VISAKHAPATNAM: The waiting period for adoption of a child has been increasing for the prospective adoptive parents (PAPs) with each passing year in Andhra Pradesh. It is taking more than three to four years even for the referrals. For instance, only 90 children were placed for adoption in 2022-23, while thousands of PAPs registered their names for adoption with the 14 specialised adoption agencies of AP. Among the 90 children, 11 were intercountry adoptions. According to officials, more girls are being adopted in recent years, indicating a change in the society.

Speaking to TOI, Andhra Pradesh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights member Gondu Sitaram said that the long waiting period of the PAPs can be attributed to the fact that there are more waiting parents in comparison to a lesser number of children available for adoption in the state. "However, there should be no scope for any illegal adoptions, which may put the children at risk. The guidelines and rules formulated by Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) should be strictly followed for adoptions. Back in 2022, I had reported an illegal adoption case in Visakhapatnam to the police," said Sitaram.

The district children protection officer Ramesh said that the child welfare committee is taking care of these children. "Even for the children surrendered by parents due to financial issues or other problems, there will be a one month waiting period before registering them with CARA for adoptions. The limited number of adoptable children is making the wait longer for the PAPs," said Ramesh.

As per the eligibility criteria for the PAPs set in by CARA, they shall be physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially capable.

They shall not have any life-threatening medical condition. They should not have been convicted in a criminal act of any nature or accused in any case of child rights violation. No child shall be given for adoption to a couple unless they have at least two years of stable marital relationship except in the cases of relative or step-parent adoption.

With final adoption orders stalled in Maharashtra from January 11, about 170 prospective parents have been hit. However, international prospective parents are the worst hit as they have no right to foster

The joy was palpable even over the telephone. A call from a Mumbai-based adoption centre to a city in Europe in September 2022 reduced a couple in their mid-30s into a bundle of hugs and tears of joy. After a painful wait of almost 2.5 years, they were finally going to be parents to a 10-month-old. Giddy with joy, they clicked on an email attachment containing their daughter’s photograph.

The adoption process moved fast after that. In the first week of January, a District Magistrate (DM) concluded the hearing in their case, the penultimate step to adoption. The excited parents-to-be started planning their trip to India but that wasn’t to be.

On January 11, the Bombay HC directed the Maharashtra government not to transfer pending adoption proceedings to DMs, as mandated under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2021. In July 2021, the Rajya Sabha (RS) had passed an Amendment that transferred the power to issue adoption orders from civil courts to the DMs. The Amendment — which aimed to “strengthen” child protection under the JJ (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and ensure “faster” delivery of adoption cases — was passed despite protests and without any discussion in the RS.

In 2021, Kjersti Toppe (Sp) was called upon to investigate illegal adoptions to Norway. But the organization that asked for an investigation was not even given a meeting.

It was in October 2021, two weeks after Toppe had taken her seat in the minister's office in the Ministry of Children and Families, that she received a letter from the organization Romanticized immigration .

The four-page letter, which VG has seen, had a simple message: Illegal adoptions have taken place in Norway, probably on a larger scale than was known.

Romanticized immigration therefore asked for an independent investigation of Norwegian adoption practices.

The organization also asked for a meeting with Toppe.

https://truecrimedaily.com/2023/05/22/bakersfield-california-trezell-jacqueline-west-convicted-guilty-killing-son-orrin-abusing-orson/?fbclid=IwAR2Yxq4mmIUc6poKTLJh7FYoEZ5rALorNh5H8kOe3gnoHezd0SZGOqWfRNs_aem_th_AVQfEmWOdaRUIOTv2n1l9Q2Tg61oWxnVdYz9sMFx-GW6QBLHKEir2GCmtfZF5TCqSm0&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (TCD) -- A Central California couple has been convicted of several charges and acquitted on others in connection with the disappearance and deaths of their two young adopted sons.

Kern County Superior Court records show a jury found Trezell West and Jacqueline West guilty of second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, two counts of willful cruelty to children, and false report of emergency for the deaths of 4-year-old Orrin West and 3-year-old Orson West. The jury could not return a verdict on charges of conspire to commit a crime and another count of second-degree murder.

According to the Bakersfield Californian, the second-degree murder conviction relates to Orrin’s death, but the jury could not determine if they murdered Orson. There is reportedly a possibility that Kern County prosecutors may retry the defendants for the two charges the jurors could not agree on.

It concerns a request for a letter which the European Commission did not register

https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/documents_romanian_adoptees#comment-1130

Pforzheim. Lawyer - that's what it says on the announcement of the nominations for the election of city councilors in 2019. And that's behind the name of Oana Krichbaum. She is also referred to as such on the website of her Berlin employer. But is the wife of the CDU member of the Bundestag and European policy spokesman for the CDU/CSU parliamentary group Gunther Krichbaum even allowed to call herself that? That's what a PZ-news reader who doesn't want to be named asks.

The answer from the Berlin Bar Association, where Oana Krichbaum is registered, is clear: no. The lawyer has been licensed since May 2011 and is also listed in the Federal Bar Association's nationwide official list of lawyers - but as an "Advocat". The reason for this can be found in the law on the activities of European lawyers in Germany (EuRAG). This regulates the conditions under which lawyers from EU countries and Switzerland are allowed to work in Germany. It states, among other things, that European lawyers must use the professional title of their country of origin. In the case of Krichbaum, who studied in Romania, this is the designation “Advocat”.

