Just up on our Subscription Blog:
Imagine being able to sit down with the Duan family as an adoptive parent of a child from Hunan Province. What questions would you ask? What answers would you seek?
Last month we sat down with the Duan parents and the recently released from prison daughter, and asked them pointed questions about how they came to be involved in trafficking, where the more than 1,000 kids came from, which orphanages outside the original six were involved, how they moved the kids, and many other questions. The answers bring much more clarity to the scandal, and show how widespread that event was, involving orphanages in Chongqing, Sichuan, Guangxi, Guangdong and other areas in Hunan Province. By the end of the interview, both the interviewee and the interviewer were in tears as the personal cost of the events were relived.
Subscribing is quick and easy, and the information is guaranteed to enlighten!
http://www.research-china.org/blogs/index.htm
To be notified of new postings, e-mail me.
We also have a paid subscription blog for families interested in more detailed analysis of China's program. Due to the sensitive nature of these articles, they are available by subscription only. (http://www.research-china.org/blogs/index.htm)
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Monday, April 02, 2012
The Dark Side of China's "Aging Out Orphan" Program
9/24/13 Update: Since the publication of this essay, China's "aging out" program has grown. Director Pei, retired director of the Luoyang orphanage, is now the in-country liason for China's "orphan hosting" program, whereby supposedly older, aging out children are invited to travel to the U.S. to live with American families, with the hope that these families will decide to adopt them. Director Pei has begun working with director Zhou of the Fuzhou orphanage in Jiangxi Province, recruiting older children from their areas to participate in these programs. This "Orphan Hosting" program has been embraced by New Horizons, who is working with director Pei, CCAI, America World Adoption, Lifeline, and other agencies. The most recent fabricated "aging out" adoption was completed in June 2013.
4/24/12 Update: The past three weeks have apparently seen a lot of activity at WACAP, with several key staff members rumored to have left the agency. Additionally, families have come forward reporting similar experiences with other orphanages, including one assistant orphanage director of a large Jiangxi orphanage who allegedly laundered his own daughter for international adoption. The U.S. State Department is rumored to be looking into the allegations presented in this article, although I have no first-hand confirmation of that.
4/4/12 Update: One of the families profiled in this article has decided to lend her own voice to the story. "Debbie" writes an immensely popular blog here, and posted about her story this morning.
_____________________________
I didn't want to post this article publicly. I have been pretty much in a "zen" place, posting the in-depth articles about China's international adoption program to my subscription blog. I have known about the issues discussed in this article for a while, but felt that families wanting to know more could subscribe to our blog. This kept the "blow back" from waiting families and others at a minimum, since subscription blog readers are composed of families who have deep experience in China's program, and could accept the stories and discoveries without too much emotional anxiety.
After it was posted to our subscription blog, other families stepped forward, and the gravity of the situation became obvious, and too important to remain "hidden" from other adoptive families. So, after much consideration, I felt that waiting families and those who have already brought home one of these children needed to know the potential problems that exist in their adoptions.
The sad reality is that as the number of healthy, young children coming into China's orphanages has declined, waiting families have often migrated to China's Special Needs and Special Focus program. Orphanages have responded to this increased interest by inventing creative means for obtaining children to satisfy this new demand. The following article focuses on one well-known orphanage, but evidence shows that this program is wide-spread (see related links at the conclusion of this article).
I contacted WACAP for their input, and they responded with a lengthy response, insisting that I correct my "misunderstandings". I informed them that while I appreciated their perspective, the information in the following article originated from first-hand accounts of adoptive families and others. I did tell WACAP that I would be happy to post their comment at the end of the article, but they declined my offer. I personally have no ax to grind with WACAP, and appreciate the difficult position they find themselves in when dealing with China. They are used in this article merely as the unfortunate example to illustrate an extensive and deep-rooted problem; certainly other agencies are equally involved.
I have long ago given up on the hope that China's program will change, its abuses end. Therefore, this article is simply a "red flag" to prospective adoptive families to learn from the sad experience of these families, and a host of others, to be aware of potential deceptions and abuses. For families that have already adopted an "aging out" child (Although this article focuses on adoptees older than ten years old, the problem encompasses children of all ages), be alert to red flags in your own relationships and conversations with your adopted child. This article will hopefully shed a bright light on these deceptions, and protect future birth parents, adoptees, and adoptive families from entering agreements blindly.
If you have a similar story to those recounted below, please feel free to leave a comment, or contact me at BrianStuy@Research-China.Org. Your privacy will be completely protected.
Brian H. Stuy
______________________________
In the Fall of 2008, WACAP adoption agency began to send e-mails out to many adoption groups pleading for a new group of older orphans who needed families. "They are all listed as healthy," the broadcast e-mail read, "They are in danger of turning 14 and 'ageing (sic) out.' This means they may have no support or resources and have to live on their own in China - if they are not adopted before they turn 14." This particular group would become known as the first "Journey of Hope" program through WACAP, one of the largest China adoption programs in the U.S. Emails went out and word spread through the Yahoo groups discussing WACAPs new program, which included the Luoyang orphanage adoption group, where adoptive families were advocating for children "soon to be aging out" of that orphanage, which comprised the majority of the children on WACAP's list. One Luoyang adoptive parent wrote of "a program that was to get older kids adopted. Perhaps there is a new effort to get the older kids paperwork ready and have files in at CCAA. Maybe, they are being added to CCAA's new 'shared' list. Thirty or so agencies are now being 'tested' with the new 'shared' list of older or sn kids."
Observers of China's international adoption program have observed that the program has "morphed" over the years, with particularly sharp changes occurring after the Hunan scandal of 2005. Not only did the number of children coming into China's orphanages experience a sharp decline following December 2005, but the composition of those foundlings also changed. Whereas historically more than 95% of foundlings had been extremely young healthy females, following the scandal the percentage of male and SN foundlings began to sharply climb. Today, around a third of all Chinese adoptions are male, and over half are Special Needs. To take an illustrative example, between 2000 and 2011, Guangdong Province submitted 2,343 boys for adoption out of a total of 23,032 children, or roughly 10% boys. However, that average masks a substantial shift that occurred after 2005. In the six years between 2000 and 2005, Guangdong Province orphanages submitted 14,266 children for adoption, of which 488 were boys (3.4%). In the six years between 2006 and 2011, Guangdong orphanages submitted 8,766 files for adoption, of which 1,855 were for boys (21%). The situation is similar when it comes to special needs submissions: Between 2000 and 2005, 218 SN children were submitted by the Guangdong orphanages, representing 1.5% of all adoptions from that Province. That number increased to 822 between 2006 and 2011, raising the average to 9.4%. A majority (78%) of these children were found after 2005.
This kind of demographic shift is typical, if not more pronounced, in the other Provinces as well.
With that shift has come an increase in awareness of "Special focus" children, including those in danger of "aging out". Attentive observers rightfully wonder where these children came from, and why the sudden apparent shift in cultural norms that have resulted in such a dramatic increase in male children being made available for adoption.
There was an overwhelming response from the adoption community to WACAP's publicity of their "Journey of Hope" children, and the majority of the children were soon matched, but not all. More than a year passed and there were still children waiting from the program. Some of the children had been moved to the shared list and other Luoyang children were beginning to show up on individual lists. Some children had already been home for a year. The children left behind were communicating with those who had already found families, questioning when they too might have a family. The pleas of one particular child, "Jonathan", pulled on the heartstrings of "Sue" (not her real name) as he continued to wait. Jonathan was telling his friends who were already in America that if he did not have a family soon, the orphanage would kick him out. "Someone help me get adopted," he pleaded to his friends. Word spread and Sue wondered what would happen to him, so she called WACAP and inquired if she could actually bring him home.
In 2010, Sue and her family would travel to Luoyang and formally adopted Jonathan into their family.
