| Type | Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle | Source | Last Checked |  |
 |
Advocates of international adoption are furious over a new federal policy related to tuberculosis testing that could disrupt plans for families adopting children from China and Ethiopia.
What do you think of the new policy?
#1 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:26 PM EDTWhats wrong with American children that need a home ?????? Also people who have like M.D. and the sorts, should not be allowed to even have children of their own because they are now making that childs life hell, because the child has M.D. also for the rest of their lives, and are supported by the tax payers for the rest of their lives too...... Is that fair to the child to be handy capped ? And is it fair to the tax payers who now have to foot the bill for that child... And if those handy capped people were not allowed to have children, it may end that disease for good......
You ask what's wrong with American children that need a home? - Nothing.
However, there are advantages to adopting a child from overseas. One is that the courts in other countries sever family rights and that's it. In this country, even after years of adoption some no account parent could surface and complain to a judge that they never gave up their rights to their child, even if they can't support them, want them back. Judges often side with these no account parents and take the child away from a family who has provided for them and more importantly loved them as their own.
The judges seem to care more for no account natural relatives than the family who expended many dollars but more important all that love just to see the child torn away.
Such is not good for the children. Thus adoption overseas in the long run is better for the children and the families who adopt them.
There is no excuse for what this new policy has done to these families, and children, waiting for adoption. Some bureaucrat really had his head up his @$$ on this one.
It is discrimination pure and simple. Adopted children of American families are held to a standard that children born overseas to an American couple do not have to face. Visitors to this country face no tests before coming on 90 day visitor Visas.
If adopted children were given immediate citizenship at adoption instead of having to travel to this country to receive citizenship, then no testing would be required.
So the only thing that stands between this girl and travel is just when / where she becomes a citizen for the CDC believes that adopted children have less rights than full citizens. This flies in the face of what the Statue of Liberty stands for and the CDC and its head should hang their heads in shame.
I have no problem with adults being quarantined until they pass health tests but children under 12 should have the right to travel to this country for top notch health care if needed.
Besides a physician called in by the CDC said on August 7th that children of this girl's age are not contagious.
The CDC is the culprit in this matter, as it's chief is / was a TB specialist that for some reason can't admit that this is a bad policy.
Everyone should be treated the same. If this policy saves one life---it would be worth it. Children testing positive are just that--positive--and could give TB to other people. Why take the chance.
I have to agree the government on this one. TB is making a resurgence in the U.S. I'm sorry that this happened to this child, but the greater population needs to be considered.
TB is coming in with the Illegal Immigrants. I worked in a Health Department for years and all the cases were illegal Immigrants. I don't know why they are singling out just the adopted children from foreign countries.
If TB is spread through the air (coughing), it seems like kids infected would be more likely, not less likely to spread the disease. I would have to agree with the CDC on this one... It is not a matter of emotions, it is a matter of spreading a potentially deadly disease (the antibiotic resistant strain). I feel bad for these orphans in other countries, but the CDC's intent on this situation was the safety of Americans. People looking to adopt can always start here in the US or make sure that the TB tests are completely cleared before proceeding in a foreign adoption.
What a ridiculous policy. How can the U.S. Government force parents to abandon a child simply because of a medical concern? Would this have happened if Harper had a different disease? How many visitors enter our country every day as tourists, never tested for TB? The fact that the CDC is attempting to show that it is serious about TB, at the expense of adopted children is obscene. They should feel ashamed of themselves.
#2 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 6:54 PM EDTIt's ridiculous!!!! I've adopted two children from Ukraine and it's a long, arduous process (but well worth it). The last thing families need (or waiting children need) is one more stupid barrier!!! Both of my children tested positive for TB but they have been treated and they're fine. They had negative chest x-rays too. I hope the CDC reconsiders this totally unnecessary policy.
#3 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:11 PM EDTWhat is wrong with the American children in need of adoption?? Why do people, such as yourself, choose to take children from other countries and there are thousands of children with special needs and thousands who are completely healthy right here in the states?! I don't make light of foreign children's plight, but there are kids right here who would love the care and warmth of your home just as much as the children from the Ukraine, China or elsewhere. I just don't understand.
I totally agree with what you have said...why don't the people who want to adopt first look in this country,,is it because they want a perfect child.. of course they do..
Here in Cali, the foster care system/CPS haven't had an overhaul since 1982 - it is very difficult to get a child out of the system due to rights of the so-called "parents", such as they are. My understanding is that this is a similar scenario in most states.
I don't have a perfect child. I don't know of any perfect child anywhere that is up for adoption.
1. Since when does anybody get to decide who someone else will adopt? If I chose adopt a child, it's nobody's business who or from where I adopt. I suppose if I adopted a child from another state someone would complain that I should have adopted in-state! Anyway, it seems that your point of view is that the problem isn't that some Americans are having unwanted children nor that adoption in the US is far more difficult than adoption from other countries, but rather it's that selfish people have these pesky rights to chose who they want to adopt?
(side note: I am married to a woman from another country, despite all the single women available right here in the USA. Was that wrong of me, too? I mean I probably could have found a similar woman somewhere in the US if I had tried harder, right? And there are lots of helpful services that could have helped me find such a woman; I see them advertising all the time! Come to think of it, I'm feeling pretty silly now - going off to some distant land and falling in love...)
