JAIPUR: A newborn always gets love and affection from his family. But, not in this case.

Within a month of his birth, custody of 29-day-old infant has changed thrice. Who will be his family where he will be brought up, what will be his identity, is still unknown for him?

Currently, he is at childcare home in Chittorgarh. He was born on April 18 at a private hospital of Nimbahera in Chittorgarh district.

Since he was born to a girl within a month of her marriage, she and her husband, who was not the biological father of the infant boy, gave the newborn to a couple by singing an agreement having title “godinama” on a stamp paper, without following the proper norms of adoption mentioned under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Since the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) found it a clear-cut violation of Section 80 of JJ Act 2015, a zero FIR has been registered against four persons, two couples, who adopted the baby and those who gave the baby for adoption at Sadar police station, Chittorgarh.

The baby is now in the custody of CWC and admitted to childcare home. “There are norms prescribed under JJ Act 2015 for adoption of a child. If they are not followed, the adoption is illegal and it is a violation of section 80 of JJ Act, 2015. Just signing an agreement on stamp paper, the legality of adoption is not fulfilled, in such cases FIR is registered. Action will be taken against those who are found guilty in the matter,” said Shailendra Pandya, member, Rajasthan State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (RSCPCR). The incident came into light when a woman brought a premature five-day-old baby to district hospital, Chittorgarh for his treatment. The baby was born at a private hospital in Nimbahera. The doctors immediately admitted the baby on April 23.

HYDERABAD: Cine actor Karate Kalyani met the Hyderabad Collector L Sharman on Tuesday and stated her version on the controversy wherein it has been alleged that she illegally adopted a baby girl. The actor in her interaction, with the Collector, maintained that she had not adopted the child and that the infant along with the biological parents were living with her at her place. She was merely helping them with resources, Kalyani emphasised.

Speaking to the media with her advocate, she denied all allegations of an illegal adoption. “I have been purposely vilified when in reality I have not adopted the child, but was only assisting her parents. Lies are being spread that I purchased the child which is baseless,” Kalyani said.The actor will now have to depose before the Child Welfare Committee on Wednesday when the final decision on the issue will be taken as to whether she has violated any law. It may be recalled that 1098 childline had received a complaint on the same from an anonymous person.

Meanwhile, debunking several myths on adoption and claims of Kalyani, the Hyderabad District Welfare Officer E Akkeshwar Rao explained how the adoption process can be done at any age of the child. This factor was no bar in legal adoption in India, contrary to Kalyani’s claims that she was waiting for the child to turn one, before starting the legal adoption process. As per the current situation, individuals enrolling for adoption have to wait anywhere between one to three years before legal approval.

.

When Michael Bennett ordered a 23andMe DNA testing kit in 2018, he was hoping to gain insight into his family health history.

“Every time I went to the doctor, they’d ask questions that I didn’t have the answers to,” said Bennett, a retired army veteran in Fort Worth, Texas, who was adopted at age 3.

Bennett, now 70, was born in 1951 in post-WWII occupied Japan. His biological mother, Yoshiko Nakajima, was Japanese; his biological father, Dick Webster, was an American serviceman. In 1953, Bennett was adopted by a couple in the United States. That was pretty much all Bennett knew about his birth family and he was OK with that.

“I had a very happy childhood. I adored my parents,” Bennett told TODAY Parents.

Sure, Bennett was curious about Nakajima and Webster — what happened between them? Why was he placed for adoption as a toddler? But Bennett didn’t dwell on the unknowns.

The state will help older foster youth who are aging out of care find families that will last beyond foster care.

TOPEKA, Kansas — Kansas will be the first state to let foster children pick their foster parents. The goal of the one-of-a-kind change aims to let older foster children create strong connections that could help them as they age out of the state’s care.

Foster children can find permanent homes either through adoption, being reunited with family or guardianship, but this new option gives foster youth more say.

Foster children age 16 and older would be able to pick up to two adults to serve as their legal, permanent family. Those people could include caregivers or people close to the child.

“It would be an unprecedented change,” said Scott Henricks, director of permanency at the Kansas Department for Children and Families. “It would be a change of direction on really how the system works.”

---------- Forwarded message ---------

From: ACT

Date: Wed 18. May 2022 at 08:18

Subject: Fwd: : Re: : Defamation/ Clarification

To: ContactExpertisecentrumILA , Sandra de Vries ,

Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a petition of an adoptive daughter of a

government employee, whose application for the benefit of a family pension was

dismissed on the sole ground of her being adopted after her father's retirement date, held

that an adoption post-retirement would not be a ground to deny the benefit of the family

pension to such child.