The next few months went well, and although there were language barriers and other communication issues, Sue felt that things were progressing as well as expected. But one thing bothered Sue: Her thirteen year-old son had a developed physique, and was sprouting a mustache.
Sue began to ask her son if he was really thirteen, and he assured her that he was. "Are you sure you are thirteen?" she pushed. As he had an upcoming birthday, she wanted to make sure that the celebration was purposeful. But Jonathan exhibited no excitement about the celebration, and in fact acted like the whole episode embarrassed him. Sue found this puzzling. "Perhaps he has never had a birthday celebration," she wondered, "the poor boy." Again she asked him about his age. "Can you at least give me what Chinese sign you were born under?" she pleaded. One afternoon, after pushing him yet again to give her some clue as to when he was actually born, he responded, "China told me never to tell. China said I could never tell my real birthday."
Sue was stunned. "You are our child now, they can't do anything to you." Her son understood, but was still terrified to say anything. "No, I can't tell, I can't tell, China said to never tell." No matter how hard Sue pushed, Jonathan would not relent.
A few weeks later, Jonathan initiated the conversation. "Can China get me in trouble?" he asked. No, was Sue's answer, you are safe from China. "OK," Jonathan replied, "then I am 17, not 13."
Sue did not know what to think. She had gone to China to adopt a boy that was ostensibly a young teen, and now she realized that she had adopted a near-adult. Who had known this? Her agency? The orphanage? Jonathan continued: "You know, I am not alone. There are lots and lots of my friends that have the same story." Indeed, witnesses in the orphanage remember Director Pei, when he heard in 2008 that WACAP was coming to start up the "Journey of Hope" program, going out with the orphanage van and coming back a short time later with two teenage kids to put in the program.
Sue went to retrieve Jonathan's paperwork received at his adoption. The paperwork says your birth mother is dead. No, she is alive. It said your grand-father was old and ailing. No, he is not. He is alive and well. And then Sue recalled a conversation at the school conference a few months earlier. Jonathan's teacher mentioned how neat it was that he could still talk to his brother in China. Sue assumed the teacher was confused, as she had no knowledge of a relationship with family members, especially a brother. Surely the teacher misunderstood. Sue was wrong.
It was in that moment that Jonathan decided to open up and tell his story. "My birth family visited me while I was in the orphanage. I have a photo we took as a family a week before you came to adopt me." Jonathan retrieved the secret photo and showed it to Sue. She observed how fit and happy the family looked, not at all like the "old and ailing" grandparents she had read about in Jonathan's pre-adoption descriptions. Jonathan explained that his birth family was against the idea of Jonathan going to the U.S., out of fear they would never see him again. Jonathan, however, was excited. This was his chance to become rich and famous.
But if Jonathan's birth family was against him being adopted, how did he end up in the orphanage?
This question was posed to Jonathan's birth grandfather, who was the individual that had relinquished Jonathan to the orphanage. When asked why he had turned his grandson to the orphanage, he recounted how one day he and his wife were approached by Luoning County Civil Affairs officials. They started the conversation by observing that if he and his wife were having any troubles raising their grandson, that the officials could help arrange for their grandson to be taken to the orphanage, and the orphanage would help raise him. "If your grandson goes into the orphanage," they were promised, "he will get a good education and get a good job." Jonathan would later tell us that it wasn't until 2009, just before he was adopted to the United States, that his grandparents learned that he would be leaving Luoyang. At no point during the "pitch" did the Civil Affairs officials notify him or his grandparents that he would be leaving China, and when his birth family learned of that fact two years later, they were extremely worried and upset.
"Do you believe he really will come back one day and take care of you?" we asked the sixty-five year old spry and energetic grandfather. "Yes," was his reply.
Jonathan's story is consistent with others from Luoyang. "Kate" adopted her daughter from Luoyang in 2010, along with a deaf child from the Beijing orphanage. Kate's Luoyang daughter also opened up and revealed that her birth family had also been approached by officials who discussed relinquishing her. Two days before Kate finalized the adoption, and when Kate was already in the Province to finalize her adoption, the Luoyang orphanage still did not have the relinquishment paperwork signed by the birth family. To increase the pressure on the grandmother to sign the required paperwork, the orphanage took Kate's daughter on a two-hour drive to her grandmother's house. The orphanage needed the grandmother to sign papers relinquishing her grand-daughter so that the adoption could be finalized. With Kate in the area, time was running out.
This trip re-traumatized Kate's daughter, forcing her to experience the pain of losing her birth family all over again. Kate's daughter was fairly sure her Grandmother did not want her to be adopted and taken away.
As Kate's Luoyang daughter told her the story, Kate felt a familiar sense of outrage, for her Beijing daughter had also told her that she had been brought to that orphanage as a six-year old under similar pretenses. Kate's Beijing daughter was sent to a Beijing school for the deaf, which she attended during the week. Since there were no classes held on the weekend, Kate's daughter stayed in the Beijing #2 orphanage on the weekend. Kate's daughter recounted how her parents would frequently visit her, bringing her treats as she went to school in the Beijing school. She would return home for Chinese New Years, but otherwise remained at the orphanage for most of the year. She had lived two hours outside Beijing, in a rural farming community. One day, without any warning or preparation, Kate's Beijing daughter was adopted by Kate, leaving her family to wonder what ever happened to their daughter. The Beijing #2 orphanage apparently also raised Kate's daughter's age from eleven to nearly fourteen in order to take advantage of the speed with which "aging out" children are adopted by Western families.
WACAP has frequently told adoptive families concerned with hearing such stories from their children that kids often fantasize about their birth families, supposedly unable to understand why they were "abandoned". But Luoyang's recruitment program was witnessed first-hand by Michael Melsi, a twenty-something American who started volunteering in the Luoyang orphanage in 2006 as an English language instructor. Michael spent most of his time in the Luoyang orphanage on the fourth and six floors of the orphanage, among the teenagers in Luoyang's "Special Focus" program. There, he befriended most of the children waiting to be adopted from the waiting child lists of WACAP, CCAI, and other agencies.
At the beginning of his time in Luoyang, Michael observed that “it was pretty apparent that the kids had some kind of distant relatives that were involved in their lives to some degree, never in a million years at that time would I have thought that they actually had parents or close relatives. But it was clear that even though they were in an orphanage, they were from a community where they still had ties.”
That point was driven home during Spring Festival 2009. Michael assumed this would be a sad time for the kids in the orphanage, so he arranged to bring the kids some treats and activities to help celebrate the Chinese “Christmas”. When he arrived at the orphanage, he found that very few of the older kids (older than 6) were there. Michael wondered where they all had gone, and asked the orphanage staff where the kids had disappeared to. At first he was told the children had been sent to spend the festival with area families, who had volunteered to help give the kids a bit of “normal lives”. That did not sound right to Michael, so he pushed further, and was eventually told that the kids had gone home to their extended birth families (aunts, uncles, grandparents) to spend the holidays with them.
When WACAP formed the “Journey of Hope” program in 2008, Michael noticed that some of the older kids were being sent out of the orphanage and disappearing. When he asked the orphanage staff and other children about this, he was told that those kids had “selfish relatives” who were refusing to allow the adoption of their kids who they were unwilling to care for. Thus, the kids were being forced to leave the orphanage. Michael researched where some of his “kids” had ended up, and found that they had returned to their birth families. It soon became apparent in several cases that women who were initially said to be "aunts" were actually the children's birth mothers. When Michael asked the birth families why their kids had ended up in the Luoyang orphanage, they reluctantly told him that they had understood that the orphanage would provide for the expenses of raising their children. Furthermore, the birth parents felt it would offer their children the opportunity to get a better education and live in the city, which they believed would provide the children with a better life in the future. When the orphanage began to pressure them to sign documents relinquishing parental rights to their own children, they had refused.
