Korean Adoptee Wins Right in Korean Court to Meet Her Korean Father, And Be Registered on Family Registry

This is a breakthrough ruling for Korean adoptees. A Korean court June 12 ruled in favor of adoptee Kang Mee-sook, adoptive name Kara Bos, who was raised in the U.S. She now has the legal right to meet her Korean father, and be listed on his family registry. She had originally searched for her mother to no avail, and then found through DNA that she had a 99.99 biological connection to a Korean man named Kang. He and his family, however, refused to meet with her, and so she took action through the Korean courts. 

This ruling means that she can be registered on her father’s Korean family registry as “a person acknowledged,” which is a significant part of the Korean family law system. She was born out of wedlock, and still hopes to meet her mother. She will meet her father on Monday in Korea.

As an adoptive parent, I have long held that adoptees should have the right to their own identity as a civil and human right. This is an enormous groundbreaking ruling for Korean adoptees, who make up the largest segment of international adoptees, and could set a precedent of sorts for other international adoptees seeking access to their identity and information. I wish Kang Mee-sook/Kara Bos all the best.

I had previously written about the case here.

You can read an English version of the story from a Korean newspaper here.

Here is a link to a New York Times story about the case.

This is a landmark case for international adoption adoptee rights and could perhaps have ramifications for other adoptees searching for their truths.

Korean Adoptee Files Paternity Suit Against (For?) Her Korean Father

Kara Bos was adopted from Korea to the US when she was 2 years old. Now, 36 years later, she has filed a paternity suit in Korea to be legally recognized by her Korean father. 

As many adoptees have done, Kara used DNA testing to locate Korean family members. Following up on results which connected her to a cousin and nephew, Kara traveled to Seoul and took DNA tests there. Those results identified an 85 year old Gangnam man with 99.9% probability of being her father. Kara apparently has two half-sisters in Korea, and they have have refused to connect directly with the man she believes to be her Korean father. 

On May 29, 2020, a court hearing in Seoul is scheduled to take place in order to enter Kara in the father’s family registry. The Korean family registry is an important and historical part of Korean culture, as it officially identifies family members and thus can affect citizenship, inheritance, and more.

Among the reasons Kara wants to meet her Korean father is to learn why she was abandoned, and to have information about her mother. “He is my only link to finding out who my mother is, as my adoption documents list only ‘abandoned.'”

Kara says that adoptees “need to know who our parents are, where we come from, and why we were abandoned, and the Korean government doesn’t do anything to help us with that. We want truth. We want answers to our past.” 

“I want my story told so that Korea understand the excruciating pain and rejection an adoptee has to go through even as an adult on their return to find out their birth story.”

Read the Manila Bulletin article here: “Korean-American adoptee files landmark paternity suit against her biological father in South Korea.”

The Korean adoptee community has been especially active in promoting DNA testing. Here is one source for information and tests.

Remembering Hana Williams, 9 Years After Her Death

Today is the 9th anniversary of the death of 13-year-old Hanna Williams, whose name was also Hana Alemu. Two years after her death, her adoptive parents were jailed for decades in 2013 for homicide by abuse (the charge against Carri Williams, the adoptive mother) and for manslaughter (the charge against Larry Williams, the adoptive father).

Every May 12, and on many other days as well, my thoughts turn to Hana. On May 12, 2011, Hana died outside her adoptive family’s home, due to hypothermia and malnutrition. She’d arrived in the U.S. from Ethiopia in 2008, and died weighing less than she had upon arrival. Her time in America began with a semblance of love, and devolved into cruelty, torture (the use of torture was part of the homicide by abuse charge), physical and emotional abuse, and ultimately death.

She would have turned 22 this year, had she lived.

Larry and Carri also had 7 biological children, who all, I am guessing, are legal adults now. They witnessed all the things that happened to Hana, as well as to the Williamses’ other adopted Ethiopian child, Immanuel. He was abused also, and Larry and Carri were charged and convicted for their abuse of Immanuel. I don’t know how any of the children are doing now. The testimony of the siblings who testified in court, who were also ultimately victims here, played an important role in the conviction of Larry and Carri.