2. The nationality of the child is not really the issue anyway. The fact is they have already adopted the child. It's too late for "You should have adopted an American orphan" and other such foolishness.
3. The issue is another well-intentioned law that has unintended effects. In this case, it singles out a group that is amongst the least likely to spread TB (adopted children) while ignoring millions of risky tourists and immigrants. Protecting US citizens from TB is important, but we need to be realistic in our risk analysis and/or more thoughtful during the legislative process.
Most of what you said is absurd to say the least. No it isn't anyone's business. You have your rights. I am curious what makes a person go online, travel overseas to adopt when I am sure there is someplace within walking distance of where they live. What is the driving force for that option?
As for "unwanted births" in the US: Isn't unwanted births in these other countries that is causing the need to solicit foreign adopters?
The law had the effect it was intended to have. Given some of the information I've seen here regarding TB, it is my sincere hope they make it even more restrictive.
I'm glad we agree they are free to adopt as they see fit.
I guess we have different ideas of absurdity. To me, it is absurd to question their motives for wanting to adopt Harper rather than any other child in the world. If it is out of mere curiosity that you pose your question, perhaps you can find more information in other venues where that issue is more relavent to the topic. This article is not about why they chose to adopt from China, but rather why Harper was not allowed to come home with her parents.
Yes, there are children who need parents all over the world. I'd be just as happy if some Chinese couple adopted a child from the US and gave tha child a good and loving home in China. I see no need to differentiate one situation from the other. If we want more children in the US to be adopted, perhaps we should change the adoption process in the US.
As I undestand it the law says that Harper is not allowed in to the US, but a US citizen who is in all other ways exactly the same as Harper is allowed in. Why is Harper a risk that must be kept out, but the US citizen is free to come in? They both pose exactly the same risk to the rest of us. That, to me, is a stupid law. I chose to call it an unintended effect b/c I like to attribute such things to ignorance rather than malice.
Doug in MD, it IS the government's business who immigrates to this country. My husband is a foreign national. We have TWICE done the green card route. A total pain in the patoots and expensive to boot. Yeah, the process ought to be overhauled, but if my husband had tested positive for TB or AIDS or anything else, the govt. has a perfect right to keep him out.
Doesn't matter if it is a family member or not, possible immigrants should be screened. What galls me is that they let all the illegals in this country run around infected everyone right and left.
I ended up with latent TB. Don't know how I got it, but I lived in San Francisco until recently, which has the most cases in the country. I am mad. I'm older for one thing, so the drug regimen is much more dangerous for me to take. (The drug regimen becomes more dangerous as people age.) I also am already taking medications for bipolar disorder that are already hard on the liver. In short, I can have liver failure at any moment , and constantly have to be monitored for it, just from the TB drugs. That makes my medical care expensive. The drug combination makes the regimen more dangerous. It is unfair to expose people to an airborne disease. Not all people are young and healthy to begin with, and it should be assumed that all can fight back.
Now latent TB like Cindy in CO describes is not dangerous, but can become so. Those children would be allowed to leave fairly quickly. If a child has active TB disease. Meaning: is contagious, then the drug regimen would take 9-12 months to complete.
For prospective parents, this is what I have to say: I too could not have children, but decided that maybe that's because God meant for me to be a doting aunt instead. I am tired of your selfishness, self-centeredness, and racism. There are plenty of brown American children to adopt and friends of mine adopted two brothers recently without problems. Frankly, I don't think most of you deserve children.
#4 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:42 PM EDTAmen!! Couldn't have said it better. What other reason could they have for going out of the country, spending thousands on top of thousands to adopt when adoption in the US is sorely needed?
"I am tired of your selfishness, self-centeredness, and racism."
Oh the horrible horrible selfish taking care of a needy child. How dare someone give a child a home!?!?!?!
"There are plenty of brown American children to adopt"
And you call these people racist?
You don't get it. If you want a US brown child, no matter the age, who has done nothing to no one, you can have that child in a month. I bet that child has already been screened and treated for TB even. My friends, who are white, too, are giving two, very young African American boys from Chicago a very good Suburban lifestyle. Those children are being given advantages. And there are advantages for us, too: Two less angry young men that we won't have to worry about running across in a dark alley 15 years from now.
I too am so sick of the selfish, self-centered, and racist people who take a child with absolutely nothing into a loving home and raise them with kindness and compassion so that they can grow up and become productive contributors to society. What a-holes!
Many of the people I know who were adopted did not grow up in the type of household you've described. When things go wrong, many adoptive parents have a tendency to blame it all on the child's genetics. Many adoptees that I know say they just weren't what their parents wanted. The problem with being able to pick and choose I guess.
Domestic adoption is great. International adoption is great. It doesn't matter folks. You are all missing the true point of what God asks us to do.