Michael became increasingly concerned with what he was seeing in the Luoyang orphanage, and contacted several adoptive families to inform them of the situation. He also decided to contact WACAP directly, and outlined many of his findings and concerns. Within two days, Michael was contacted by the orphanage and informed that he would not be permitted to return to the orphanage, with officials citing concerns that he was a carrier of swine flu.
_____________________
Director Pei, the Luoyang orphanage director, presented WACAP with a plan that he was formulating. Although no longer the orphanage director (the orphanage saw a change of directors in 2010), nevertheless in late 2011 Pei contacted WACAP and informed them that he was interested in guiding a group of relatives of children adopted through WACAP's "Journey of Hope" program to the United States.
WACAP has had a long history with the Luoyang orphanage, going back to the early 1990s when the agencies head, Janice Neilson, formed a mutually beneficial relationship with the orphanage director, Pei Zhong Hai. Over the course of the next seventeen years, WACAP arranged funding for the Luoyang orphanage, and Pei provided children for adoption.
So it was that WACAP contacted "Debbie", the adoptive mother of one of the "Journey of Hope" girls, and asked if they would be agreeable to a visit by their daughter's biological Uncle in their home. Of course this came as a huge shock to Debbie and her husband, who could not understand how the people described in their daughter's adoption paperwork as being too poor to care for their daughter were now suddenly able to afford to fly to the U.S. and tour around with their daughter's orphanage director. They were angry, confused and very frustrated as the realization came to them that they had been deceived by the orphanage to begin with. They informed WACAP that they felt very uncomfortable with the situation, and WACAP informed Director Pei that Debbie and the other families were not welcoming of his proposal.
Debbie realizes now that she should have noticed the red-flags surrounding the "aging out" kids earlier, but chose to ignore what she described as disquieting clues. "All the them had the same stories," she remembers. And indeed, a perusal of WACAP's 2009 "Journey of Hope" listing bears this out: "WCL, Contest winner and artist. Healthy 12 year old boy. . . .He has been at the orphanage for over three years. He remembers nothing about his birth parents or where he lived before the orphanage." "XL. Violinist. Healthy 12 year old girl. . . . She has no memory of her birth family." "HL. Athlete. Healthy 12 year-old boy. . . When asked about his memories before he arrived at the orphanage he said he has no memories before that time." "GBL, Basketball player and jogger. Healthy 12 year old girl. . . . She has no memory of her birth family. "YHL, Performer, Healthy 12 year-old girl. . . . When asked about her birth parents, she said she does not remember anything."
When asked about these children, Jonathan admits that he is aware of several who know full well who their birth families are, and some of them were among the kids admonishing him to remain quiet. He recounts how in March 2007, the orphanage sent the van to pick him and the other children recruited by the Luoning County Civil Affairs Bureau up. On the day of the "pick up", all of the families were notified to bring their kids to the county Civil Affairs Bureau, where the the orphanage van waited. On the morning Jonathan was picked up, he was accompanied by ten or eleven other children, ranging in ages from a few months to over seventeen years old, mostly boys. All were allowed to say goodbye to their birth families before being loaded into the orphanage van and taken away to what most, if not all, felt was an orphanage education school.
In January 2011, the CCAA commended the Luoyang orphanage, describing them as a "Model Welfare Institute for International adoption in 2010", the year that Jonathan and his friends were adopted abroad. The Luoyang orphanage director boasted that "There is no trifling with international adoptions. The leaders of the Civil Affairs Bureau and the officers of our orphanage have attached great importance to the working of international adoption, from the preparation of the finding ads to the adoption paper work, to when the kids are sent into the arms of adoptive families, including the adoptive families returning back to visit the orphanage. All of these works were overseen by the director, with very carefully attention, and well done by following the rules step by step. This ensures that there was no mistake of any of those kids sent for international adoption. It also brought a new world for the growth of those kids."
Sue and the other families would disagree. While some of the families have been informed by their adoptive children of the truth behind their adoptions, many of the other children still urge Jonathan to remain quiet. "Don't tell! We were told we can never tell." Thus, there is little doubt that many families of Luoyang's "orphans" don't realize that their child, along with their birth family, really expect that this is simply a "study abroad" program. Already, stories of adoption disruptions and turmoil are being recounted as the children grow frustrated that they are not being given the material gifts that they had been promised. Unfortunately, Luoyang's program is in no way unique, as many orphanages across China have seen similar spikes in "aging out" children needing to be adopted.
The issues go beyond simply raising a child under false pretenses. Once an adoption, even one performed under false premises, is completed, the child becomes a legal beneficiary of the adoptive parents estate, for example. Then there are the issues surrounding the true nature of the relationship between these children and their adoptive families. As Sue recounted, she could see the stress of lying on her son's face as he repeatedly covered up the truth from her probing questions. One day, he just got tired of lying.
Sue articulates a cautionary note to families assuming that these "aging out" and other tales of woe are accurate:
“People who adopt these aging out kids need to go into this knowing full well that it is very possible that this child is significantly older, already aged out, it is very possible that their birth dates were changed, it is very possible that they have birth family still there and that there is more to the story. It is not just the cut-and-dry ‘this orphan needs a home.’ You need to be sensitive to the question of whether an industry is being created by these aging out kids that you are feeding into when really they don’t need to be coming here.”
Related articles:"Promises, Promises!"
"China's New 'Orphan Program'" (Subscription blog article)
4/24/12 Update: The past three weeks have apparently seen a lot of activity at WACAP, with several key staff members rumored to have left the agency. Additionally, families have come forward reporting similar experiences with other orphanages, including one assistant orphanage director of a large Jiangxi orphanage who allegedly laundered his own daughter for international adoption. The U.S. State Department is rumored to be looking into the allegations presented in this article, although I have no first-hand confirmation of that.
4/4/12 Update: One of the families profiled in this article has decided to lend her own voice to the story. "Debbie" writes an immensely popular blog here, and posted about her story this morning.
_____________________________
I didn't want to post this article publicly. I have been pretty much in a "zen" place, posting the in-depth articles about China's international adoption program to my subscription blog. I have known about the issues discussed in this article for a while, but felt that families wanting to know more could subscribe to our blog. This kept the "blow back" from waiting families and others at a minimum, since subscription blog readers are composed of families who have deep experience in China's program, and could accept the stories and discoveries without too much emotional anxiety.
After it was posted to our subscription blog, other families stepped forward, and the gravity of the situation became obvious, and too important to remain "hidden" from other adoptive families. So, after much consideration, I felt that waiting families and those who have already brought home one of these children needed to know the potential problems that exist in their adoptions.
The sad reality is that as the number of healthy, young children coming into China's orphanages has declined, waiting families have often migrated to China's Special Needs and Special Focus program. Orphanages have responded to this increased interest by inventing creative means for obtaining children to satisfy this new demand. The following article focuses on one well-known orphanage, but evidence shows that this program is wide-spread (see related links at the conclusion of this article).
I contacted WACAP for their input, and they responded with a lengthy response, insisting that I correct my "misunderstandings". I informed them that while I appreciated their perspective, the information in the following article originated from first-hand accounts of adoptive families and others. I did tell WACAP that I would be happy to post their comment at the end of the article, but they declined my offer. I personally have no ax to grind with WACAP, and appreciate the difficult position they find themselves in when dealing with China. They are used in this article merely as the unfortunate example to illustrate an extensive and deep-rooted problem; certainly other agencies are equally involved.
I have long ago given up on the hope that China's program will change, its abuses end. Therefore, this article is simply a "red flag" to prospective adoptive families to learn from the sad experience of these families, and a host of others, to be aware of potential deceptions and abuses. For families that have already adopted an "aging out" child (Although this article focuses on adoptees older than ten years old, the problem encompasses children of all ages), be alert to red flags in your own relationships and conversations with your adopted child. This article will hopefully shed a bright light on these deceptions, and protect future birth parents, adoptees, and adoptive families from entering agreements blindly.