In 2018, Ethiopia ended international adoptions. Hana’s death played a large part in that decision. as many Ethiopians worried about the fate of their children sent away for adoption. Most Ethiopian adoptees do well, of course, though some struggle with the trauma and grief that can be part of adoption. I know some adoptees who are placed for adoption due to medical conditions that are essentially untreatable in Ethiopia, and am happy to say that the American and the Ethiopian families have stayed in contact, which is wonderful. Increasing numbers of adoptees are searching for and reuniting with their Ethiopian families, a complicated journey. For adoptees and for Ethiopian families who want to search, consider contacting Beteseb Felega/Ethiopian Adoption Connection, a wonderful resource. Others, please consider donating to their work.

Many Ethiopian adoptees have searched and reunited with their Ethiopian families, including my twin daughters. My daughters are both mothers now themselves—what a blessing. My older granddaughter met her grandmother, aunts, uncles, and cousins in Ethiopia. My younger granddaughter is 8 months old now, and I hope she has a chance to meet all her Ethiopian relatives as well.

While some international adoptees are genuine orphans, with no living parents or other relatives, the vast majority are not orphans. Hana had relatives in Ethiopia. I think of them today as well, of course. May Hana rest in power, justice, and peace. We have not forgotten you.

May all children be safe and loved.

An adoption agency photo of Hana in Ethiopia, prior to her adoption in 2008
.

There are many ways to support vulnerable children and families in Ethiopia, and I encourage you to do so. Adoption is by no means the only way to ensure that children grow up safely and happily. Organizations that support HIV+ children, that empower women and literacy for girls, that train midwives and provide maternal care, that bring electricity to rural regions, that build schools and libraries: there are many wonderful, transparent, and effective nonprofits/non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) working with Ethiopians in the community to help children.

2019 Stats on Intercountry Adoptions: Declines and Omissions

The U.S. State Department has released the 2019 international adoption statistics. There were a total of 2971 children adopted to the U.S. last year. There were 4059 in 2018; numbers have been dropping for years. Of that 2019 total, about half came from 4 countries: China, Colombia, India and Ukraine combined. From the U.S., 56 children were placed for international adoption in Canada, Mexico, Netherlands, and elsewhere. In 2018, there were 81 U.S. children placed for adoption overseas, according to the State Department.

Please read through the report and look at the numbers. Here are some phrases you won’t find:


• “citizenship problems and deportations of adult adoptees,”
• “post-adoption services offered to birth parents,”
• “the tremendous need for better training for prospective parents in regard to racial identity and racism in the U.S.,”
• and “we are deeply involved with other nations to improve efforts for adoptee search/reunion and family preservation.”

You will absolutely see phrases like this:


“…to advocate for the protection, welfare, and best interests of children in need of permanent, loving families, and to assist prospective U.S. adoptive parents in realizing their dreams of creating or expanding their families.”


“…the ultimate aim of preserving and enhancing the viability of intercountry adoption in the United States.”


I have so much to say, and hope to provide a more detailed post later. In the meantime, here are some pull quotes from the report, followed by my brief comments in italics.


“In September 2019, we hosted an Adoption Symposium, “Strengthening Practice for the Future of Intercountry Adoption,” which convened more than 120 interested stakeholders, including representatives from adoption service providers (ASPs), advocacy organizations, U.S. government agencies, and the U.S. accrediting entity, Intercountry Adoption Accreditation and Maintenance Entity, Inc. (IAAME), as well as adoptive parents, birth parents, adult adoptees, and Congressional staffers.”


My understanding is that adoptees were few in number, and there was one birth mother, who was born and raised in the U.S., and placed a child here in the U.S. I’d guess that the ASP reps included many adoptive parents in their numbers. I do give credit for State reaching out for one of the first time to include adoptees and birth parents at the table, and I understand they did a great job, but there is still a very long way to go.

“While the overall number of intercountry adoptions to the United States declined from the previous year, 75% of that decline can be attributed to the decrease of intercountry adoption from two countries, China (a decrease of 656) and Ethiopia (a decrease of 166). In both cases, the reductions result from continued social, economic, or legal changes the Department previously observed and reported in those countries.”

In 2018, the Ethiopian Parliament officially ended international adoptions not, as is demurely phrased here, due to “continued social, economic, or legal changes,” so much as deep worry about the status of their children such as Hana Williams, who was murdered by her adoptive parents. The Ethiopian government also expressed concerns about the racism that permeates America, and stressed the need for in-country adoptions.


Additionally, there have been significant cases of fraud, corruption, and bribery in international adoption via U.S. agencies and/or their partner staff overseas. U.S. adoption agency staff have been indicted and convicted, and more than a few agencies have closed suddenly due to bankruptcy.