For all those on here trashing adoptive parents as being racist for choosing to go outside the States, you should really answer a simple question first. How many of those brown children have you adopted? If the answer is none, then you fit the perfect definition of a hypocrite. Since God's wishes were mentioned earlier, you should know that it is God's wishes for us to take care of the orphans from the east to the west. Look it up in the Bible, then argue with God instead of the adoptive parents who are dutifully fulfilling his wishes. People choose to adopt internationally for various reasons. For some, it is to avoid the pitfalls of the American system which on many occasions has shattered the adoptive parent's world by allowing a biological parent to simply change their mind, hire a lawyer and sue to get the child back. Many who have already gone through the pain of infertility would rather not go down such a treacherous road, and thus choose a more secure adoption process in another country. Others choose international adoption because they have seen the dire circumstances orphaned children face in many foreign countries and feel called to give those children a home.
You know what? Why is it really any of your business anyway. Is it your place to judge someone for giving a child a family simply because you don't understand why they do it? It really shouldn't matter what country the child is from or what color its skin is. It doesn't to me. So maybe the real racist here is you.
I am happy for any child who finds their family. If that child is from Asia, Africa or America, if that child is brown, black, yellow, red, white or polka-dotted, it doesn't matter to me. The main point is that the child now has a family and a home.
For all those who are pulling the racist card here, I'm sure you have at least one adopted "brown child" in your family right? Yeah...that's what I thought. If it makes you so passionate, why don't you stop talking the talk and go walk the walk. Go down to your nearest adoption agency and change a life!
Wow, do people honestly think it is okay to endanger the lives of people who would be exposed to this illness "for the sake of the children"? No one on that plane home will get a choice in whether they want to take one for the team. No one in the airport will get to opt out of exposure. I believe it is acceptable and correct procedure to quarantine a sick individual (regardless of age) until tests show there is no danger to others. TB is spread through the air so an airplane is the perfect oportunity to infect others. I feel for the child but I think protecting everyone is the only option.
#5 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:20 PM EDTHow many innocent people have to DIE so these well-meaning people can have their way????????
Who is going to pay for the treatments these children are going to receive?????? Even if it is covered by their insurance, others are going to have to pay a share........
IMO - Anyone that knowingly helps transmit a highly contagious disease to another human. Should face a death sentence and be required to pay ALL the health care expenses of the victim...........
#6 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:50 PM EDTJust how many people can die from being exposed to a non-contagious person?
If costs are covered by one's insurance how do others have to pay a share? What sort of economics is that?
So let's see, everyone who has given someone else AIDS should be given a death sentence? I'd rather guess if they have AIDS they pretty much already have a death sentence. Would you have them killed twice? Will you kill them first and then require them to pay the other's health care expenses? Or do they pay and then you kill them?
How is that justice?
This is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Change the policy now... use common sense!
#7 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:03 PM EDTOutraged,
EVERYONE that receives a visa into the USA and many other countries are screened for TB and other medical conditions......
Just because your children avoided the testing, does not make it right.........
Are you willing to pay ALL the health care expenses and be responsible for ANYONE that becomes infected, due to your actions???????????????
Your statement about children not coughing hard enough to transmit the TB germ is BS............. And you know it is.
I hope the next time you are on a international flight you and your family get to sit next to someone that is infected with TB......... Just remember that it is their right to share their disease with YOU........
When I was a child, I caught TB from my first grade teacher. This is a highly contagious disease that used to kill MANY people 100 years ago. It is a wasting disease they then called "consumption" because it consumed the ill person. There is no government policy on this that is going to make everyone happy. As someone who was ill as a child for years with this disease, I think both sides are right. It IS inhumane to treat potential adoptees this way. It is also foolish to expose everyone else to this disease. If you are feeling that the current policy is "WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!" then I suggest you do not understand how horrible this disease can be. Perhaps these children could be allowed to enter the country but be quarantined at home while taking medication until they are disease-free?
There was a conference call held on August 7 between the CDC, Department of State, congressional offices, adoptions agencies, attorneys, various independent doctors, and childrens organizations. During the call, the CDC asked a renowned expert to discuss the issue (Dr. Jeffrey R. Starke, M.D., FAAP of the Texas Childrens Hospital), who immediately and definitively stated that there were only 2 reported cases in the world of a child having been known to transmit TB and that he could comfortably state that more than 99% of children with active TB are not contagious. He stated that the culture tests on children are not reliable and implied that they are of little use in these situations.
For the record, the Scruggs Family was perfectly happy to go home and be quaranteened and even offered to take a private plane home, but the CDC would not allow that. This is discrimination against internationally adopted children pure and simple! If the CDC and the public were REALLY concerned about the risk of TB brought in from other countries, then why are they not testing vistors who are issued 90 day travel visas? Why do they not test foreign born bio children of Americans when they enter the US? If that is REALLY the concern, then test them ALL!
I guess many of you cannot read and comprehend.... the child has tested NEGATIVE!!!! Hence the reason for a waiver, besides that do you really think that her parents would bring her back to the states and not keep her quarantined and not get her medical help.
this is a precious child who deserves to have a family and not get a 'well I guess you can be an American Citizen but gee call us when you not sick' from our government. it's pitiful!
and Ms. Brenda -- boy, do you have a lot of anger, you poor thing! but i have a question for you, how in the H--- is it selfish to want to give love and life to another human being? and btw, families w/ children from ANY other race (including Asians!) would then have a transracial family not just those who adopt children who are AA.
#8 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 PM EDTYou avoided the question I'm afraid. Transracial for sure, but that can be acheived right here in the states. Why go thru the extra expense and effort to get a child from out of the country. In a way, this could be construed as being very unpatriotic. Because you do not like the "sort" of child available for adoption in the US, you go abroad. Alleviate that country's burden while leaving your own searching.