If you have a similar story to those recounted below, please feel free to leave a comment, or contact me at BrianStuy@Research-China.Org. Your privacy will be completely protected.
Brian H. Stuy
______________________________
 |
| Luoyang City Orphanage, Henan Province |
The Dark Side of China's "Aging Out" Program
In the Fall of 2008, WACAP adoption agency began to send e-mails out to many adoption groups pleading for a new group of older orphans who needed families. "They are all listed as healthy," the broadcast e-mail read, "They are in danger of turning 14 and 'ageing (sic) out.' This means they may have no support or resources and have to live on their own in China - if they are not adopted before they turn 14." This particular group would become known as the first "Journey of Hope" program through WACAP, one of the largest China adoption programs in the U.S. Emails went out and word spread through the Yahoo groups discussing WACAPs new program, which included the Luoyang orphanage adoption group, where adoptive families were advocating for children "soon to be aging out" of that orphanage, which comprised the majority of the children on WACAP's list. One Luoyang adoptive parent wrote of "a program that was to get older kids adopted. Perhaps there is a new effort to get the older kids paperwork ready and have files in at CCAA. Maybe, they are being added to CCAA's new 'shared' list. Thirty or so agencies are now being 'tested' with the new 'shared' list of older or sn kids."
Observers of China's international adoption program have observed that the program has "morphed" over the years, with particularly sharp changes occurring after the Hunan scandal of 2005. Not only did the number of children coming into China's orphanages experience a sharp decline following December 2005, but the composition of those foundlings also changed. Whereas historically more than 95% of foundlings had been extremely young healthy females, following the scandal the percentage of male and SN foundlings began to sharply climb. Today, around a third of all Chinese adoptions are male, and over half are Special Needs. To take an illustrative example, between 2000 and 2011, Guangdong Province submitted 2,343 boys for adoption out of a total of 23,032 children, or roughly 10% boys. However, that average masks a substantial shift that occurred after 2005. In the six years between 2000 and 2005, Guangdong Province orphanages submitted 14,266 children for adoption, of which 488 were boys (3.4%). In the six years between 2006 and 2011, Guangdong orphanages submitted 8,766 files for adoption, of which 1,855 were for boys (21%). The situation is similar when it comes to special needs submissions: Between 2000 and 2005, 218 SN children were submitted by the Guangdong orphanages, representing 1.5% of all adoptions from that Province. That number increased to 822 between 2006 and 2011, raising the average to 9.4%. A majority (78%) of these children were found after 2005.
This kind of demographic shift is typical, if not more pronounced, in the other Provinces as well.
With that shift has come an increase in awareness of "Special focus" children, including those in danger of "aging out". Attentive observers rightfully wonder where these children came from, and why the sudden apparent shift in cultural norms that have resulted in such a dramatic increase in male children being made available for adoption.
There was an overwhelming response from the adoption community to WACAP's publicity of their "Journey of Hope" children, and the majority of the children were soon matched, but not all. More than a year passed and there were still children waiting from the program. Some of the children had been moved to the shared list and other Luoyang children were beginning to show up on individual lists. Some children had already been home for a year. The children left behind were communicating with those who had already found families, questioning when they too might have a family. The pleas of one particular child, "Jonathan", pulled on the heartstrings of "Sue" (not her real name) as he continued to wait. Jonathan was telling his friends who were already in America that if he did not have a family soon, the orphanage would kick him out. "Someone help me get adopted," he pleaded to his friends. Word spread and Sue wondered what would happen to him, so she called WACAP and inquired if she could actually bring him home.
In 2010, Sue and her family would travel to Luoyang and formally adopted Jonathan into their family.
The next few months went well, and although there were language barriers and other communication issues, Sue felt that things were progressing as well as expected. But one thing bothered Sue: Her thirteen year-old son had a developed physique, and was sprouting a mustache.
Sue began to ask her son if he was really thirteen, and he assured her that he was. "Are you sure you are thirteen?" she pushed. As he had an upcoming birthday, she wanted to make sure that the celebration was purposeful. But Jonathan exhibited no excitement about the celebration, and in fact acted like the whole episode embarrassed him. Sue found this puzzling. "Perhaps he has never had a birthday celebration," she wondered, "the poor boy." Again she asked him about his age. "Can you at least give me what Chinese sign you were born under?" she pleaded. One afternoon, after pushing him yet again to give her some clue as to when he was actually born, he responded, "China told me never to tell. China said I could never tell my real birthday."
Sue was stunned. "You are our child now, they can't do anything to you." Her son understood, but was still terrified to say anything. "No, I can't tell, I can't tell, China said to never tell." No matter how hard Sue pushed, Jonathan would not relent.
A few weeks later, Jonathan initiated the conversation. "Can China get me in trouble?" he asked. No, was Sue's answer, you are safe from China. "OK," Jonathan replied, "then I am 17, not 13."
Sue did not know what to think. She had gone to China to adopt a boy that was ostensibly a young teen, and now she realized that she had adopted a near-adult. Who had known this? Her agency? The orphanage? Jonathan continued: "You know, I am not alone. There are lots and lots of my friends that have the same story." Indeed, witnesses in the orphanage remember Director Pei, when he heard in 2008 that WACAP was coming to start up the "Journey of Hope" program, going out with the orphanage van and coming back a short time later with two teenage kids to put in the program.
Sue went to retrieve Jonathan's paperwork received at his adoption. The paperwork says your birth mother is dead. No, she is alive. It said your grand-father was old and ailing. No, he is not. He is alive and well. And then Sue recalled a conversation at the school conference a few months earlier. Jonathan's teacher mentioned how neat it was that he could still talk to his brother in China. Sue assumed the teacher was confused, as she had no knowledge of a relationship with family members, especially a brother. Surely the teacher misunderstood. Sue was wrong.
It was in that moment that Jonathan decided to open up and tell his story. "My birth family visited me while I was in the orphanage. I have a photo we took as a family a week before you came to adopt me." Jonathan retrieved the secret photo and showed it to Sue. She observed how fit and happy the family looked, not at all like the "old and ailing" grandparents she had read about in Jonathan's pre-adoption descriptions. Jonathan explained that his birth family was against the idea of Jonathan going to the U.S., out of fear they would never see him again. Jonathan, however, was excited. This was his chance to become rich and famous.
But if Jonathan's birth family was against him being adopted, how did he end up in the orphanage?
This question was posed to Jonathan's birth grandfather, who was the individual that had relinquished Jonathan to the orphanage. When asked why he had turned his grandson to the orphanage, he recounted how one day he and his wife were approached by Luoning County Civil Affairs officials. They started the conversation by observing that if he and his wife were having any troubles raising their grandson, that the officials could help arrange for their grandson to be taken to the orphanage, and the orphanage would help raise him. "If your grandson goes into the orphanage," they were promised, "he will get a good education and get a good job." Jonathan would later tell us that it wasn't until 2009, just before he was adopted to the United States, that his grandparents learned that he would be leaving Luoyang. At no point during the "pitch" did the Civil Affairs officials notify him or his grandparents that he would be leaving China, and when his birth family learned of that fact two years later, they were extremely worried and upset.
"Do you believe he really will come back one day and take care of you?" we asked the sixty-five year old spry and energetic grandfather. "Yes," was his reply.
Jonathan's story is consistent with others from Luoyang. "Kate" adopted her daughter from Luoyang in 2010, along with a deaf child from the Beijing orphanage. Kate's Luoyang daughter also opened up and revealed that her birth family had also been approached by officials who discussed relinquishing her. Two days before Kate finalized the adoption, and when Kate was already in the Province to finalize her adoption, the Luoyang orphanage still did not have the relinquishment paperwork signed by the birth family. To increase the pressure on the grandmother to sign the required paperwork, the orphanage took Kate's daughter on a two-hour drive to her grandmother's house. The orphanage needed the grandmother to sign papers relinquishing her grand-daughter so that the adoption could be finalized. With Kate in the area, time was running out.