In any case, reports about the decline in the number of international adoptions should always include the perspectives of adult adoptees and of first/birth parents. When they are included in significant, meaningful numbers in these policy conversations, then perhaps genuine progress can be made in attributing reasons for the decline.


“The Department also hosted events overseas with members of the adoption community to discuss key issues in the adoption process. For example, U.S. Embassy Bogota hosted an Adoption Open House with more than 40 participants representing 15 U.S.-accredited ASPs, the Colombian Authorized Adoption Institutions, the Colombian Central Adoption authority, and the Office of Children’s Issues.”


Please note who is not listed as participating in the Open House: adult adoptees and first/birth parents. The U.S. Embassy in Bogotá missed a big opportunity there not to have the perspective of the thousands of Colombian adoptees and birth parents to discuss key issues in the adoption process.

“The Department’s new Senior Advisor for Children’s Issues, Michelle Bernier-Toth, appointed in December 2019, shares the commitment expressed at the Symposium and is actively engaging foreign government officials to advocate for the protection, welfare, and best interests of children in need of permanent, loving families, and to assist prospective U.S. adoptive parents in realizing their dreams of creating or expanding their families.”


There are elements of hope in this statement about advocacy for the protection, welfare, and the best interests of children, though there is tremendous disagreement in the adoption community as to what that should look like. What’s glaringly missing here is a strong, ethical call for family preservation, for orphan prevention, and for significant improvement in medical and mental health care for vulnerable women and children in particular. Arguably, I realize, that’s part of the mission of other U.S. government offices as well. Nonetheless, how great it would be to see it voiced in a report like this.


State’s ongoing focus on adoptive parents (mostly white, well educated, politically connected, and relatively well-off enough to both raise the $40,000-$50,000 to adopt and then get the adoption tax credit for it) and relative silence on, say, the post-adoption needs of international birth parents, or the citizenship status of adult adoptees, truly needs to change.(Citizenship is handled primarily through the Department of Homeland Security. State issues passports, a vital form of proof of U.S. citizenship.) Commenting this way about the help given to “adoptive parents in realizing their dreams of creating or expanding their families” continues the traditional and outdated Hallmark adoption narrative. I know: many adoptees do great, but many suffer abuse, neglect, depression, anxiety, and a disconnection with their culture and racial group. Imagine if we were routinely transparent and accurate about that. Imagine if our U.S. State Department worked with other countries to research status and improve outcomes of first/birth parents around the globe, after they placed their children for adoption. It is so easy to keep forgetting about that most vulnerable group. But: many international adoptees have found that they were never orphans, that their mothers thought about them every day, and that some of them were trafficked. The truth is coming out more every day.


Imagine if the State Department, working with other international governments, assisted international adoptees in realizing their dreams of searching for and reuniting with their families.


“Lastly, in FY 2019 families outside of the United States adopted 56 children from the United States to seven countries: Canada (24), the Netherlands (17), Mexico (6), Ireland (5), Belgium (1), Switzerland (1), and the United Kingdom (2).”


Most of the American children appear to have been placed from agencies in Florida and New Jersey. It’s often a shock to Americans to find out that the United States is also a sending country for the purpose of international adoption. I have heard, only anecdotally, that some black birth mothers decide to place their children overseas to escape the racism so prevalent here, and that some birth mothers wanted to place with gay couples and were prevented from doing so in the States. The U.S. didn’t used to keep any statistics about how many U.S. born children were adopted oversea. When the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption came into effect in the U.S. in 2008, we like every other sending country had to keep statistics on the numbers of outgoing cases. I do not believe statistics are kept on the race nor the outcomes of these placements. In any case, we do place our American children for adoption overseas.


Let me place the necessary “not all” disclaimers. Not all adoption agencies have corrupt, selfish, uncaring staff. Not all adoptees are unhappy. Not all birth parents suffer. There are efforts being made to help in terms of family preservation and orphan prevention. There need to be more of those efforts. So many more children could be helped.


Here’s the thing, though, about international adoption in 2020. There are hundreds if not thousands of international adult adoptees who are writing and speaking out about their experiences. We need to listen to them. The U.S. government has yet to agree that all international adoptees should be granted U.S. citizenship. That must change. Adoptees are still being left out of adoption policy-making. The post-adoption fate of first/birth mothers, fathers, siblings, grandparents, and other family members is rarely even considered, never mind studied or documented. The radical inequity of post-adoption services provided to international birth families compared to American adoptive families is astonishing, and we need to do a far better job here.


