Features > November 5, 2007

Banana Republic to Baby Republic (cont’d)

“They [recruiters] are all around us,” says Méndez. “The lawyers from the capital have come to me and offered to pay me if I’ll supply them with a list of illiterate and poor women here in Tiquisate who have more children than they can handle.”

First Lady Wendy Berger, whose husband, Oscar Berger, will leave office next year, cast an incredulous glance when asked about the thousands of children who could likely end up institutionalized if the window closes on Guatemalan adoption—like they have elsewhere in Latin America, namely Nicaragua and El Salvador.

“What thousands of kids? Show them to me,” she says, adding that if American families didn’t buy them, lawyers wouldn’t be paying women for their children.

Since her husband became president in 2004, many American adoptive families who have children from Guatemala have sent Wendy Berger photo albums of their children, now happy in America. They do this to lobby Berger to keep the process open.

But Berger takes offense at the gesture. “I don’t come to your country and tell you how to do things, so please don’t come here and try to change our laws,” she says. “Adoption works very well in the United States. The problem is here in Guatemala.”

Toughening regulation on the Guatemalan adoption industry could help prevent the private sector from viewing children as a commodity, and it could keep these kids in their country and their culture.

But is shutting down the system the practical solution? After all, if these babies weren’t removed from their nests in their early days, they would never enjoy the fruits of the American middle class: food on the table, healthcare and education—not to mention iPods and prom nights.

An anecdotal story of a baby theft and recovery from Quetzaltenango, in the western highlands, provides few answers.

In 2005, foreign volunteers helped a birth mother find and legally reclaim the baby who was stolen from her at the maternity ward, placed in a foster home and on the verge of being adopted abroad. The happy reunion was shortlived, however. Within months of the return the unsupervised baby was killed by an abusive older brother—a tragedy that likely would have been prevented had the child been adopted into a healthy home in El Norte.

• subscribe to print magazine

  First Name Last Name Home Address City State Zip Code Email

  2-year, 24-issues, $44.95 1-year, 12-issue, $24.95

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  I see that Jacob Wheeler has a degree in “creative non-fiction” which is, unfortunately, what this article most certainly is.

  In his unbalanced account of “baby-stealing,” Mr. Wheeler neglects to mention that in response to concerns about the adoption system in Guatemala, the U.S. embassy instituted two DNA tests to make sure that children are not “stolen” for adoption.  A positive match between relinquishing mother and child is required for a child to be adopted to the U.S.

  His selective quotes from GuatAdopt and his references to American couples spending $25,000 to $30,000 and leaving “days or weeks later” (it took nine months for my son) “with no questions asked” and “lounging with their soon-to-be-adopted Mayan children” enjoying “the leisurely Latin American lifestyle” is an unfortunate caricature and does a disservice both to the many adoptive families who ask questions and push for reform and to the readers of In These Times.

  Mari

  Posted by meshopsi on Nov 5, 2007 at 10:30 AM

  Perhaps one might be happier if they merely aborted the children (better dead than in El Norte?)?

  Posted by wolf on Nov 5, 2007 at 10:41 AM

  Some of what Mr. Wheeler wrote is accurate but taken out of context and twisted to his own agenda.  I have to agree with the above two posters, is abortion more of an option or how about birth control? And the statement that we Americans spend $25,000 to $35,000 and leave days and weeks later is inaccurate and totally misrepresented.  You fail to mention the homestudy, background checks both on the state and federal level, INS approval process that can take months to complete as well as the two DNA tests that are done on baby and mother, Guatemalan family court and finally if all is right and in oder PGN approval and then you get submitted for a pink slip and then you can travel the few days to complet the adoption.  We are in the midst of our second adoption from Guatemala and I can assure you and your readers that the process is anything as simple as handing over money and you get your child. 

  Also, the stance by UNICEF that the children of poverty stricken countries not just Guatemala should have to languish in a system that doesn’t work just because they believe they should stay in their “own culture” and use international adoption as a last resort is absurd to me.  Children should be guaranteed a right to a family and permancy regardless of race, creed, or religon.  UNICEF’s beliefs are misguided and frankly border on racist in my opinion.

  I am not niave enough to believe that there isn’t some corruption that goes on in international adoption but the irregularities they speak of are few and far between as the old statement goes “don’t throw the baby out with the bath water” sure holds true here.  The system needs to be addressed but what about the children who live in poverty?  Maybe addressing the fundamental aspects of the societal issues that plague third world countries like malnutrition, family planning, education etc should be addressed and not attacking a vital role that international adoption plays here.  International adoption is not a cure-all to the woes of these countries and it can’t save them all but it has a role.
  Mary

  Posted by mpna on Nov 5, 2007 at 11:57 AM

  “Adoptive parents can spend approximately $25,000 to $30,000 to adopt from Guatemala, and most of them leave days or weeks later with their little ones cradled in their arms, and with no questions asked as to how the attorneys acquired their babies.”

  WHAT A PIECE OF GARBAGE REPORTING!!!!  Seriously!  Do you honestly think that the US would issue visas to children obtained in the fictitious way as you describe?  PLEASE, I want to slap sense into you.  Obviously you have no care in writing the truth.  Don’t you even have fact checkers?  We have been waiting for nearly a year to adopt a child from Guatemala.  Why so long?  Because of the rigorous red tape on both the US side and the Guatemala side.  To top it off, our adoption may never happen and a child may remain homeless.  You obviously did NO research. 

  YOU MAKE ME SICK!  You should be fired for this type of garbage.  To top it off in the “post your comments” section, it states “please be respectful in your comments"… yet you can report this kind of bull.

  Posted by Waiting Mommy on Nov 5, 2007 at 12:24 PM

  How sad. You have written (like most other media outlets) a poorly researched, one-sided, anti-adoption piece.You have jumped on the media bandwagon of bashing International adoption. Is there no such thing as balanced, well-researched, truthful journalism any more?

  This statement in particular is ridiculously innacurate: “Adoptive parents can spend approximately $25,000 to $30,000 to adopt from Guatemala, and most of them leave days or weeks later with their little ones cradled in their arms, and with no questions asked as to how the attorneys acquired their babies.” It took us 12 months to compete our adoption and we have a detailed report prepared by a Guatemalan family court appointed social worker that clearly details the origin of our adopted son and the reasons why his first mother chose relinquish him. We also have a photo of his first mother and the DNA lab results that prove she was indeed his biological mother.

  I could go on, but will let others correct the additional misleading and poorly reported information in this article.

  Creative non-fiction, indeed.

  Posted by Tomm on Nov 6, 2007 at 11:08 AM

• extended discussion >>>Continued...

  Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 9 posts.

Member Login

Also by Jacob Wheeler

• Don’t Tase Me, GOP!
  
• Caricaturing Danish Muslims
  
• The War That Never Ends
  Iraq Veterans Against the War's 'Winter Soldier' hearings revealed the awful truths of the occupation and the ongoing struggle for those who have returned home.
• Guatemala’s “Crime of the Century”
  
• Corporate Potluck
  Dietitians and their company sponsors make strange buffet fellows
• El Salvadors Patriot Act
  Last year the government adopted a "Special Law Against Acts of Terrorism," which gives police and judges leeway to clear the streets of demonstrators and imposes mandatory sentences of 60 years for what was once considered a freedom of expression