"Alleviate that country's burden while leaving your own searching."
Alleviate that child's need while others whine about it on the internet. Doesn't seem too bad to me.
that is deflection without providing any substance. The question is Why overseas and not right here where it is also desperately needed??
It is selfish to expose people to an airborne disease. Chances of survival of the treatment or the disease diminishes with age. Why are such generous people avoiding American "minority" children? Hence, black and Hispanic. Many of the American children end up in prison and the mental hospitals. Why aren't you more concerned about how American children turn out?
"The question is Why overseas and not right here where it is also desperately needed??"
Antoine, I don't really care whether the child is American, Canadian, Cambodian, or Nigerian.....a child is a child to me. If someone takes a needy child into their home to love, support, and care for, that is a GOOD thing.
"Why aren't you more concerned about how American children turn out?"
I'm concerned with ALL children, Brenda, not just the American ones. I'm not really sorry that I don't pick and choose certain children to be more concerned about than others.
Antoine -
Your disagreement with their decision to adopt from overseas is duly noted (over & over & over again).
Regardless of how many times you ask the question, no one in this discussion can answer that question on their behalf. In my admittedly unprofessional opinion, rational people don't fixate over such non-issues.
If you are genuinely curious about the topic, perhaps you can conduct your research at sites geared to that decision making process. This article is about why Harper could not come home with her parents. Shouldn't the discussion focus on that topic?
By the way it is not because of the TB; a US citizen who is exactly the same as Harper in every way (including health/medical condition) would be allowed to make the trip home. Nobody on this discussion has been able to explain why the one case is more or less dangerious than the other.
Hmm, if your adopting from a country other then your own, Well I think you are stealing from your country.
What would fix it, do not allow people to adopt outside the United States.
#9 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:07 PM EDTI am curious ... do you mind sharing about your domestic adoption experience. I love to hear happy endings!
AC Robertson, I think you have some anger issues you need to work through. When you get sick and your insurance asks "others" to pay, I hope you find kinder hearts than yours.
#10 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:07 PM EDTI have no problem with supporting those that have payed their share. The problem I have is those that want a FREE ride and feel no responsibility when they TAKE from others.....
Twenty-six years in the military and I have traveled around the world eight times during the last three years. I wonder how much you have traveled????????
On a 19 hour Thai Airways flight I caught a nasal infection that required CIPRO and three months to cure. Tell me about kinder hearts. Ha! Ha!
IMO anyone that is diagnosed with a contagious disease, should be placed on a NO Flight list. When they are cured and have a medical certification then they could request to be removed.......
FYI I have adopted two Thai children, sponsored two International Exchange Students, and received numerous visas. Accepting responsibility for your and your family is part of being a responsible Citizen of the world.........
I have also served my country in the military and been posted overseas for six years. Get off your high horse and stop looking down on others you don't even know.
The girl has tested negative for TB. She is also the legal child of two American citizens. This is no longer a public health issue.
Accepting responsibility for your family is probably the only correct thing you've said. Here is a family trying desperately to bring their daughter home and care for her. When you got sick on your 19 hour flight did you quarantine yourself and stay away from everybody for three months? Or, did you take reasonable precautions to make sure you didn't make others sick.? If you didn't quarantine yourself, then you must not have been taking care of your family.
Maybe you did not read the whole article......
However, Litchford said they were told Harper tested negative for TB, so they went ahead with their trip, hoping to bring her home. After arriving in China, they were told that Harper actually had tested positive for TB and that, under the new CDC regulations, she would have to undergo a series of tests to ensure she was TB-free, with results not expected for at least six week.
Why are the adoptors mad at the US CDC for enforcing a rule or law the adoptors (adults) knew was in place before they left to meet their adopted daughter? Why aren't they outgraged at the Chinese government for deliberately lying/misleading them about the child's health in order to get them to go through with the adoption?
If they have such a problem with the rule why did they proceed with the adoption? Why not ask for a different child? I mean they are going overseas to shop for a child, after all, when there are plenty of US children who are in need of a good family life (children of both color and caucasian birth). Not as trendy perhaps as an overseas child, but they are also in need inour country.
They were deliberately misled by the Chinese government, who told them they girl had tested negative until the prospective parents arrived in China. Then the Chinese government told them the girl really was positive.
Seems like the Chinese were just trying to get rid of a child who was seriously ill to get her off their hands and let someone else deal with the disease (e.g. let the US taxpayers or insurance companies pay). If TB wasn't a serious problem, why was she in the "special needs" program?
Why didn't the prospective adopters get more details about the "asthma-like problem" like a specific diagnosis? Of course the Chinese were lying and misleading them. Or at least that is gleaned from the parents side of the story since they stated they didn't know she was positive until they arrived in China.
Why do people who know about a real think it shouldn't apply to them, they are too special, and the rules only apply to others.
And by the way, why should a child become an American citizen because they were adopted by US citizens? They are still immigrants, regardless of their age, and should be allowed to make the decision on citizenship for themselves, once they are adults. The constitution says citizens are born in the US or of US parents overseas.