This trip re-traumatized Kate's daughter, forcing her to experience the pain of losing her birth family all over again. Kate's daughter was fairly sure her Grandmother did not want her to be adopted and taken away.
As Kate's Luoyang daughter told her the story, Kate felt a familiar sense of outrage, for her Beijing daughter had also told her that she had been brought to that orphanage as a six-year old under similar pretenses. Kate's Beijing daughter was sent to a Beijing school for the deaf, which she attended during the week. Since there were no classes held on the weekend, Kate's daughter stayed in the Beijing #2 orphanage on the weekend. Kate's daughter recounted how her parents would frequently visit her, bringing her treats as she went to school in the Beijing school. She would return home for Chinese New Years, but otherwise remained at the orphanage for most of the year. She had lived two hours outside Beijing, in a rural farming community. One day, without any warning or preparation, Kate's Beijing daughter was adopted by Kate, leaving her family to wonder what ever happened to their daughter. The Beijing #2 orphanage apparently also raised Kate's daughter's age from eleven to nearly fourteen in order to take advantage of the speed with which "aging out" children are adopted by Western families.
WACAP has frequently told adoptive families concerned with hearing such stories from their children that kids often fantasize about their birth families, supposedly unable to understand why they were "abandoned". But Luoyang's recruitment program was witnessed first-hand by Michael Melsi, a twenty-something American who started volunteering in the Luoyang orphanage in 2006 as an English language instructor. Michael spent most of his time in the Luoyang orphanage on the fourth and six floors of the orphanage, among the teenagers in Luoyang's "Special Focus" program. There, he befriended most of the children waiting to be adopted from the waiting child lists of WACAP, CCAI, and other agencies.
At the beginning of his time in Luoyang, Michael observed that “it was pretty apparent that the kids had some kind of distant relatives that were involved in their lives to some degree, never in a million years at that time would I have thought that they actually had parents or close relatives. But it was clear that even though they were in an orphanage, they were from a community where they still had ties.”
That point was driven home during Spring Festival 2009. Michael assumed this would be a sad time for the kids in the orphanage, so he arranged to bring the kids some treats and activities to help celebrate the Chinese “Christmas”. When he arrived at the orphanage, he found that very few of the older kids (older than 6) were there. Michael wondered where they all had gone, and asked the orphanage staff where the kids had disappeared to. At first he was told the children had been sent to spend the festival with area families, who had volunteered to help give the kids a bit of “normal lives”. That did not sound right to Michael, so he pushed further, and was eventually told that the kids had gone home to their extended birth families (aunts, uncles, grandparents) to spend the holidays with them.
When WACAP formed the “Journey of Hope” program in 2008, Michael noticed that some of the older kids were being sent out of the orphanage and disappearing. When he asked the orphanage staff and other children about this, he was told that those kids had “selfish relatives” who were refusing to allow the adoption of their kids who they were unwilling to care for. Thus, the kids were being forced to leave the orphanage. Michael researched where some of his “kids” had ended up, and found that they had returned to their birth families. It soon became apparent in several cases that women who were initially said to be "aunts" were actually the children's birth mothers. When Michael asked the birth families why their kids had ended up in the Luoyang orphanage, they reluctantly told him that they had understood that the orphanage would provide for the expenses of raising their children. Furthermore, the birth parents felt it would offer their children the opportunity to get a better education and live in the city, which they believed would provide the children with a better life in the future. When the orphanage began to pressure them to sign documents relinquishing parental rights to their own children, they had refused.
Michael became increasingly concerned with what he was seeing in the Luoyang orphanage, and contacted several adoptive families to inform them of the situation. He also decided to contact WACAP directly, and outlined many of his findings and concerns. Within two days, Michael was contacted by the orphanage and informed that he would not be permitted to return to the orphanage, with officials citing concerns that he was a carrier of swine flu.
_____________________
Director Pei, the Luoyang orphanage director, presented WACAP with a plan that he was formulating. Although no longer the orphanage director (the orphanage saw a change of directors in 2010), nevertheless in late 2011 Pei contacted WACAP and informed them that he was interested in guiding a group of relatives of children adopted through WACAP's "Journey of Hope" program to the United States.
WACAP has had a long history with the Luoyang orphanage, going back to the early 1990s when the agencies head, Janice Neilson, formed a mutually beneficial relationship with the orphanage director, Pei Zhong Hai. Over the course of the next seventeen years, WACAP arranged funding for the Luoyang orphanage, and Pei provided children for adoption.
So it was that WACAP contacted "Debbie", the adoptive mother of one of the "Journey of Hope" girls, and asked if they would be agreeable to a visit by their daughter's biological Uncle in their home. Of course this came as a huge shock to Debbie and her husband, who could not understand how the people described in their daughter's adoption paperwork as being too poor to care for their daughter were now suddenly able to afford to fly to the U.S. and tour around with their daughter's orphanage director. They were angry, confused and very frustrated as the realization came to them that they had been deceived by the orphanage to begin with. They informed WACAP that they felt very uncomfortable with the situation, and WACAP informed Director Pei that Debbie and the other families were not welcoming of his proposal.
Debbie realizes now that she should have noticed the red-flags surrounding the "aging out" kids earlier, but chose to ignore what she described as disquieting clues. "All the them had the same stories," she remembers. And indeed, a perusal of WACAP's 2009 "Journey of Hope" listing bears this out: "WCL, Contest winner and artist. Healthy 12 year old boy. . . .He has been at the orphanage for over three years. He remembers nothing about his birth parents or where he lived before the orphanage." "XL. Violinist. Healthy 12 year old girl. . . . She has no memory of her birth family." "HL. Athlete. Healthy 12 year-old boy. . . When asked about his memories before he arrived at the orphanage he said he has no memories before that time." "GBL, Basketball player and jogger. Healthy 12 year old girl. . . . She has no memory of her birth family. "YHL, Performer, Healthy 12 year-old girl. . . . When asked about her birth parents, she said she does not remember anything."
When asked about these children, Jonathan admits that he is aware of several who know full well who their birth families are, and some of them were among the kids admonishing him to remain quiet. He recounts how in March 2007, the orphanage sent the van to pick him and the other children recruited by the Luoning County Civil Affairs Bureau up. On the day of the "pick up", all of the families were notified to bring their kids to the county Civil Affairs Bureau, where the the orphanage van waited. On the morning Jonathan was picked up, he was accompanied by ten or eleven other children, ranging in ages from a few months to over seventeen years old, mostly boys. All were allowed to say goodbye to their birth families before being loaded into the orphanage van and taken away to what most, if not all, felt was an orphanage education school.
In January 2011, the CCAA commended the Luoyang orphanage, describing them as a "Model Welfare Institute for International adoption in 2010", the year that Jonathan and his friends were adopted abroad. The Luoyang orphanage director boasted that "There is no trifling with international adoptions. The leaders of the Civil Affairs Bureau and the officers of our orphanage have attached great importance to the working of international adoption, from the preparation of the finding ads to the adoption paper work, to when the kids are sent into the arms of adoptive families, including the adoptive families returning back to visit the orphanage. All of these works were overseen by the director, with very carefully attention, and well done by following the rules step by step. This ensures that there was no mistake of any of those kids sent for international adoption. It also brought a new world for the growth of those kids."
Sue and the other families would disagree. While some of the families have been informed by their adoptive children of the truth behind their adoptions, many of the other children still urge Jonathan to remain quiet. "Don't tell! We were told we can never tell." Thus, there is little doubt that many families of Luoyang's "orphans" don't realize that their child, along with their birth family, really expect that this is simply a "study abroad" program. Already, stories of adoption disruptions and turmoil are being recounted as the children grow frustrated that they are not being given the material gifts that they had been promised. Unfortunately, Luoyang's program is in no way unique, as many orphanages across China have seen similar spikes in "aging out" children needing to be adopted.