The statistics next year will be even lower, due to COVID-19, due to bans on air travel and closed visa offices. All around the world, nonprofits, governments, and businesses stopped. Adoptions have too, for the most part, during the pandemic.


So. Read the report. Listen to adoptees. Help empower women, educate girls, and support medical and mental health aid around the globe. Help preserve vulnerable families.

Update in Hana Williams’ Case: Carri Williams’ Petition Denied

A legal update: You may remember that in September 2019, the Washington state Court of Appeals refused to reverse the convictions of Larry and Carri Williams in the death of Ethiopian adoptee Hana Williams.

Today, the Court of Appeals turned down Carri Williams’ Personal Restraint Petition, which she had filed on October 29, 2019, in response to the September denial. I am not a lawyer; this is my understanding. The bottom line is that both Larry and Carri will remain in jail.

You can read the denial from the Court of Appeals here.

In 2013, Larry and Carri Williams were convicted for the homicide of Hana Williams and the abuse of Immanuel Williams. I wrote about the conviction and the sentencing here.

Hana, you remain in our hearts. Immanuel, we wish you peace and healing.

Wow Was I Wrong About Laura Ingraham

In my post yesterday about an international adoption conference held by the State Department, I briefly mentioned that conservative Fox channel host Laura Ingraham was a keynote speaker. I said the decision to have Ingraham there was “unfortunate.” I was wrong. I should have been far more forceful.

One of the first tenets of being a good accomplice for white accomplices in social justice work is to change your lens. My lens is that of a white Cisgender abled woman, the type that has traditionally held power and privilege in the world, second only to white Cisgender abled men. My lens is firmly socialized and established; I am a work in progress around reframing it. Another tenet for folks like me is not to center ourselves because (see the first tenet) we are pretty much always centered in history, advertising, opportunities, credibility.

When I wrote about Ingraham’s speaking at the adoption conference, I looked at it only through my lens, and centered my own experience. Ingraham wasn’t talking about me or for me or to me. I am an adoptive parent, as she is; beyond that, we have little in common. I can easily dismiss her and her impact. While I called her remarks about possibly moving migrant children into the U.S. adoption system “horrifying,” I shrugged my shoulders, and moved on.

Then I read a post by Melanie Chung-Sherman, a highly regarded therapist, a woman of color, an adopted person. Here is what she had to say about the choice of Ingraham as a speaker at the State Department conference:

“Did you know?? The U.S. Department of State felt it necessary and ever-so relevant to bring in Laura Ingraham to keynote before a closed adoption symposium addressing ‘adoption reform.’ Yes, that Laura Ingraham. 

Even worse–DOS invited fellow transracial adoptee advocates (friends of many) to speak about ‘reform’ while knowingly putting this known white supremacist, xenophobe, homophobic, transphobic, and ableist (who happens to be a TRIA parent) up on stage for them to sit and listen to from the beginning. 

It was aggressive, harmful, violent, and completely demeaning for those who have committed their lives to social justice, equity, and adoption reform. 

Yeah, I’m pissed.”

My eyes and mind were opened as I read this. I had not thoughtfully reflected on what hearing Ingraham speak might have felt to the international, transracial adult adoptees there. Once I did reflect, prompted by Melanie’s words, I realized how cloudy my lens was, and how I had centered myself.

I’ve subsequently heard that perhaps the State Department did not select Ingraham as a speaker; maybe the White House did. I don’t know much more than that. I recognize that disparate voices and varying opinions are part of politics. I understand that there were those in the audience who supported Ingraham’s remarks, and those who found them odious.

Anyone genuinely involved in adoption today should be aware that, for far too long, adoptive parents have held the microphone in adoption policy and practices, in media articles, and in the traditional, tired narrative that adoption is win-win-win and full of only happy endings. Of course there are wonderful outcomes and good decisions. Often, though, there are rough roads, lots of confusion and grief, and grappling with identity, loss, and unattainable information.

Handing the microphone, literally, to Laura Ingraham showed an astonishing lack of knowledge about what adoption conferences today should be: they should be focused on adoptees, and on birth parents. They should be the prominent speakers and guides that the government and media go to first. Having a controversial adoptive parent with anti-immigrant views at an adoption conference that for the first time centered international, transracial adoptees tainted but probably did not ruin other notable accomplishments. Next time, or at any adoption conference, there are many amazing, powerful adoptees who could be (should be) at the podium. Still, adoptees are now at the table for State Department policy formulation, and that is laudable.