Will this proposed law limit the automatic citizenship to children under a certain age? Or can an American go to a foreign country and and adopt a 17 year old "child" (by law in most states) terrorist and bring that "child" back into the US as a citizen? Or could a US citizen make a nice income on adopting older "children" for cash in exchange for getting them a by-pass on the route to citizenship? Hmmmmmm
To Me-1267716:
You stated: "The constitution says citizens are born in the US or of US parents overseas."
The Constitution was written and approved over 200 years ago. Since that time a multitude of people have come to this country and obtained citizenship through methods prescribed by Congress.
Unless you are of Native American descent most likely some of this multitude were your ancestors as well. If you dispute this are you willing to become a non-US citizen since neither those ancestors born abroad under your definition would be citizens nor their off spring?
ME-1267716, This just went into effect July 1st. This family had no way of knowing this was going to happen to them. Have you ever heard of a family bringing home a terrorists? In most countries that allow international adoption they have age limits. In China the child can be no older than 13. So put your mind to rest about those Chinese terrorists. Also the child has to be classified as an orphan. The US requires a lot of proof of that status including police reports form the sending country. Seriously people at least know what the he** you are talking about before you throw out these racist comments. Let's see I guess we should never adopt from Oklahoma in case we adopt a terrorist. Yes, we have "our own" terrorists too.
Not true at all. The family DID know before leaving. The story said so. They were told that the child tested negative and that is why the left for China only to find out that the child had tested positive. They were deceived but not by the US government. It was China who deceived them. Had they been told the truth, they may have refrained from making the trip. None the less, they new the consequences before leaving and from my perspective accepted those consequences. Now they want to cry foul.
The law is what it is.
First of all, absolutely no one is going to die by letting these kids into the country. According to experts there have only been 2 reported cases EVER of a child transmitting TB... kids cannot cough hard enough to transmit the germs. Plus this child is on medication and is no longer considered contagious. It is not the doctors who have not cleared her to fly, its the US government.
But, that is not the issue, the issue is that an American couple legally adopted a child (recognized as finalized by both China and America) and then they were forced by our own government to abandon her because no one would listen to reason. She is not contagious, she is not a threat, she is a 4 year old very scared little girl.
I had 2 children who were born on US military bases overseas (in areas with high TB rates) and my children were never subjected to TB testing before they were allowed to enter the US. But, I have 2 adopted children (from the same part of the world) and they faced mandatory TB testing, medical testing, and vaccinations before they were allowed to enter the US. Doesn't make alot of sense does it?
Listen, there are hundreds of thousands of people who enter the US every year to immigrate and to visit and many of them are certainly TB positive. Orphans are literally a drop in the bucket of all immigrants but they have been singled out to receive these mandatory tests and visa denials. Again, doesn't make alot of sense does it? By stopping a 4 year old child from entering the US with her parents does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to protect the health of Americans... NOTHING.
Think about this one... a British couple who adopts a Chinese orphan can enter the US with their child with NO problems but an American couple has to fight our government and leave their child overseas with strangers...
#11 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:07 PM EDTLuckily, I can read, you're full of it.
Brenda,
Have you ever tried to adopt a child from the US? If not then you have no business telling us that chose other countries we don't deserve them. We were not able to take on multiple children at the same time. Blame the adoption laws in the US, they are geared at keeping children wtih their birth parents and they are not released for adoption until they have been shifted from foster home to foster home. If you haven't adopted you have no right judging those of us that do.
#12 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:09 PM EDTAdoption in the US is difficult. Sorry that we here believe in holding up the rights of families. It is a certainty, with some exceptions, that it is far better for the child to be with their birth family over an adopted family. However, you pointing out the struggle to adopt in the US speaks to your own weakness and selfishness. And yes, I have adopted- right here in the good old US of A. It was arduous and frustrating. But I would do it again the same way.
Can't we just be happy that an orphaned child gets a home, no matter where they come from? Thank you for adopting from the USA, Antoine. Thank you to those who "are selfish" and have adopted from overseas. Anybody who is willing to go through the ordeal of adoption has a great deal of selfless sacrifice to look forward to. I'm just glad that people are willing to do it.
I was an adopted child fro the US. Most of the friends I made never got adopted.
Antoine, adopting African American children in the US is not difficult at all.
OUtraged, the concern I think Brenda and I both are pointing to is for every family that adopts overseas, that is one more child in an orphanage here that may never find a home. That is one more child that becomes a statistic. One more child that becomes your burden and mine now and potentially forever. One more child the has a very high chance of being your assailant or mine years from now due to the neglect and lack of love they will undoubtedly receive. You can't complain about crime and violence if your actions directly or indirectly contribute to it. Yet the very people who choose to leave the states for adoption will be the very people clutching their purses in the malls, steering their little ones clear of "suspcious looking" adolescents, lamenting the rise of gang violence (which sociologist have already associated gang relations to a lack of a family unit) and the increase in taxes due to the prisons needed to house those forgotten ones.
What would happen, I wonder, if all those well meaning families gave some of that overwhelming love and adoration to just one American (regardless of race) child in an orphanage right here in the states? Could we see turn in state of our own soceity?
Ah yes, because after all, there's nothing wrong with children growing up without the love and support of a family as long as they aren't geographically located here!
Where do you come up with this stuff?