Children’s home providers in England should not be able to profit from caring for society’s most vulnerable children, the new head of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) has said.

Steve Crocker criticised private providers driving around in sports cars and buying racehorses with their profits after “getting rich off taxpayers’ money”.

Profit margins for the 15 largest private children’s home operators average 22.6%, according to the Competition and Markets Authority.

Most councils in England have at least one looked-after child whose private placement costs £10,000 a week or more, with costs running to £60,000 a week in the most extreme cases. Yet in Scotland, which has moved much closer towards a not-for-profit children’s care system, costs are generally lower.

“There should be a national approach to management and profits,” said Crocker, calling for a national cap on fees in England. “We have long had the aspiration to make the sector not-for-profit – Scotland, which has had that aspiration for longer, has got nearer to it.”

NAGPUR: Salamullah Khan, 62, the alleged mastermind in a child trafficking case being investigated by the crime branch, owned an aided orphanage at Kondhali which was shut by the authorities last year after his role in an illegal adoption racket came to fore.

Khan, who has been arrested along with two nurses and a 55-year-old woman, was booked in yet another case registered at Kotwali police station last year. The latest offence was registered at Sitabuldi police station following action by crime branch’s anti-human trafficking (AHT) unit.

Sources stated that Khan, who provided a 12-day-old baby to the elderly woman for Rs three lakh three years ago, is refusing to cooperate with police in the custody. “Khan is claiming that his memory is failing and hence cannot recall from whom he had bought the baby,” said a police source.

It’s learnt, there were three children at Patel Bahuuddeshiya Sanstha’s orphanage run by Khan at Kondhali when he was booked for trafficking last year. The women and child development department had shut the place and shifted the children elsewhere.

In the latest case, police stated that Khan was introduced to the elderly woman by the two nurses who worked at a big hospital in Dhantoli. The woman used to visit the hospital for treatment to conceive at an advanced age.

By Lina Vanegas

I am a transracial and transnational displaced person. I was separated from my country, language, and culture and taken to Michigan, which has no connection to me or my ancestors. I was taken there to create a family for strangers who had the privilege and resources to buy me. I had family in Colombia and I was far from being a true orphan. I was bought in Bogota, Colombia and sold to a white couple living in the Midwest in 1976.

I use the word “displaced” intentionally, because the word “adopted” does not define my lived experience in an accurate way. The word “adopted” is language that was created by the child welfare-industrial complex, also known as the adoption industry. I do not subscribe to any of the constraints or barriers that they attempt to put onto my life with their language choices. Using the word “displaced” defines the intentional separation from my family by the child welfare-industrial complex.

My lived experience has informed who I am and has inspired and motivated the work that I do online and in the world. It is very rare that adopted and displaced people’s lived experiences are seen, heard, validated, centered, and believed, so my mission is to do that online, on my podcast, Rescripting The Narrative, and in the work that I do as a social worker and with the organization Adoptees for Choice.

Currently, the voices on adoption that are centered, listened to, and amplified come from adoptive parents and the child welfare-industrial complex. The message that they proclaim is that we are lucky and chosen and should therefore be grateful for being given a better life. This is a very well-crafted marketing campaign; it is propaganda. This adoption propaganda narrative ignores our reality, which is that our lives began in trauma, grief, and loss when we were separated from our mothers and families. Adoption must be recognized as an adverse childhood experience (ACE), as it puts us at risk for addiction, homelessness, suicidal despair, suicide attempts, death by suicide, eating disorders, self harm, anxiety, depression, identity issues, and more. Adoptees are four times more likely to attempt suicide than non-adopted people.

The use of the words such as "abandonment" in laws and legislation concerning adoptions is causing "unnecessary hurt and difficulties in many adoption proceedings," a High Court judge has said.

The remarks were made by Mr Justice Max Barrett in a judgment where he approved an application made regarding a teenage boy who wants to be adopted by the family who have cared for him since he was a very young child.

The parties cannot be named for legal reasons.

The judge said more sensitive wording should be used in such laws to describe parents whose child is adopted, given that "it is hard enough to see one child's being adopted without also being told "you have failed."

The judge suggested that the laws be amended, and that alternative wording be used instead that is less upsetting.