As an adoptive parent, I’ll close with my promise to keep my eyes, heart, and mind more open to the voices and insights of adoptees and birth/first parents, and to keep working on my lens. I’ll close this post with the powerful words of Reshma McClintock on behalf of herself and other international adoptees who attended the State Department conference:


“Transracial/Inter Country Adoptees are one of the most resilient and determined people groups. At the US State Department Adoption Symposium we addressed adoptee voice elevation, citizenship, family preservation, rehoming, adoptee rights, and other important topics.

I used the opportunity I had to address attendees with this message: Adopted adults are the most valuable and untapped resource on the subject of adoption. We must be recognized and involved in adoption conversations. 

I‘m proud of my community and thankful for those who support the good work we are doing collectively. It is emotionally, physically, mentally, and financially exhausting, yet WE ARE OUT HERE.”

#AdopteeMovement

Is There Hope via the State Department Around International Adoption?

The U.S. State Department, responsible for the processing of thousands of international adoptions, had the audacity, courage, wherewithal, and optimism to hold a conference on adoption that includes not just the usual adoption agency folks and adoptive parents, but (wait for it) international, transracial adoptees and birth parents. Well done.

I was among those invited to the U.S. State Department’s symposium on “Strengthening the Practice of International Adoption.” So was my daughter Aselefech Evans, an Ethiopian adoptee. Neither of us were able to attend, in large part because we weren’t sure when Aselefech’s twin sister would give birth to her baby girl: the due date was September 7.

I am thrilled beyond words about my new beautiful granddaughter, who arrived on September 5. Everyone is doing well. Had Baby Aya notified us of her plans to arrived in the world, I might have joined the fascinating group invited by State. Oh to be a fly on those walls.

The symposium began yesterday and concludes later today. The agenda included topics such as caring for children in adversity, best practices in adoption, and the government’s role in intercountry adoption. There was a panel yesterday with adoptive parents, international adoptees, birth parents, and adoption service providers: I heard that was a lively conversation.

I am heartened by the fact that several adult adoptees are attending, speaking, and writing about the symposium. The list includes Dr. JaeRan Kim, who blogs brilliantly at Harlow’s Monkey, and Reshma McLintock of the powerful documentary Calcutta Is My Mother. Claudia Corrigan D’Arcy, the powerhouse behind Musings of the Lame: Exposing Adoption Truths, shared her perspective as a birth mother. How wonderful it would be if there were even more birth parents presenting, especially international ones, who are among the most marginalized voices in adoption.

Some of the usual folks such as the National Council for Adoption are also there. NCFA is not a marginalized group by any means. They’ve been mad at folks like me (who advocated against CHIFF) and particularly at the State Department, whom NCFA blames for the decline in adoptions.

One of the ways to assess an organization’s commitment to a cause is to see how their leadership reflects the cause. NCFA has, as best I can tell, one biracial adoptee on its Board of Directors, and no adoptees of color on staff. I don’t think there are any international adoptees at all on either staff or Board, never mind any international adoptees adopted at older ages. Both the Board and the staff are remarkably dominated by white people. A couple of them were adopted at birth; the Board chair was adopted, in (I’m guessing) the early 1950’s, when adoption practice was very different from today. He was a good friend of Bill Pierce’s, who some of us remember well. The current executive director of NCFA is an adoptive parent. (If I am incorrect about the transracial and international adoptees on staff or Board, NCFA, please let me know and I will correct my errors.)

I digress about NCFA because of the contrast with State’s decision to reach out intentionally to international, transracial adoptees and birth parents, not just agencies and adoptive parents. I find it unfortunate that State had Laura Ingraham, the Fox News show host, as a speaker. She’s the adoptive parent of children from Guatemala and Russia. She’s also known for describing the US-Mexico border detention facilities as “essentially summer camps” for migrant children, among other controversial remarks. In her speech yesterday, Ingraham suggested that the children entering at the border should enter the U.S. adoption system. I find this view horrifying for a number of reasons, and I understand Ingraham received some serious pushback.

I hope that the need for citizenship for all international adoptees received the attention it deserves. Take a look at Adoptees For Justice and Adoptee Rights Campaign for more information. I look forward to hearing more about how the issue was addressed at State’s conference.