Another sad deflection. Just admit your bias. When our orphanages are no longer needed, then I can support the adoptions half way across the world. Why are you so against children here in need of that love and support of a family?
Again with your projection onto others.
Obviously, I see a child as a child. You see a child as an American child, or a Russian child. I care about them, you care about their nationality. I see a child helped, and I'm happy. You see a child helped, and you complain.
No I see a child that should have been helped but wasn't. Could have been helped but was denied. For what reason? Because it is fashionable, chic and easier to go Hollywood rather than help those right under nose.
Adoption is a positive thing no matter where someone is adopted from. Instead of trying to pull down those who are trying to do good and adopt a child, why not try and make it easier to adopt period? Why do we need to tell families trying to do a good thing the method and manner in which they must do it?
The point is that it is not worth debating whether adopting from the US is better than from overseas. Do you ask a person about to donate money why they chose one charity over another? Do they have some sort of plot to harm one group while helping another? I'm just happy that somebody is making the world a little bit better.
A CHILD HAS FOUND A HOME! BE HAPPY FOR THAT, AND STOP IMPUGNING THEIR MOTIVES.
I wish I could believe it was that simple. However my experience tells me otherwise.
We looked into adoption in the US. NO children under the age of 2 were available unless they had MAJOR helath issues. We were not able to take on a child with severe emotional of physical needs. ALl of you outraged by international adoption are geting your applications tomorrow to adopt in the US, right? If the US was my only choice we would not have adopted. It is absurd what they expect parents to endure in the US system. Our state would not even let us adopt unless we fostered first. I did not feel we could give a child back to his/her abusive drug addicted parent/s. We looked to China becasue we wanted a child under 2. If we are adopting we should have some say in where our confort level is. There are a lot of great people who survive the US foster care/adoption system. Good for them. We found our daughter in China. We are blessed to have her. I believe EVERY child deserves a family.
Antoine in MD - there are no orphanages ni the US - only overseas.....
Thank you Karen! I was just going to point that out. No orphanages at all in the US. Just another bit of misinformation about how "easy" it is to adopt domestically. But there certainly are many in other countries. And they are full of children in great need.
The policy should be enforced strictly.
#13 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:12 PM EDTJen thank you for explaining so well!
#14 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:14 PM EDTHow horrific! That poor little girl has been through so much already—the parents planned to get her treated, she has tested negative already, and kids can't even really spread the disease...what more does our government need. Give them a waiver already!
#15 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:23 PM EDTThis policy needs to be changed NOW. It is outrageous that this family must leave their daughter behind in China. This girl finally found her forever family and now she is be ripped apart from them. I can't even imagine the emotional trauma this young girl and her family is going thru. TRAGIC!
#16 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:24 PM EDTThis is truly sad. These children have a hard enough time. The CDC needs to reconsider its policy in relation to adopted children. These children should have the same rights as those born to the family. She is not contagious and she is a scared 4 year old child who has already suffered so much in her young life. Mom to one darling from China.
#17 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:25 PM EDTI am a Public Health Professional and run a TB clinic. The vast majority of our TB cases are foriegn born. This child's skin test for TB may be negative but in a child a negative skin test means very little. I am guessing that they are waiting for a specimen that was obtained from the child's lungs to show signs of the bacteria that is TB to grow on a culture plate. This can take 8 weeks. That is where the delay may be coming from. My question is someone in China must have known that this law was coming and also knew that this child was going to be adopted in July. Why not do these tests in May so the child could have been clear to leave? This sounds like very poor planning on the part of the adoption agency handling this adoption. I feel terrible for these parents and the child but the reality is the health of many are protected by these rules. Very young children generally do not spread TB even if they are infectious but this child is four not very young. I personally have seen children as young as 4 spread TB. Unfortunately in Public Health the rights of one may have to be denied to protect the rights of many. Ultimately this will end and these people will have their daughter. I do wish that all immigrants and those entering the US were subjected to these tests but that is not the case. Please remember the cost of treating one case of mulit drug or extra drug resistant TB can approach a million dollars. Yes, this family has insurance but what if their child infects someone who doesn't? Then it is the taxpayer that picks up this cost. I lean pretty far left on the political spectrum but we have to protect the health of many, even if it is at the cost of the rights of one.
#18 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:29 PM EDTThank you. TB is highly contagious and four years old does not qualify as very young. $$$$$ ONE MILLION to treat one case of multi-drug resistant TB.
What if this child was quarantined in this country with the best of medicines? Would that make any difference to those who oppose one child coming to this country?
If you are so afraid of this one child coming to this country, are you also willing to stop all flights from say Argentina where swine flu is supposedly rampant and a far more distinct threat than one tiny child in one place somewhere in the United States?
Are you also for getting the fence built on the Mexican border to keep all the illegal aliens who come across our Southern border from all countries south of the border, tested for nothing but end up working side by side with Americans all over the country?
Is it ok for these many to come but not one child? This must be the new math.
Jackie - I am not in favour of spreading TB in the US. However, I cannot understand how Harper is more of a risk to the rest of us, than some other 4-year-old in the same situation as Harper except that this hypothetical 4-year-old girl happens to already be a US citizen. As I understand it, the US citizen who is in all other ways exactly the same as Harper Scruggs is allowed to enter our country. Please explain to me why Harper is a threat to us all, but the other girl is not.