The issues go beyond simply raising a child under false pretenses. Once an adoption, even one performed under false premises, is completed, the child becomes a legal beneficiary of the adoptive parents estate, for example. Then there are the issues surrounding the true nature of the relationship between these children and their adoptive families. As Sue recounted, she could see the stress of lying on her son's face as he repeatedly covered up the truth from her probing questions. One day, he just got tired of lying.
Sue articulates a cautionary note to families assuming that these "aging out" and other tales of woe are accurate:
“People who adopt these aging out kids need to go into this knowing full well that it is very possible that this child is significantly older, already aged out, it is very possible that their birth dates were changed, it is very possible that they have birth family still there and that there is more to the story. It is not just the cut-and-dry ‘this orphan needs a home.’ You need to be sensitive to the question of whether an industry is being created by these aging out kids that you are feeding into when really they don’t need to be coming here.”
Related articles:"Promises, Promises!"
"China's New 'Orphan Program'" (Subscription blog article)
Thursday, March 08, 2012
Review of Jim Garrow's "The Pink Pagoda"
I first became aware of Jim Garrow's story in March 2008, after an article was published in a Canadian magazine giving the basic elements of his story. In June 2008, I decided to speak to the man personally and called him at his home in Ontario and asked him to go into the details of his work in more depth. My intent was to publish the interviews in June 2008, but I was asked to hold off, because there was a Canadian investigation into Garrow's claims of infant smuggling, and did not wish him to become cautious. I finally decided to post the interviews to my blog after the GuelphMercury article was published in August 2010 confirming the investigation. One can listen to our Garrow interviews here.
One is struck upon opening Jim Garrow's new book, "The Pink Pagoda", by the statements of support found in the first section of the book, entitled "Endorsements". These written statements of support for Jim and his work come from such people as "Dr. Parry, Assistant to the CEO for the International Internet Alliance", a person and organization on whom I could find no information; Ross McKitrick, an outspoken critic of Global Warming; Robin W. Pifer, a Pastor of the Cedar Alliance Church; Walter Baker, executive director of the Fairhaven Bible Conference; William D. Gairdner, a former Olympic athlete and author of such books as "The Trouble with Canada," and "The War Against the Family"; a mysterious and unidentifiable "Dr. A.B.", allegedly of the Unesco-World Health Organization; Dr. Jim Garlow, a pastor and adoptive parent; and Jerome Corsi, author of "Where's the Birth Certificate?", about . . . well you know what that is about.
All of Garrow's "Endorsement" authors are qualified by Garrow as "best-selling", "world-renowned", etc. I will let the reader use Google to determine the accuracy of Garrow's claims about these individuals. Garrow's book is published by WND Books, described by an editorial in the UK's Guardian as ""a niche producer of rightwing conspiracy theories, religious books and 'family values' tracts." WND Books describes itself as “'fiercely independent', telling the stories that other publishers won’t." The point is that the reader should get an idea of the religious and political circles Jim Garrow associates with -- the birds of a feather thing -- which may prove useful as one begins reading his book.
Jim introduces us to his story by describing his great success in all things financial, and how this success brought him to China. The book, he writes, is the story of how he came to save over 40,000 babies between 2000 and 2012. When I interviewed him in 2008, Garrow claimed to have saved 24,000. By 2009 it had apparently risen to 31,000 (p. 149), 2010 the number had climbed to 34,000 and now, in 2012, it stands at 40,000 (Pink Pagoda "Introduction"). In his introduction he also admits that many might call him a "human trafficker", an accusation he freely and enthusiastically embraces.
Thus begins the exciting story of Jim Garrow's start and work in baby trafficking inside China. In the first chapter, he describes saving the baby niece of his Chinese employee, "Xinyi", whose husband wanted to "put aside" the child because she was a girl. Jim sets the stage for the conflict that will run through the entire book -- the family was forced to take these actions because of Chinese laws -- evil laws -- which practically forced a family to have a boy. "As Chinese law dictates, only a male heir can inherit family property and also provide for the parents' elder years." One is left to question why the upper-middle class birth family of this child would worry about these issues, given their employment at a large U.S. firm and their patently upscale urban lifestyle. It would also belabor the point to discuss whether this assessment of Chinese law is even accurate, but Jim uses this statement to set the stage for why China had "become a nation awash in grief over having to make such unthinkable choices." Jim contrasts this evil with the work that he feels called to do, which he explains using Bible scripture uttered by Jesus himself.
Jim goes on to recount how he met with the father of the unwanted baby, who had a plan to bring the baby to the area Buddhist monks who were willing to dispatch the child for him. They were willing to do this, it was explained to the incredulous Garrow, because the monks believed in reincarnation and thus believed the child would have a better life in the next cycle.
The only solution the father would accept was for the child to find a new home outside China, a promise Jim made without knowing how he would fulfill it. As I read this event that set Garrow on his mission, I found myself wondering if any stereotype of Chinese society had not been employed: the powerful husband and the submissive wife; the low societal and religious value placed on a girl's life; the smells and noises in the couple's apartment, the endless fear that neighbors would hear the conversation and report them to the authorities. I of course can't say that what Jim describes is impossible, but I can just say that my experience in observing my wife's urban family and thousands of couples through my own travels in China gives me the feeling that I am watching a "predictable" movie. Having located and interviewed many birth families of unregistered children, I have found the neighbors aware and accepting of the situation, even protective. I have found wives of urban couples to be assertive and active participants in matters of family business. I read Jim's account, and while possibly true, I find the lens through which he sees the event as Western, simplified, and largely unfamiliar.
I got the same feeling while reading Jim's account of how he found a home for the unwanted baby. He met an American expat living in China whose wife lived in the United States. The man explained that they wanted to adopt, but that it seemed to take a long time to do the paperwork, etc. Jim told him he could adopt right away. Now, I'm sure that most readers familiar with the adoption might at this point be wondering how in the world this adoption could be completed. I will let Jim describe the process:
At this point, there were no documents to accompany the baby and her new parents back to the United States. Those I would discover in one of the best libraries in the world for doing such research—the local beer house, where expats hang out. It was in one of those pubs that I met my “librarians,” who even went so far as to share copies of the documents from their own Chinese adoption process. Paperwork aside, I also learned valuable information about the entire process and what pitfalls to hopefully avoid. I had moved at God’s bidding into the adoption business, and I planned to run that business as efficiently as I did my schools. God bless the fool with a big heart. (pp. 11-12)
No mention of the need for an I-600 (Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative); no consulate interview; it seems that all Jim had to do was produce some forged adoption documents and the U.S. government would issue the infant a visa. The reader can decide how authentic Jim's account feels.
Jim also spends a lot of time reminding his readers of his stature, both financial and otherwise, in China. He writes about his fancy car, his lush apartment, his ability to lavish financial gifts on those around him. Two examples will serve to illustrate, but such examples could be multiplied many, many times. In chapter 5 ("Walkabout") Jim recounts how he left his protective hotel to take a walk in the "other China". He abandoned his "car and driver" to walk around Chongqing's poorer neighborhoods. He gets lost, asks some kids where the nearest McDonalds was, and was escorted by fifteen street children there. Jim then describes his arrival at the eatery:
The white-gloved gatekeeper greeted us at the door, and as she stared suspiciously at the boisterous group of children surrounding me, she asked in perfect English,
“How can I help you?”
I responded with the universal language: money. In China the currency is called renminbi. The slang expression is kwai. Think dollars and bucks. I handed her the equivalent of $140.00 to cover the cost of whatever the children wanted to eat. That $140.00 was equivalent to one month’s salary for the manager, and she knew that she could expect a very large tip for putting up with this ragtag group.