When confronted with this legal situation, the Pforzheim city councilor was initially surprised, but after a period of reflection she commented in detail. She first clarifies that her application for admission to the Stuttgart Bar Association as a resident European lawyer was submitted in April 2011. In the application, the National Association of Bar Associations of Romania (Uniunea Nationala a Barourilor din Romania) confirmed that she had "acquired the status of a lawyer" and was "registered with the Bucharest Bar Association on July 3, 1991," she quotes. This means that she is “authorized to practice the profession of lawyer in accordance with Law 51/1995 on the organization and practice of the legal profession,” she clarifies. Krichbaum explains that she is not allowed to negotiate in German courts and is therefore only active in an advisory capacity.

Krichbaum then describes the dilemma with the legislation. On the one hand, there are the names from Greece, Croatia or Iceland that “need more translation” (Dikigoros, Odvjetnik/Odvjetnica and Lögmaur), says Krichbaum. On the other hand, the term “lawyer” applies in Liechtenstein or Austria. “This alone makes it clear that there is no 'ranking' within the terms, but that they are placed next to each other on an equal footing,” emphasizes Krichbaum.

“In everyday use, every lawyer from a state in the European Union will say that he is a lawyer,” Oana Krichbaum.

FOUND PARENTS: According to her adoption papers, Uma Feed was abandoned on the streets by her biological parents. Now she has come into contact with her biological mother, who tells a completely different story.

ADOPTION FROM SOUTH KOREA

Several adoptees from South Korea, who are listed as orphans in the adoption papers, have discovered that they were adopted against their parents' will.

South Korea's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) investigates the cases of people who have been adopted to, among others, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands from the 1960s to the early 1990s, as of today 334 cases.

There are approximately 6,500 adoptees from South Korea in Norway.

Mohammed Hasan (50) aka ‘Pappu’ from Quarsi area of Aligarh, UP has been sentenced to 20 years jail for raping his adopted minor daughter (10), originally a Hindu.

Hasan took the 3-year-old Hindu girl from a brick kiln around 8 years back. He claims to have ‘adopted’ her, and then changed the minor’s name and religion. Once the girl turned 9, he started sexually abusing her, as per a report in Dainik Jagran. Hasan has 2 sons and 2 daughters of his own.

His daughter-in-law found him raping the child on October 25 last year. A social worker who lived nearby lodged a complaint on October 27. Shockingly, or maybe not in our apathetic colonial secular State, it is alleged that police refused to lodge an FIR for 3 days. They called the minor child to the police station for ‘questioning’ in the absence of a woman constable.

BJYM’s local leaders Dharamvir Singh Lodhi and Saurabh Chaudhary approached the CO (Circle Officer) and got the FIR lodged. Thankfully, the case was then fast-tracked by the UP govt and after 15 hearings, a judgement was delivered within 41 days of the charges being finalized on April 4, by POCSO court judge Surendra Mohan Sahay.

Mohammed Hasan was convicted for the heinous crime and given 20 years imprisonment and fined Rs 50K. The girl is currently living in a shelter home – police has not been able to trace her original parents, and neither is there any documentation of her ‘adoption’.

Critics say 2009 reform creating a 'second-generation cutoff' unfairly targets adopted children

Canadian adoptive parents of foreign-born children are applauding a push to give their children citizenship rights equal to those of adoptees born on Canadian soil.

A parliamentary committee has introduced amendments which — if passed into law — would change a rule preventing internationally adopted children from automatically transmitting their citizenship by descent if they go on to have children outside of Canada.

Critics say the current law creates an unfair distinction between Canadian-born and international adoptees that risks negatively affecting the latter group of children, who may choose to study or work abroad as adults.

"There's a two-tiered system," said Kat Lanteigne. Her son Nathanael, 7, was born in Zambia.

NEW DELHI: The Centre has amended the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules to allow female and male government servants to avail of child adoption leave and paternity leave respectively, for pre-adoption foster care of a child aged below one year. In either case, the government employee should have less than two surviving children.

Before the latest amendment, Rule 43AA of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, entitled male government servants to a 15-day paternity leave within a period of six months from the date of valid adoption. Similarly, Rule 43B provided for a 180-days child adoption leave for female government employees immediately from the date of adoption.

To factor in the need for such leave during pre-adoption foster care as well, the department of personnel and training on May 15 notified the Central Civil Services (Leave) (Amendment) Rules, 2023, wherein the amended Rule 43AA states that paternity leave may be granted not only from the date of actual adoption but for pre-adoption foster care as well. In case the child is not taken as a ward by the government employee, such leave already availed shall be debited from any other kind of leave available to his credit.

Similarly, the amended Rule 43B allows female central government employees with less than two surviving children, to be granted child adoption leave for up to 180 days on accepting the child in pre-adoption foster care or on valid adoption, as the case may be. Such leave will be debited from any other category of leave available to the credit of the woman government employee, if the foster care is not followed by adoption of the child.

Salary equal to the pay drawn prior to proceeding on leave, shall be payable during the 15-day paternity leave in case of male employees and during the 180-day child adoption leave in case of female employees.