The Dutch Antropologist Pien Bos' PhD research project was yesterday rewarded with a CUM LAUDE. Her findings can be read in 'Once a Mother'. I was present during this event and must say I was deeply impressed.
Bos researched the motivation of Indian unmarried mothers to relinquish their children for adoption.Her conclusion is that Indian women who relinquish their children are not well informed. They often relinquish their children because they find themselves in an environment where adoption is considered the best, if not the only solution. Often they feel they relinquish the care of the child, but not the child itself. The cultural significance of the blood bond between a mother and her child, in combination with the cultural meaning of the notion mother, implies that motherhood is not transferable.
Pien Bos argues that these mothers should be better informed about the possibilities to keep their children.
Crucial is the role of the NGOs. Pien Bos interviewed 36 mothers in different mother and child homes in Chennai. The NGOs running these mother and child homes also have another role: placing children for adoption (in foreign countries, but more and more within in India). For adopted children these NGOs receive money, and this is, says Bos, where the situation becomes problematic. Staying in these mother and child homes is a like a trap, rarely unmarried mothers can leave with their children.
Pien Bos lived for two years in India and her interviews with the Indian mothers give a great but disturbing insight in the lack of freedom of those mothers. And the question remains if in such an ambiguous situation, children should be placed for adoption.
A must read.
The book can be ordered at p.bos@maw.ru.nl - 15,00 Euros
Friday, 11 January 2008
Sunday, 6 January 2008
India's exploitation of the womb
FromJudith Warner's Blog:
‘Because what’s going on in India – where surrogacy is estimated now to be a $445-million-a-year business — feels like a step toward the kind of insane dehumanization that filled the dystopic fantasies of Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” and Margaret Atwood’s “Handmaid’s Tale.” (One “medical tourism” website, PlanetHospital.com, refers to the Indian surrogate mother as a mere “host.”) Images of pregnant women lying in rows, or sitting lined up, belly after belly, for medical exams look like industrial outsourcing pushed to a nightmarish extreme.’
Judith Warner's excellent critical analysis brought back my Romanian experience. In my book you can find examples of these practices too.
For example, how I visited a Bucharest maternity clinic end 2000 where abandoned babies were kept for intercountry adoption in a backroom, while just next door a luxurious fertility clinic was offering IFV for Romanian nationals. I could only wonder why those Romanians could not adopt the babies next door.
In January 2005 that same fertility clinic made international headlines as a 66-year- old woman had given birth after IVF treatment, the oldest mother in the world.
But the most striking was Romania’s trade in human egg cells which came out in April 2005. A US/Israeli company was harvesting the eggs of students for a financial ‘compensation’. These eggs could be ordered via the Internet, and shipped to New York or London for fertilisation. The European Parliament had adopted a resolution to call for the European Commission’s full investigation of this.
In ‘Romania-For Export Only’ I mentioned this as a side issue and did not enter into much detail.
However, let me now give the details.
The Romanian trade in human eggs was done by GLOBAL ART USA (ART = Artificial Reproduction Technology), run by Dr. Sanford Rosenberg (USA) and Dr. Ilya Barr (Israel) .
I don’t think the Romanian branch of Global Art still exists. After all, Romania is now a member of the European Union, where such practices are not allowed. So, they relocated outside the EU, to Ukraine, as can be read in this article The misery behind the baby trade.
Years ago I saw a TV programme about the Italian fertility doctor Severino Antinori in which he announced his intention to use Indian women to breed children for Italian couples, with eggs and gamete from Italy.
It is not unlikely that now or in future eggs harvested by companies like Global Art will be bred by Indian women, or women in other countries with weak regulation.
Just imagine the children looking for their roots…
And I wonder, is this the world we want to live in???
‘Because what’s going on in India – where surrogacy is estimated now to be a $445-million-a-year business — feels like a step toward the kind of insane dehumanization that filled the dystopic fantasies of Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” and Margaret Atwood’s “Handmaid’s Tale.” (One “medical tourism” website, PlanetHospital.com, refers to the Indian surrogate mother as a mere “host.”) Images of pregnant women lying in rows, or sitting lined up, belly after belly, for medical exams look like industrial outsourcing pushed to a nightmarish extreme.’
Judith Warner's excellent critical analysis brought back my Romanian experience. In my book you can find examples of these practices too.
For example, how I visited a Bucharest maternity clinic end 2000 where abandoned babies were kept for intercountry adoption in a backroom, while just next door a luxurious fertility clinic was offering IFV for Romanian nationals. I could only wonder why those Romanians could not adopt the babies next door.