Another example of Jim's larges is recounted in chapter 7 ("The Pink Pagoda is Born"), where Jim describes what allowed him to be successful (and protected) inside China:
Back in China, I cut a major figure with my posh penthouse, Mercedes sedan, chauffeur, and money that I could spend as I chose. That ability to spend and transfer money was tied to my special red-and-gold foreign experts license, a document rarely accorded someone who wasn’t Chinese. Not only does that gold-embossed “passport” allow one to move money about without restrictions; it also protects the bearer from any kind of harassment at airports and the like. That document was always tucked into one of the pockets in my signature Tilley vest; that is still true here in Canada. I never leave home without it. One might be curious how I managed to get such a document. Think back to 2000, and that special student in my class at Shaw College in Canada. That special student is the one who invited me to come to China the first time, and who introduced me to the inner circles of connected, powerful people, including her uncle, Hu Jintao. No more needs to be said. (p.37)
Jim also recounts in nearly every chapter how much respect and reverence he experienced from the Chinese people themselves. When a stranger mysteriously shows up in a Chongqing coffee house, he inexplicably says that Jim would make Dr. Bethune proud. Jim continues:
Yoda’s reference to Dr. Bethune was not the first time I had heard that comparison. Since my first trip to China, people had told me outright that they believed I was the reincarnation of the revered doctor who revolutionized medical procedures during the Second Sino-Japanese War. For Americans who might not recognize his name, the term MASH is certainly a famous acronym, and it was Dr. Bethune, a Canadian by birth, who developed the mobile medical units that were precursors of the MASH (mobile army surgical hospital) units instituted in 1945, after his death. Bethune’s mobile units, along with the MASH units that followed, were responsible for saving so many lives during the wars of his century, worldwide. The Bethune Institute was and is a paean to his legacy, which in some nearly inexplicable way, I have inherited. Using his name wasn’t so much a strategic move on my part as it was a dynamic, spiritual one. (p.53)
Earlier, Jim recounts this statement by one of his employees: “I personally believe that Dr. Jim is the reincarnation of a saint, maybe Dr. Bethune, and I’m not alone in that belief. The Chinese people who come in contact with him believe that too. Even people who haven’t met him but who have heard about him speak his name with genuine reverence.” (p. 29) It should be noted that Jim Garrow is not a "Dr." in any real sense, but the recipient of an honorary degree from a religious college. He received that degree in 2008, long after the events recounted here, so this statement by his employee contains an anachronistic problem.
This idea constitutes the second over-arching motif one sees in the the book: First, that Jim makes, and always has made, large amounts of money, and dispenses it like water. Second, that he is comparable to the spiritual giants -- New Testament passages can be applied to him, others recognize his spiritual greatness as he walks down the street. The couple that adopted Jim's first rescue, for example, observed: "But clearly, and I saw that for myself in China, everybody seemed to know who you were. Even walking down the street, Chinese people, even monks, just looked at you, and tried not to crowd you. I don’t know exactly what that was all about, but you definitely had presence and respect."
By chapter 13 ("The Great Wailing Wall") the feeling that I was reading a work of fiction became overpowering. The accumulation of the bravado, the implausible episodes of meeting "Yoda", who would literally appear and disappear at will, and who was supposed to be a member of China's "KGB", left me believing that Jim was weaving a fantasy tale that incorporated every Western impression of China and her people. Too much of what I read contradicted what I had myself experienced on my trips to China. But, I kept thinking, "Perhaps I don't walk in the same circles as Jim. Perhaps what he describes could have happened." That possibility was shattered in chapter 13 of Jim's book, "The Great Wailing Wall".
Jim starts this chapter with "Yoda", his secret Chinese army intelligence benefactor, telling Jim he had arranged a trip for him to learn an important lesson. "Dr. Garrow," explained Yoda's two associates, "we are going to show you something which may shock you, but it will give you an understanding of what we Chinese think and where we come from.” Jim goes on to matter-of-factually state that "We headed for Yunnan province, about two hours from the city of Kunming." Jim presents this as a "day trip", which struck me as odd given that Kunming is over a thousand kilometers from Chongqing. Distance aside, Jim recounts how he was brought to a Buddhist temple outside Kunming, and given over to two monks who escorted Jim on a walk.
More stairs, but this time leading down toward a small valley. These stairs were made of wood, and not nearly so wide as their marble counterparts.
More stairs to the right, then to the left; then we reached a steep, rough terrain, which we proceeded to climb. At the top, I was looking across a valley about five hundred yards wide. It wasn’t a deep valley, and I could see across to a meandering wall that looked something like a miniature version of the Great Wall.
I felt sure that this part of the temple grounds was not part of the usual tour, and I could not imagine why I was being brought here.
At this point, the monks motioned me to move ahead on my own, so I walked toward the wall. From a distance, I thought I was looking at bundles of wood stacked neatly up to the point of a narrow pagoda-style roof, presumably to keep the wood safe from rain. Overall, I took the wall to be about one hundred feet long and about five feet high. As I got closer still, it looked as though the bundles had been wrapped in very elaborately embroidered brocade, mostly red backgrounds with brightly colored embellishments. The bundles at the top were still vividly colored, but as my eyes moved toward the bottom of the wall, the bundles were more faded and tattered.
I was now directly in front of the wall, and close enough to touch the packages if I wanted to. I didn’t; I couldn’t.
My arms hung limply at my sides, and it felt as if all the air in my lungs had been sucked out of me. I don’t remember for certain if I said anything. If I did, it would have been, “Oh, my God.”
Jim discloses that he was looking at a wall comprised of hundreds upon hundreds of infant bodies, all wrapped in Buddhist ceremonial fabrics, stacked one upon another. Again, Garrow provides no clues with which to test the veracity of this statement, and its purpose seems designed to re-enforce the Western view that the Chinese kill their unwanted daughter's wholesale, against all verifiable evidence to the contrary. (For a short overview of different "Blood Libel" accusations in history, read "Fetus Food: Another Urban Legend Busted", eSkeptic, March 21, 2012).
Adoptive families from China will no doubt be interested in knowing what his book says about his work to bring unwanted babies into China's orphanages in order for them to be adopted internationally. While he is quite outspoken in private conversations and correspondence about the destination of most of the children he has supposedly rescued, the book is almost completely silent about his interactions with China's orphanages. He does recount one story involving Yoda, his protective intelligence officer, and an orphanage in Chongqing Municipality. Yoda learned that this unnamed orphanage had been accepting infant girls, only to turn around and sell them to sex traders, who would apparently raise the children for 15 years before using them in the sex trade. One can of course question the financial and logistical logic behind such scheme, but what is interesting to read in Jim's book is how Yoda handled it (remembering that Yoda is all powerful):
"Of course, I heard about it later; and once again, I did not ask for particulars. In one day, the entire orphanage was closed, and all of its people gone. When I say gone, I mean they permanently disappeared. An angry Yoda was like the sword of the Lord, smiting all who were sinners. These people were the worst of sinners, and no one, including me, ever asked what happened to them. The babies and children were saved. That was the only justice to focus on." (p. 82)
Another episode ends similarly, when one of Garrow's infants is kidnapped (I am not making this up) by Chinese gangs. Three days later, Yoda, using his extensive network of the Chinese underworld, retrieves the child.
"First, [Yoda] brought in the proverbial big guns to squelch any grumblings in the town. Along with the big guns came lots of cash to everyone who might pose a problem, including the parents, both adoptive and birth. Then Yoda put out the word through everyone who at any level had any dealings with our operation. “If you ever do such a thing again, if you steal one of our children or cause the death of anyone in our organization, you will be dead. Not just you, but everyone in your family and everyone you know.” Those were not idle words. And to our staff: “If they use a knife on you, use a gun on them. If they use a gun . . .” And the escalation would have no limits. Nor did Yoda’s controlled and focused rage have any limits. Various newspapers picked up the story, and certainly helped to spread Yoda’s “good word.” (p. 110-111)
As I stated, Garrow mentions no particulars about this orphanage, or any of his other stories. But being familiar with all of the orphanages in Chongqing, I can attest that none of them have "disappeared". Orphanages have closed, but we are still in contact with the directors and other employees.