International adoptions have great complexity. I think we are beginning to move away from the traditional narratives of adoptive parents and adoption agencies, and genuinely inviting and listening to international, transracial adoptees in regard to adoption policies. We need to do a much better job of inviting and listening to international birth parents as well. I’m not sure I would have predicted that the State Department would be taking a leadership role in bringing disparate voices together for “Strengthening Practice for the Future of Intercountry Adoptions,” as the conference is titled. Change is definitely in the air.

May all children have loving, safe families. May all of us keep working to make that so.

Larry and Carri Williams (Again) Denied New Trials in Murder of Hana Williams

This past June 2019, Larry and Carri Williams, convicted in 2013 of the homicide of their Ethiopian adopted daughter, requested new trials. Today, the Court of Appeals denied those requests. Larry and Carri will remain in jail.

Larry Williams was sentenced for 27 years, and Carri Williams for 36 years. They have been in jail since their jury trial in 2013. In 2015, they appealed their convictions, saying that evidence was incomplete and that the court made multiple errors. The appellate court denied their appeal.

This time, they argued that they received deficient legal representation, and that their convictions should be vacated; Carri asked to be re-sentenced for a lesser charge than first-degree manslaughter.

A hearing was held on Wednesday, June 12, in Seattle.

Today, the Appellate Court released their rulings. The judges, in a 43 page decision, rejected all of Carri’s claims about prosecutorial misconduct. The judges wrote: …”we conclude there were no constitutional errors giving rise to any actual prejudice and no fundamental defects resulting in a complete miscarriage of justice. Carri received a fair trial. We thus reject her….petition.”

In a 52 page decision, the Appellate Court also rejected Larry’s petition, which included 8 claims. They concluded their decision the same way as they did Carri’s: no constitutional errors and no fundamental defects in the trial.

I am not a lawyer, and I welcome lawyers to weigh in. The bottom line, though, I can state as a non-lawyer: the petitions were denied, and Larry and Carri will remain in jail.

The slip decision for Larry Williams in available here.

The slip decision for Carri Williams is available here.

Be aware that these lengthy decisions contain details about Hana’s life and death; they make for tough reading. May Hana rest in power and in peace.

Another Adoption Agency Worker Pleads Guilty to Fraud: This Time, In Uganda

You may be aware that, in 2014, the U.S. Justice Department brought charges of fraud and corruption against the staff of International Adoption Group for their work in Ethiopia. The three U.S. employees (Mary Mooney, James Harding, and Alisa Bivens) ultimately pleaded guilty and were sentenced in 2017.

This week, the Justice Department announced that Robin Longoria pleaded guilty to “Conspiracy to Facilitate Adoptions from Uganda Through Bribery and Fraud.”

Longoria was an adoption agency worker most recently with A Love Beyond Borders, a COA-Hague accredited adoption agency based in Denver, CO. She is still listed on their staff page.

Longoria pleaded guilty for “her role in a scheme to corruptly facilitate adoptions of Ugandan children through bribing Ugandan officials and defrauding U.S. adoptive parents and the U.S. Department of State.” The Justice Department notice says Longoria “managed aspects of an international program in an Ohio-based adoption agency.” Longoria worked for the now-closed agency European Adoption Consultants (EAC), based in Ohio.

The U.S. State Department debarred EAC in 2016, and upheld the debarment in 2017. In February 2017, the FBI raided EAC, “as part of an ongoing criminal investigation. According to LinkedIn, Longoria joined A Love Beyond Borders (ALBB) in February 2017.

ALBB has apparently removed Robin Longoria’s Staff profile from their page. I took the screenshot this morning.

Yesterday, Robin Longoria pleaded guilty in the Northern District of Ohio court to one count of conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) to commit wire fraud and to commit visa fraud.” Sentencing will take place on as yet unnamed date.

An FBI Special Agent said “We are pleased that Ms. Longoria has accepted responsibility for her role in facilitating an international adoption scam.”