In January 2005 that same fertility clinic made international headlines as a 66-year- old woman had given birth after IVF treatment, the oldest mother in the world.
But the most striking was Romania’s trade in human egg cells which came out in April 2005. A US/Israeli company was harvesting the eggs of students for a financial ‘compensation’. These eggs could be ordered via the Internet, and shipped to New York or London for fertilisation. The European Parliament had adopted a resolution to call for the European Commission’s full investigation of this.
In ‘Romania-For Export Only’ I mentioned this as a side issue and did not enter into much detail.
However, let me now give the details.
The Romanian trade in human eggs was done by GLOBAL ART USA (ART = Artificial Reproduction Technology), run by Dr. Sanford Rosenberg (USA) and Dr. Ilya Barr (Israel) .
I don’t think the Romanian branch of Global Art still exists. After all, Romania is now a member of the European Union, where such practices are not allowed. So, they relocated outside the EU, to Ukraine, as can be read in this article The misery behind the baby trade.
Years ago I saw a TV programme about the Italian fertility doctor Severino Antinori in which he announced his intention to use Indian women to breed children for Italian couples, with eggs and gamete from Italy.
It is not unlikely that now or in future eggs harvested by companies like Global Art will be bred by Indian women, or women in other countries with weak regulation.
Just imagine the children looking for their roots…
And I wonder, is this the world we want to live in???
Thursday, 3 January 2008
US research on Romanian 'orphans'
Orphanages Stunt Mental Growth, a Study Finds
Again the US research on Romanian 'orphans' is in the news, as end of last year it's findings were published in Science.
The researchers now argue that this research was meant to promote foster care and was at the basis of Romania's child protection reform.
Helas, the reality is much more complex and troubling.
This reseach, by 4 American Universities and SERA Romania, was done at a time when the Romanian reform was already well underway.
As part of the priority to close babyhomes, the Romanian government had plans to close this 'orphanage' which had been serving as shopping window for intercountry adoptions. But this closure was delayed many years - most probably because the research needed first to be finalised.
The randomly selected children who served as guinea pigs had to remain institutionalised throughout the study.
This project came under heavy criticism in Romania, whereby the US side denied that their research had anything to do with intercountry adoption:
http://iht.com/articles/2002/06/06/romania_ed3_.php
However, the below article clearly shows it was about intercountry adoption:
http://www.med.yale.edu/chldstdy/icmh/adoption.html
I personally visited this research project in June 2001 and those interested in the full story can find a detailed reporting of this in my book.
Again the US research on Romanian 'orphans' is in the news, as end of last year it's findings were published in Science.
The researchers now argue that this research was meant to promote foster care and was at the basis of Romania's child protection reform.
Helas, the reality is much more complex and troubling.
This reseach, by 4 American Universities and SERA Romania, was done at a time when the Romanian reform was already well underway.
As part of the priority to close babyhomes, the Romanian government had plans to close this 'orphanage' which had been serving as shopping window for intercountry adoptions. But this closure was delayed many years - most probably because the research needed first to be finalised.
The randomly selected children who served as guinea pigs had to remain institutionalised throughout the study.
This project came under heavy criticism in Romania, whereby the US side denied that their research had anything to do with intercountry adoption:
http://iht.com/articles/2002/06/06/romania_ed3_.php
However, the below article clearly shows it was about intercountry adoption:
http://www.med.yale.edu/chldstdy/icmh/adoption.html
I personally visited this research project in June 2001 and those interested in the full story can find a detailed reporting of this in my book.
Thursday, 22 November 2007
The international adoptions lobby: an insider's perspective
The international adoptions lobby: an insider's perspective
A review by Rupert Wolfe-Murray,
published in VIVID Romania through international eyes, 19 November 2007
Romania - for export only, the untold story of the Romanian 'orphans' by Roelie Post
There are several unusual things about Roelie Post and her important new book on international adoptions. An employee of the European Commission, between 1999 and 2005 Post handled one of its most controversial dossiers: Romania's institutionalised children. She is one of very few EC insiders who has risked her career by publishing her experiences, in diary format. Whether one agrees with her or not, one has to admire this courage.
The book itself is not particularly fancy looking: it has a plain white cover and a title some would call clunky. Although such a cover may look out of place in a modern bookshop where cover designs are becoming increasingly sophisticated, I appreciate the clean and simple look as a sign of its seriousness. Despite these superficial drawbacks the book is very readable and engaging.
