.S. on an IR4 visa, you already have full, permanent, legal custody of the child. The child's passport has been redone to show you as the birth parent. Readoption in the U.S. is required solely for U.S. immigration purposes, to convert the permanent residency to proper citizenship. Even on an IR4 visa, the child is already yours before you step foot back into the U.S.

However, when a child travels on an IR3 visa, no readoption or finalization is required. The child becomes an American citizen upon setting foot on U.S. soil by action of law. Many parents choose to readopt (or have a formal "Recognition of Foreign Adoption" judgment) in order to get a U.S. birth certificate, change the child's name, or comply with state laws. As far as the U.S. itself is concerned, the child who arrives on an IR3 visa is a citizen.

None of this is particularly significant, however, since the child must have been adopted in the home country before either an IR3 or an IR4 can be issued. Adoption in Russia is exactly the same as adoption in the U.S. as far as the legalities go. There are no do-overs, RMAs, or easy outs if the child turns out incompatible with your family.

My heart goes out to all those who have adopted or given birth only to find that the child has severe emotional, physical, or psychiatric problems. RAD, ODD, ADHD, and other acronyms are very, very familiar to anyone who adopts -- especially an older child.

Being lied to by the agency or orphanage is, unfortunately, par for the course. It does not change the parent's responsibility. The agency and the orphange workers did not go before a judge with a petition to adopt. The agency did not accept custody of the child. All adoptions are essentially independent adoptions, despite what an agency or orphanage may say. The legal obligation is entered into by the parent, and approved by the judge. You cannot undo it by claiming false advertising or damaged merchandise. From the moment the judge bangs the gavel, the child is yours, with all the rights and responsibilities pertaining thereto.

Both of my children have post-institutional behaviors, and neurological problems caused by lack of nutrition in early childhood. They also have emotional and behavioral issues, neurological deficits, and suffer the (often life-long) effects of neglect and abuse.

If I were ever to decide they were too much for me to handle, or threatened the rest of the family, my only recourse would be to seek hospitalization, intervention by social services, private placement somewhere, or getting someone else to adopt them. They are my kids, just as surely as if they'd been born to my wife. I cannot return them with a note.

(I'll mention for the record that I am speaking theoretically about getting rid of my kids. Despite their problems, they are wonderful, and we are a happy family. The first year was very difficult, and the younger boy will probably never be fully independent, but I wouldn't even consider life without them.)

You are to be commended for your dedication to these kids of unfortunate circumstances.

But you must have come across many parents of similar children over the years who were simply not competent to take on such a challenge. Are those kids better off staying with those parents? Maybe, maybe not.


I'm not trying to say the mother and grandmother here took the only option available to them. But giving them the benefit of the doubt, they may have taken the only action they knew how to take. Are all parental decisions ideal? Obviously not. Do parents make big mistakes sometimes? Of course.

So do we condemn every mistake a parent makes, especially every serious mistake? No, sometimes a mistake is just a mistake, not something evil or immoral.

Some kids have such severe problems they do need to be institutionalized or at least put in an intensive caring situation with parents or caregivers competent to handle such a child. I'm not convinced leaving that child with a parent unable to manage such a child is the beat place for the kid.

So that leaves what we think would be a responsible action, have you child hospitalized in a behavior management unit, or, what is being called an irresponsible action as these people did, send the child back to where the child came from and let those caregivers find a suitable placement for the child.

I just don't see a huge difference here in the final outcome for the child. In fact, all this attention is very fortunate serendipitously for that child. And maybe the attention on the adoption system will also have beneficial outcomes.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

He is seven years old. How do you know what he will do next week? I'd be interested in knowing what professional help the parents sought on his behalf. It might also be worthwhile to learn how the parents/grandparent treated him.

Not that we know much about this child other than speculation, but there is a lot of research on the problems one will see with both severe fetal alcohol syndrome and severe attachment disorders. There is a very poor prognosis without intensive intervention and even then there is no guarantee one can help such a child.