All of us who have been involved in international adoption are also pleased about that. I find it significant that the Justice Department brought IAG to justice for their Ethiopia programs, and now Longoria has pleaded guilty to crimes in Uganda. I have no inside information, but feel confident that this guilty plea came as the result of some intensive investigations by the Justice Department over the course of years. “This defendant has admitted to playing a part in a conspiracy in which judges and other court officials…were paid bribes to corrupt the adoption process,” said a Justice Department attorney. Another said, “The defendant compromised protection for vulnerable Ugandan children…”

There are “co-conspirators” mentioned in the Justice Department press release. which suggests that others could be named. Longoria and her co-conspirators agreed to pay bribes in Uganda that were disguised as fees to corruptly influence “adoption-friendly judges;” they also concealed these bribes from the adoption agency’s clients, the adoptive parents. Further, Longoria and her co-conspirators created false documents for the State Department “to mislead it in its adjudication of visa applications for the Ugandan children being considered for adoption.”

Fraud, corruption, and deceit all underly the adoptions which Longoria and her co-conspirators facilitated. Their actions, along with those of the IAG staff, create storm clouds over other adoption agencies, and over the Hague Adoption Convention accreditation process. IAG staff lied to the Council on Accreditation on their application for Hague accreditation. COA renewed EAC’s accreditation in April 2016 for a period of four years.

COA no longer oversees the Hague accreditation process. As of August 2017, the sole accrediting entity is IAAME. Several adoption agencies have lost accreditation either temporarily or permanently since then; others have voluntarily given up their accreditation.

These legal and accreditation issues are important. They don’t, however, convey the heartache caused by these crimes: the Ugandan children and their original families, and the U.S. adoptive families. The damage done to them will remain forever. I have no doubt that a lot of people helped bring this case to fruition, and that the investigation took a lot of time and money. I am grateful for the integrity of those willing to pursue these cases, and I appreciate the work of the U.S. Justice Department, the U.S. State Department, and everyone involved.

Among those are the tireless folks of Reunite, which helps to preserve families and reunited those who have been separated by illicit adoptions in Uganda. Reunite sees this as “a first step in a much longer journey,” and hopes that justice will come “to all those in America and Uganda who were involved in these corrupt and unethical adoptions.” I hope so too.

Fugglers, Golliwogs, and Ugly Adoption Narratives

Fugglers: The (not) funny, ugly sensation with human-like teeth,

an adoption certificate, and a golliwog. They need to be stopped.

A popular plush toy with human-like teeth, marketed as repulsive, is filling up shelves on Target, Amazon, and many other sites. Here’s why we need to protest, and why the Fuggler company needs to revamp the marketing.

It’s not because of the weird human-like teeth, nor because of its general ugliness, which the company revels in. Creepy but whatever.

It’s not because of oversensitive parents. 

It’s because Fuggler uses an insulting, tired, ages-old marketing trope of adoption to promote these toys. 

“Adopt at Your Own Risk!” 

“Look deep into the vacant eyes of all the Fugglers up for adoption. Narrow it down to the one who repulses you the least. Or the most—we don’t know your life.”

“Take a hot sec to consider why you’re sabotaging your own happiness.”

Yep. That’s actually what they are saying. And in the final step of the Fuggler Adoption Process, “Remove your Fuggler from its box with great caution. Immediately regret your decision.”

Pretty funny, right? No. Not today, in a world where adult adoptees continue to be marginalized and their voices suppressed. Not in a world where actual human adoptees are re-homed liked animals. Not in a world where adoption, which can be full of love and joy, is also full of trauma and grief. Making fun of adoption should never be considered a terrific marketing ploy.

Stop.

To make things worse, there is at least one Fuggler that is a golliwog. Don’t know what that is? It’s a racist caricature, known well in England, with dark skin, big white eyes, big red lips: its roots are in the racism of minstrel shows and the depictions of Little Black Sambo. Did you know that British writer Agatha Christie published Ten Little N****** in 1939, a children’s poem about the deaths of 10 black children, the cover of which showed a golliwog lynched, hanging with blood dripping down? Here’s the cover, which at the time was well-received and accepted:

Here’s the golliwog in Fugglers:

The Fugglers come in many colors. This one should have been discarded, and made in a different color, with different eyes, and without red lips. 

Here’s the golliwog with its adoption certificate:

Please join us in demanding the removal of the racist golliwog toy. End the production of the dark brown Fuggler with white eyes and red lips. There are lots of other colors that can be used. It’s an easy fix.

Remove the outdated, harmful, grotesque adoption language. Surely you can come up with a better marketing approach in 2019

Contact SpinMasters, the Canadian-based branding company for Fuggler, at SpinMaster.com. On Twitter, they are @SpinMaster and @spinmasteruk.

Contact Fugglers at fuggler.com. On Twitter, they are @fugglers and on Insta, they are Fugglers.