Post's story is compelling. In 1999 she was given the Romanian children dossier and as she gradually learnt about the issue she came to be one of the champions of the remarkable reform process that has resulted in the closure of Romania's large children's homes. To better appreciate this achievement it is essential to understand that Romania is the only country in Central and Eastern Europe that has managed to stop the practice of institutionalising children in need, and has set up alternatives such as foster care, daycare centres and family-type homes. The basis of the reforms are that families are the building block of society.
However, her job and the reform process are but a backdrop against which the real drama is played out; the relentless lobby for international adoptions from Romania. Much has been written about this shadowy and unaccountable lobby, but never before has so many details been revealed about their actions in the heart of Brussels, and their access to some of the world's top politicians.
During the 1990s the adoption of babies from Romania was a free-for-all. During the early 1990s a child could be adopted with a simple receipt from a local judge and before 1997 the records of how many were sent abroad are scant. The 1997 reforms were formulated by those in the pay of the lobby, and a free market in children was set up. The results were that the so-called ‘orphanages' became processing centres for the export of children, and corruption became rampant. By 2001 the practice was banned and since then the lobby has been desperately trying to prove that Romanian women are unable to look after their own children and international adoption is the only answer.
Not only did the Romanian government come under tremendous pressure from politicians in the US politicians and in some EU member states (namely, Italy and France) but Roelie Post was continually harassed in her job at the Commission. Her book is a blow by blow account of the main lobbyists in Brussels, with scandalous walk on parts from the likes of Silvio Berlusconi and Romano Prodi. For anyone interested in the intriguing international adoption story this book is essential reading.
A review by Rupert Wolfe-Murray,
published in VIVID Romania through international eyes, 19 November 2007
Romania - for export only, the untold story of the Romanian 'orphans' by Roelie Post
There are several unusual things about Roelie Post and her important new book on international adoptions. An employee of the European Commission, between 1999 and 2005 Post handled one of its most controversial dossiers: Romania's institutionalised children. She is one of very few EC insiders who has risked her career by publishing her experiences, in diary format. Whether one agrees with her or not, one has to admire this courage.
The book itself is not particularly fancy looking: it has a plain white cover and a title some would call clunky. Although such a cover may look out of place in a modern bookshop where cover designs are becoming increasingly sophisticated, I appreciate the clean and simple look as a sign of its seriousness. Despite these superficial drawbacks the book is very readable and engaging.
Post's story is compelling. In 1999 she was given the Romanian children dossier and as she gradually learnt about the issue she came to be one of the champions of the remarkable reform process that has resulted in the closure of Romania's large children's homes. To better appreciate this achievement it is essential to understand that Romania is the only country in Central and Eastern Europe that has managed to stop the practice of institutionalising children in need, and has set up alternatives such as foster care, daycare centres and family-type homes. The basis of the reforms are that families are the building block of society.
However, her job and the reform process are but a backdrop against which the real drama is played out; the relentless lobby for international adoptions from Romania. Much has been written about this shadowy and unaccountable lobby, but never before has so many details been revealed about their actions in the heart of Brussels, and their access to some of the world's top politicians.
During the 1990s the adoption of babies from Romania was a free-for-all. During the early 1990s a child could be adopted with a simple receipt from a local judge and before 1997 the records of how many were sent abroad are scant. The 1997 reforms were formulated by those in the pay of the lobby, and a free market in children was set up. The results were that the so-called ‘orphanages' became processing centres for the export of children, and corruption became rampant. By 2001 the practice was banned and since then the lobby has been desperately trying to prove that Romanian women are unable to look after their own children and international adoption is the only answer.
Not only did the Romanian government come under tremendous pressure from politicians in the US politicians and in some EU member states (namely, Italy and France) but Roelie Post was continually harassed in her job at the Commission. Her book is a blow by blow account of the main lobbyists in Brussels, with scandalous walk on parts from the likes of Silvio Berlusconi and Romano Prodi. For anyone interested in the intriguing international adoption story this book is essential reading.
Saturday, 3 November 2007
Radio Netherlands Worldwide
Roelie Post talks about International Adoption
By Ashleigh Elson
02-11-2007
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/thestatewerein/otherstates/tswi-071102-intnladoption
So, what rights do children caught up in crisis situations have? We asked Roelie Post. Post worked for the European Commission on the reform of Romania's child protection for many years and is the author of Romania: For Export Only.
Post wasn't surprised to hear about the Zoe's Ark situation and compared it with the international adoptions that happened during the tsunami crisis in 2005. She says children should be helped in their own country."