Garrow does recount a few adoptions into the U.S. (but not Canada), but even these experiences lack the "ring of truth" for those who have personally walked through the paperwork and logistical maze of U.S. Immigration procedures. As I pointed out above, Garrow seems to maintain that all one needs to do to obtain a Chinese infant is to procure some forged adoption documents and show up at the U.S. border with child in hand. He seems ignorant of, or completely ignores, the pre-adoption approvals required (I-600, CCAA approvals, etc.) to obtain an entry visa for the child to enter the U.S.
What struck me as odd, however, was the nearly complete absence of any mention of Jim working with any of China's orphanages. In fact, a reader of "The Pink Pagoda" would finish with the impression that nearly all of the unwanted children had been adopted inside China. This impression runs completely contrary to what Jim told me and others in his interviews, in which he proudly boasted of working with four internationally adopting orphanages in Chongqing, from which he claimed that 80% of the children adopted came as a result of his work, and with hundreds of other such orphanages across China. His website continues to encourage U.S. adoptive families to "ascertain if we have been part of the process of saving your babies in China." Although in his book he claims that his first "save" was in 2000 (which he also confirmed in other interviews, including mine), he recently responded to a family with children adopted in the late 1990s from Anhui and Jiangxi Provinces thusly: "To be quite frank our work encompassed so many of the children rescued in the late 90's and up until recent days that there is a real possibility that your daughters were handled by our folks." He continued to contradict previous interviews and his own book by stating: "We never placed any children in orphanages after 2000. All the babies from then on with only a few exceptions were adopted internally by barren Chinese couples." It seems that Jim's story constantly changes depending on whom he is addressing.
The overall issue with Jim's book is that he provides no specific names, places, or events with which to confirm his story, from the "Xinyi" episode at the start, to his nomination for a Noble Peace Prize in 2009 at the end. In that episode an anonymous Chinese official asks Jim for permission to nominate him for the Peace Prize. There is no name of this official to research. Garrow goes on to say he was beaten for the Prize by President Obama, a man Garrow openly despises, and goes so far as to publish his letter of congratulations to the President. Readers familiar with the nomination process will realize that thousands of members are on the nomination committee, and the winner is nominated by literally thousands of those members. Nominees are not made known for 50 years, so we can't even determine if his nomination occurred. However, one can see that even if Garrow's nomination by the nameless Chinese official were actual, Garrow would not have received anywhere near the votes to present any competition for President Obama or the other top contenders. Thus, chapter 30 of his book, "The Nobel Peace Prize Scandal", in which he writes President Obama and states "We may have lost the Nobel Peace Prize to you, President Obama, but I believe that there is a higher purpose to every event in our lives" (p.149) is without doubt one of the most brazen and unprovable assertions in the book. And that is saying a lot.
In the end Garrow's story will be like those of other religious "prophets" to whom God has supposedly spoken: Outsiders will be able to point out inconsistencies, attack the veracity of the details, and question the validity of the events recounted. But believers in Jim's story will discount such problems, and insist that since such issues can't be totally disproved, they could be true. Thus, Garrow's story will be viewed as "a story told from a dream" by those who see it skeptically, but as the work of God by those who share Garrow's faith in "saving" children from China.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Research-China.Org's Birth Parent Search Group
I have received a lot of inquiries over the past week about membership in our recently launched Chinese Birth Parent Search Group. Since most of the e-mails ask the same questions, I thought I would take an opportunity to address some of the most common questions and concerns.
First, the group was started because it was recognized that most of the other birth parent search groups in existence suffered from some serious handicaps. These include an unwarranted fear of legal action should members on a group speak negatively of an adoption agency, researcher, or other entity, resulting in members's inability to openly discuss project results, tactics, and success rates of searchers. This, in my opinion, seriously undermined the value of these groups.
Second, because many adoptive families lack an overall perspective of their child's orphanage program, to say nothing of the China program in general, valuable time is often wasted discussing options for searching that in practice are highly ineffective, and often counter-productive to a successful search. For example, a common "search" technique employed by adoptive families is the placement of posters and other notices around an area. While this idea may sound promising in theory, in practice it often damages the chances for a successful search.
As a result of these problems in other groups, Research-China.Org decided to form an "invitation-only" group of committed adoptive families with the goal of forming an open, non-restricted and informed group of families willing to share successful ideas, and to discuss issues and problems with searching in orphanages across China.
Because we feel this group is for "non-beginners", a requirement to gaining membership in our group is the purchase of our Birth Parent Search Analysis. We instigated this requirement to insure that each member was as educated about the obstacles and opportunities related to their specific child as possible. How can an adoptive family know, for example, if putting up posters would help or hurt their chances of a successful search if they are not fully aware of the situation found in their child's orphanage? To take a well-known example, an adoptive family could commit significant financial resources to searching for a birth family in the Changning, Hengshan or Qidong orphanages in Hunan Province, unaware that over 90% of the children adopted from those orphanages originated in Guangdong Province. Thus, a requirement to join the group is the purchase of our "Birth Parent Search Analysis", in order to insure that every member is "up to speed" on their child's orphanage. This insures that the conversations on the search group are educated and informed.
There are plenty of generic search groups available for adoptive families, and we did not feel the world needed another one. But we felt that a serious search group, comprised of informed and knowledgeable families, would be an asset to the adoption community. Our search group, combined with the information contained in our "Birth Parent Search Analysis", is a powerful tool to educate families on the viability of a successful search, and what steps should be taken to maximize the chances of a successful search.
First, the group was started because it was recognized that most of the other birth parent search groups in existence suffered from some serious handicaps. These include an unwarranted fear of legal action should members on a group speak negatively of an adoption agency, researcher, or other entity, resulting in members's inability to openly discuss project results, tactics, and success rates of searchers. This, in my opinion, seriously undermined the value of these groups.
Second, because many adoptive families lack an overall perspective of their child's orphanage program, to say nothing of the China program in general, valuable time is often wasted discussing options for searching that in practice are highly ineffective, and often counter-productive to a successful search. For example, a common "search" technique employed by adoptive families is the placement of posters and other notices around an area. While this idea may sound promising in theory, in practice it often damages the chances for a successful search.
As a result of these problems in other groups, Research-China.Org decided to form an "invitation-only" group of committed adoptive families with the goal of forming an open, non-restricted and informed group of families willing to share successful ideas, and to discuss issues and problems with searching in orphanages across China.
Because we feel this group is for "non-beginners", a requirement to gaining membership in our group is the purchase of our Birth Parent Search Analysis. We instigated this requirement to insure that each member was as educated about the obstacles and opportunities related to their specific child as possible. How can an adoptive family know, for example, if putting up posters would help or hurt their chances of a successful search if they are not fully aware of the situation found in their child's orphanage? To take a well-known example, an adoptive family could commit significant financial resources to searching for a birth family in the Changning, Hengshan or Qidong orphanages in Hunan Province, unaware that over 90% of the children adopted from those orphanages originated in Guangdong Province. Thus, a requirement to join the group is the purchase of our "Birth Parent Search Analysis", in order to insure that every member is "up to speed" on their child's orphanage. This insures that the conversations on the search group are educated and informed.
There are plenty of generic search groups available for adoptive families, and we did not feel the world needed another one. But we felt that a serious search group, comprised of informed and knowledgeable families, would be an asset to the adoption community. Our search group, combined with the information contained in our "Birth Parent Search Analysis", is a powerful tool to educate families on the viability of a successful search, and what steps should be taken to maximize the chances of a successful search.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)