no longer quiet on the western front
To say that I am disturbed by the recent events regarding Vietnam's adoption program would be a gross understatement. For those of you who may not be well versed in the intimate details, you can go to the embassy web page and get a briefing. The ultimate goal of everyone involved is to protect the children and to insure that our children were truly orphans and not part of some kind of horrifying ring of child trafficking. Others have said things far more eloquently than I, but I feel the need to voice an opinion of a slightly different flavor.
Irresponsible reporting makes me queasy. This article was published in yesterday's Morning News of Northwest Arkansas. I am saddened for these families and their children. I am overwhelmed by the choices that they will soon be facing. I am appalled by the fact that their agency seemingly abandoned them in country. Mostly though, I am horrified by the tone of the article. I find it abhorrent that the reporter opted to refer to the agency in question as a "company", thereby implying a drive for profit, and by stating the family paid $20,000 for said agency to "secure the adoption". So, was that the agency fee? Were there not fees paid to our government, or for home studies, etc? Maybe it's just me, but after reading several times I am left with the feeling that the article could be headlined as follows: Local family pays broker for baby but can't come home.
Now, I'm not saying that the situation is anything less than unfortunate. I'm sure that these families had confidence in their agency, founded or not, and that they felt that things were above board. For their sakes I hope that the problem can be resolved, that their children are truly adoptable by U.S. standards, and that they can bring their children home. That having been said, this article does little more than perpetuate the attitude that adoptive parents are simply buying children, that they are commodities no better than barrels of oil.
During the adoption process, it is easy to feel as if you are participating in a business transaction. The process is costly. There are home studies, and fingerprinting, and background checks, and visa applications, and passports, and government fees out the wazoo, but the fees are all for services that must be received in order to legally bring home one's child. At no point are adoptive parents paying for a baby. To say so oversimplifies things to a point of vulgarity. I am an adoptive parent but I DID NOT purchase my child. He is not a commodity. He is a person... a real, live human being. Articles with the tenor of this one do less to inform the public of unfortunate events and more to tarnish the perception of families formed through adoption. Isn't it enough that we have to constantly educate people about these being our real children and that we are their real parents? Issues regarding bloodlines and family validity are prevalent in television and movies, some responsibly portrayed and some not. However, I am willing to cut the entertainment industry some slack. They don't claim to be reporting the facts in an objective manner. Desperate Housewives doesn't claim to hold the same validity as the Nightly News or the New York Times. The Morning News Of Northwest Arkansas may not be a Pulitzer winning piece of journalism, but they should feel a responsibility to report objectively and not imply that APs and PAPs purchase their children.
Irresponsible reporting makes me queasy. This article was published in yesterday's Morning News of Northwest Arkansas. I am saddened for these families and their children. I am overwhelmed by the choices that they will soon be facing. I am appalled by the fact that their agency seemingly abandoned them in country. Mostly though, I am horrified by the tone of the article. I find it abhorrent that the reporter opted to refer to the agency in question as a "company", thereby implying a drive for profit, and by stating the family paid $20,000 for said agency to "secure the adoption". So, was that the agency fee? Were there not fees paid to our government, or for home studies, etc? Maybe it's just me, but after reading several times I am left with the feeling that the article could be headlined as follows: Local family pays broker for baby but can't come home.
Now, I'm not saying that the situation is anything less than unfortunate. I'm sure that these families had confidence in their agency, founded or not, and that they felt that things were above board. For their sakes I hope that the problem can be resolved, that their children are truly adoptable by U.S. standards, and that they can bring their children home. That having been said, this article does little more than perpetuate the attitude that adoptive parents are simply buying children, that they are commodities no better than barrels of oil.
During the adoption process, it is easy to feel as if you are participating in a business transaction. The process is costly. There are home studies, and fingerprinting, and background checks, and visa applications, and passports, and government fees out the wazoo, but the fees are all for services that must be received in order to legally bring home one's child. At no point are adoptive parents paying for a baby. To say so oversimplifies things to a point of vulgarity. I am an adoptive parent but I DID NOT purchase my child. He is not a commodity. He is a person... a real, live human being. Articles with the tenor of this one do less to inform the public of unfortunate events and more to tarnish the perception of families formed through adoption. Isn't it enough that we have to constantly educate people about these being our real children and that we are their real parents? Issues regarding bloodlines and family validity are prevalent in television and movies, some responsibly portrayed and some not. However, I am willing to cut the entertainment industry some slack. They don't claim to be reporting the facts in an objective manner. Desperate Housewives doesn't claim to hold the same validity as the Nightly News or the New York Times. The Morning News Of Northwest Arkansas may not be a Pulitzer winning piece of journalism, but they should feel a responsibility to report objectively and not imply that APs and PAPs purchase their children.