Many people believe that Zoe's Ark has the best of intentions, but Post says she's heard this argument before:
"NGOs create this wrong image of children in poor countries, saying that they are abandoned orphans and that they need to be rescued. Most of the children - including in Darfur - have at least one parent, have extended family, and are part of a community. They are not orphans, they are not abandoned and therefore they should not be rescued."
According to Post, there aren't actually many true orphans. In cases where war and HIV/AIDS have left children without parents, the children are usually looked after by relatives and by their community.
"This is where the support should go - to helping local communities look after the real orphans. And not what a lot of NGOs are doing, setting up orphanages and taking children out of their communities and villages. That makes children vulnerable, it isn't a good way to live. And from there often comes the suggestion that children would be better off in another country in a nice family. But experience worldwide has shown - and the international community has always agreed - that children are best off in their own surroundings."
Post says, based on her experience in Romania with people who were involved with international adoption, she's not optimistic that the Zoe's Ark people are as naive as they might seem.
"One must not forget that there is an enormous demand for children in the western world by people who want to adopt. And this market is demand-driven… One should really wonder if this is the right way to go and how far people are innocent."
By Ashleigh Elson
02-11-2007
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/thestatewerein/otherstates/tswi-071102-intnladoption
So, what rights do children caught up in crisis situations have? We asked Roelie Post. Post worked for the European Commission on the reform of Romania's child protection for many years and is the author of Romania: For Export Only.
Post wasn't surprised to hear about the Zoe's Ark situation and compared it with the international adoptions that happened during the tsunami crisis in 2005. She says children should be helped in their own country."
Many people believe that Zoe's Ark has the best of intentions, but Post says she's heard this argument before:
"NGOs create this wrong image of children in poor countries, saying that they are abandoned orphans and that they need to be rescued. Most of the children - including in Darfur - have at least one parent, have extended family, and are part of a community. They are not orphans, they are not abandoned and therefore they should not be rescued."
According to Post, there aren't actually many true orphans. In cases where war and HIV/AIDS have left children without parents, the children are usually looked after by relatives and by their community.
"This is where the support should go - to helping local communities look after the real orphans. And not what a lot of NGOs are doing, setting up orphanages and taking children out of their communities and villages. That makes children vulnerable, it isn't a good way to live. And from there often comes the suggestion that children would be better off in another country in a nice family. But experience worldwide has shown - and the international community has always agreed - that children are best off in their own surroundings."
Post says, based on her experience in Romania with people who were involved with international adoption, she's not optimistic that the Zoe's Ark people are as naive as they might seem.
"One must not forget that there is an enormous demand for children in the western world by people who want to adopt. And this market is demand-driven… One should really wonder if this is the right way to go and how far people are innocent."
Thursday, 25 October 2007
The Import and Export of Human Life
Thu, 2007-10-25 13:49 — Kerry
The Import and Export of Human Life
It amazes me how quickly Americans forget how children are brought and bought into this country.
I can't, as I was born outside the states, but taken in as one of it's own because Americans wanted a baby. I am white, so they got what they wanted, through an agency that knew how to get what the demand was seeking.
I was Choice Meat. I bet they paid top dollar. The agency didn't last very long. It didn't have to, did it? Back in the 1960's, early 70's with the Vietnam War going on, who could risk long-term commitment, anyway? More babies were going to be produced soon enough, and prices would drop, no doubt. Problem would be, those babies would not be purebreds, would they?
Roelie's book is perhaps the match that sparks the trail to more explosive truths about the historical facts about man's inhumanity towards man when it comes to the brazen disregard to family values and physical boundaries.
Leave it to a woman to see the obvious, and be sure men to say "Whoa! She can't do that!"
Too late, we bastard cats and dogs have already been let out of the bags, and scattered all over the world.
We learned to speak and verify the truth.
Now what?
We do just that, and hope it's enough to right the wrongs that have gone on for far too long.
http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/4544#comment-2469
The Import and Export of Human Life
It amazes me how quickly Americans forget how children are brought and bought into this country.
I can't, as I was born outside the states, but taken in as one of it's own because Americans wanted a baby. I am white, so they got what they wanted, through an agency that knew how to get what the demand was seeking.
I was Choice Meat. I bet they paid top dollar. The agency didn't last very long. It didn't have to, did it? Back in the 1960's, early 70's with the Vietnam War going on, who could risk long-term commitment, anyway? More babies were going to be produced soon enough, and prices would drop, no doubt. Problem would be, those babies would not be purebreds, would they?
Roelie's book is perhaps the match that sparks the trail to more explosive truths about the historical facts about man's inhumanity towards man when it comes to the brazen disregard to family values and physical boundaries.