The child's lung fluids were tested and after the 8 week test, it was clear. The CDC will not accept it because even though the test was run by a VERY reputable hospital in China, it was not a "CDC" hospital.
Jackie, under the CDC mandated protocol, if the child's skin test had been negative she would have been granted the visa immediately (unless she is also HIV+ in which case the sputum test is required regardless of skin test results). In addition, the CDC/US Embassy mandate where and when the test can be done, NOT the agency. In the case of Ethiopia, there is one clinic (open about 15 hrs/wk) where it can be done and it can not be performed until after the child's new passport is issued - i.e. after every single other hurdle has been crossed and the parents normally already have travel arrangements in place by that time. The incidence of drug resistant TB is much lower than that in other countries (I don't know about China so I won't comment on that). The CDC also admits that the risk of transmission on an airplane by a child of that age is nil.
If the CDC and US gov't were truly interested in adopted children being TB negative, they would mandate that kids be tested at 6mo and 1yr home rather than just worrying about those who are on their way in. Many children (including those under 2 who aren't subject to the test) pass this skin test and immigrate to the US and are later found to have latent TB which didn't show up at their embassy test. And yet, there are no testing requirements for those who have already arrived.
The entire situation is blatent hypocrisy.
Excuse me, but I have lived in China. Bribery is everywhere, and I am not sure how reputable a reputable hospital there is. It may be a perfectly fine one, but it is hard to know. There are protocals which must be followed, they were set up to PROTECT the health of the American public. Balance one child against almost 300 million others....
Jackie,
The child has had 2 negative sputum tests and has been on antibiotics for 2 months. The CDC doesn't care... a rule is a rule! Further more... this is not China's policy or problem, it is ours and it is up to our government to fix it. This is hugely embarrassing to China and could adversely affect the thousands of Americans currently waiting to bring their children home.
The only way you are going to stop "foreign born" TB is to test absolutely everyone who flies into the US or crosses the border by car, bus, or on foot. Let's be real, orphans adopted by Americans are absolutely not the root cause of the increase in TB infections in the US. They are children of American citizens and should be given the same rights as biological children.
#19 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:38 PM EDTThis is cut and pasted from the story. I didn't see anything about 2 negative sputums.
Litchford said she and her husband were aware of the new regulations and also knew that Harper — being adopted under the “special needs” program — had asthma-like health problems.
However, Litchford said they were told Harper tested negative for TB, so they went ahead with their trip, hoping to bring her home. After arriving in China, they were told that Harper actually had tested positive for TB and that, under the new CDC regulations, she would have to undergo a series of tests to ensure she was TB-free, with results not expected for at least six weeks.
I agree with Jackie.....stop being so damn stubborn and hard headed. I sure don't want my grand kids to be infected bec ause you and other along with the adoptive parents based this on emotions. "Poor people now they have to leave their adoptive daughter there". It's not like she is being neglected for crying out loud. You have based your opinion on your own selfishness.....read what is being said and stop crying...it is what it is.....
Furthermore, yes there are a lot of kids out here thay needs love and care just like those "foreign" kids. We are trying to stop our country from becoming a "socialize country" but with all these foreign adoptions how the hell are we suppose to stop this. These children may grow up American Citizens but their roots are always going to be, in this case China....just like wild animals you raised them then they turn on you because that is their natural habitat....so shut up already!!!!!! .....and NO I am not angry just another tax payer who is tired of paying for others.
Who would these people you are paying for be? Would they be those auto workers who lost their jobs because people stopped buying gas guzzlers because the companies they worked for failed to read the market correctly? Would it be the iron workers whose jobs went overseas? Would it be people that like welfare more than they like work, which by the way, the majority are Caucasian? Would it just be for the money given away to the greedy banks and Wall Street crowd so they could continue to live in wealth at the expense of the blue collar worker?
I'm not sure about the socialized country comment but I ask you to remember we are a nation of immigrants from nearly, if not all the countries of the world. We are a melting pot of humanity. Are you saying that the American dream shouldn't or can't be everyone's dream?
Are comments calling other human beings wild animals really necessary to get your point across?
It may not have said that she had negative tests in the story but it does on their blog. The hospital is just not one of the "approved" clinics. There was a doctor from Children's hospital in Texas who is an expert in this area that stated more than 99% of children who have TB are not contagious. The question is why are only adopted children being targeted? If someone were to just fly into our country they would not be subject to this same law but they could spread the disease. This child is just caught in the ups and downs of a new law being worked out. There must be some type of time period where all of this can be ironed out and unfortunately it looks like Harper is caught in the middle of that. Her parents are in a rough place, she is no longer considered an orphan to China and they cannot bring her to their country. I am sure in time there will be more approved testing labs so that these tests can happen before adoption take place, as they are in other countries, but until then I am afraid that we are going to see more of these situations unless something is done.
This new policy is not specifically for internationally adopted children. It is intended for all foreign nationals or those of foreign birth (for those who want to argue whether she is US citizen or not) for whom we have knowledge of infection. Would you allow someone with TB (latent or active) to come into your house around your children and trust their health and lives to a percentage? 99% of children with this infection can't transmit the disease. That is very comforting to those who are infected by the 1% who can.