Leave it to a woman to see the obvious, and be sure men to say "Whoa! She can't do that!"
Too late, we bastard cats and dogs have already been let out of the bags, and scattered all over the world.
We learned to speak and verify the truth.
Now what?
We do just that, and hope it's enough to right the wrongs that have gone on for far too long.
http://poundpuplegacy.org/node/4544#comment-2469
Thursday, 18 October 2007
The Market of Adoption
Sunday 21 oktober, 21h50 Netherland 2
And: Tuesday 23 oktober, 10.25 uur Nederland 2
See the speakers of the programme
See background interview Hilbrand Westra and Roelie Post
Once it seemed pure idealisme. By now adoption has become a worldwide buyer market. A market where the youngest, the healthiest and the whitest children go to those who pay most. An overstressed market above all. According to Unicef there are for every child 25 waiting parents available. About parents who in their desperate search explore the boundaries of law, raise prices and put doubtful organisations at work.
Thirty years ago adoption was above all idealism. Give a child a chance. Now adoption is foremost the last option. In the Western world we wait longer and longer with having a child. And when we want it, often it no longer works. The number of involuntary childless couples grows. For them adoption is more often the last safety net.
In the documentary, inter alia, some Dutch adoption agencies are speaking out. They acknowledge the existence of a market, but say they do not participate at the price battle. Not a penny too much and certainly not under the table. The Dutch as the best pupil of the classroom. Where other countries as the US and France pamper children's homes in the third world with luxerious dinners and fat dollarcheques. How proper are our adoption agencies? How far did the market functioning enter here? What must one pay for adoption? Is there a reduction for children with a handicap.
According to the Dutch adoption agency Wereldkinderen (Children of the World) the offer of children is changing. Because we pay less at the international market, we get more often less wanted children. Children with a heirlip, with a club foot or a developmental delay. And not everyone wants such a child. Most want a healthy baby. And these are less and less available and so most parents are mainly waiting. Often for years.
More and more parents no longer wait. They take the initiative at hand. They go to the US. The market where you can adopt a baby of a few days old. Only 10 years ago just a few children came from the US, but this year it will be over 60. These so-called "private adoptions" from the US are growing explosively. The way to get a young baby fast. If you pay. Pay a lot. Pay to US commercial adoption agencies who take care of it all. The Dutch agency who needs to check this, Kind & Toekomst (Child & Future), rings in Reporter the alarm bell. They can not do these checks well. They are very worried about the biological mothers who relinguish children. The import of children from the US must stop, according to this agency.
And: Tuesday 23 oktober, 10.25 uur Nederland 2
See the speakers of the programme
See background interview Hilbrand Westra and Roelie Post
Once it seemed pure idealisme. By now adoption has become a worldwide buyer market. A market where the youngest, the healthiest and the whitest children go to those who pay most. An overstressed market above all. According to Unicef there are for every child 25 waiting parents available. About parents who in their desperate search explore the boundaries of law, raise prices and put doubtful organisations at work.
Thirty years ago adoption was above all idealism. Give a child a chance. Now adoption is foremost the last option. In the Western world we wait longer and longer with having a child. And when we want it, often it no longer works. The number of involuntary childless couples grows. For them adoption is more often the last safety net.
In the documentary, inter alia, some Dutch adoption agencies are speaking out. They acknowledge the existence of a market, but say they do not participate at the price battle. Not a penny too much and certainly not under the table. The Dutch as the best pupil of the classroom. Where other countries as the US and France pamper children's homes in the third world with luxerious dinners and fat dollarcheques. How proper are our adoption agencies? How far did the market functioning enter here? What must one pay for adoption? Is there a reduction for children with a handicap.
According to the Dutch adoption agency Wereldkinderen (Children of the World) the offer of children is changing. Because we pay less at the international market, we get more often less wanted children. Children with a heirlip, with a club foot or a developmental delay. And not everyone wants such a child. Most want a healthy baby. And these are less and less available and so most parents are mainly waiting. Often for years.
More and more parents no longer wait. They take the initiative at hand. They go to the US. The market where you can adopt a baby of a few days old. Only 10 years ago just a few children came from the US, but this year it will be over 60. These so-called "private adoptions" from the US are growing explosively. The way to get a young baby fast. If you pay. Pay a lot. Pay to US commercial adoption agencies who take care of it all. The Dutch agency who needs to check this, Kind & Toekomst (Child & Future), rings in Reporter the alarm bell. They can not do these checks well. They are very worried about the biological mothers who relinguish children. The import of children from the US must stop, according to this agency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Free Counter and Web Stats