The new policy does not effect everyone. She has tested negative by a hospital that the CDC uses when they have questions about results in their approved labs. Yes, I would allow this child, with the testings she has done and medications she has received, to come into my home. I have a 1% chance of dying in a car accident but I still ride in cars, I bet you do as well. This child would only have LESS than a 1% chance of infecting others IF she still tested positive ... which she doesn't.
All you wanabe Angelina Jolie's, If this fad is to continue (overseas adoptions) It must be done with the general public's health of paramount concern. No chance of spreading this or other deadly diseases. Every american should Call You're Senator and Congressman to stop any bill that weakens americas laws in this regard !!!!
#20 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:40 PM EDTJ Nolan,
Look at the stats... you have a way higher chance of "catching" TB at a Red Sox game then becoming infected from a newly adopted orphan. All adoptive parents must sign paperwork at the US consulte saying that we will take the child in for a medical exam ASAP as when we get home. Did the guy next to you on the bus today have that exam???
And, by the way, I definitely chose to adopt because I am completely obsessed with Angelina Jolie. I want to be just like her... I might even have Brad Pitt's baby too :)
Looking out for the health of everyone, including the adopted children is extremely important. Exposing everyone to the risk of highly communicable diseases is never a good thing. But the government should have thought about this a long time ago. I believe this policy should be enforced, but I strongly believe that the adoptions that are already in progress, where the child has already bonded with the adoptive parents, should be exempt. Ripping these brand new families apart for an indefinite amount of time is abusive to the child involved. One can only imagine the amount of trauma and emotional scars these situations are inflicting on these innocent children. When hope and trust are damaged in such a young mind, it can take years or even a lifetime to restore it. I sincerely hope this child will be OK, psychologically.
#21 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:43 PM EDTGet politicians out of health care period !!!!!! The CDC says there is still a chance of spreading TB. The health care expert says its expensive to treat ,without Insurance this could be devastating. At the very least make all adoptive parents get a insurance policy to pay these bills and pay the person who gets TB pain & suffering !!!
#22 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:13 PM EDTEVERY adoptive parent HAS TO go thru a vigorous process INCLUDING verification that there IS insurance. It is part of the requirement including that you have the financial ability to provide for the child so those of you that complain about paying others bills have apparently NO clue. We have jobs we pay for our own insurance and that of the support of our family.
And as an adoptive family we choose to go international because this country the USofA cares more about deadbeat drug addicted no good parents that give up their kids just to one day decide to ruin that life of the child again including the “parents” that give all their heart to this child. How is that helping the child?
This is not going to change until the laws governing adoption in the US change to protect the children and NOT the looser parents that should have never been allowed to step back into that child’s life once a forever family has been found.
There is no way I would put my child, my family thru this knowingly. Bringing home a child from another country this is never a worry that the child has to be exposed to.
So you want process for finding homes in the US them the laws need to change here to allow that AND yes we did explore the option and for anybody that says adoption is easier international apparently has NO clue!!
You said it, MA. We explored the option too. In fact, I had also always assumed there were "so many American kids who needed a home" until we began looking into adoption.
Whenever I hear someone make a statement like the one above I know he/she has no idea what he/she is talking about. And I refuse to even enter a debate with someone unarmed with the experience.
As I was watching this video of this little 4 year old girl my little sister walked in to kiss me goodnight. Shes 5 and was adopted from China. It honestly breaks my heart to watch this video. I luckily have never been abandoned and live in an orphanage sharing a crib with 2 other babies. When we went to get my sister from the minute we saw her there was a bond. Sometimes people say oh is she adopted from China and I have to think for a minute because to me shes my little sister. My little sister looked at tons of pictures of our family while we were still in China she understood she was now a part of our family. Going to China (or wherever you adopt from) is the final stretch of a complex and long process. To have you daughter/son and sister not be able to come home with you I can't imagine that. Its so obvious the impact this has on the child. For many the first time in their life they've had someone that loves them and tells them were your "forever family" and then be forced to once again abandon this child is so wrong words can't even explain. Our agency required a full physical of my little sis within 24 hours of being home. So even if they required them to go straight to a US hospital and be checked before entering the community at least they would be with their family. In the future this can be done before the adoption but exceptions should definitely be made for those already with their child. My prayers go out to this family I can't even imagine how they must feel. I pray you will quickly be united with your daughter.
#23 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:25 PM EDTJackie, you make the most amount of sense.
#24 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:42 PM EDTGOOD!!!!!!!!!
It is the job of the CDC and the government to protect us from things just like this. Better be safe then sorry. If my kids ended up sick because these people did not want to be put out or Inconvenienced I would be really upset to say the least.
#25 - Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:55 PM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Follow msnbc.com health to get e-mail or watchlist alerts whenever new content is published, or subscribe via RSS:
Popular Articles & Seeds 
Obama wants school vending machines bannedOne bowl = 2 servings. F.D.A. may fix thatNewborn blood used in research angers parents9/11 health lawsuits raise credibility concernsGoodbye swine flu! Epidemic seems to be overThird-hand smoke a danger to babies, toddlersMan charged with operating on his own dogFirst lady begins fight against childhood obesity
Log In | Register
Start Tracking
Stop Tracking
