I wanted to pass this information along to all of you adoption advocates out there. This was a recent post over at the Johnson Family Blog:
Those who are embroiled in the new post-Hague I-800 process are currently experiencing an unexpected result of the Hague implementation. Prior to 1997, internationally adopted children often were subject to massive numbers of vaccinations in Guangzhou in order to satisfy United States immigration requirements. In 1997, Congress unanimously approved a law amending immigration law and allowing adopting parents to bring a notarized vaccination waiver with them to the Consulate in Guangzhou instead, saying they would take care of their childrens' vaccinations upon returning safely home and under the supervision and advice of their own physician. For nearly 12 years this process has gone on without any problem, complaint or concern.
Another exemption (which does not apply to Chinese orphans) was passed in 1999-again unanimously - which provided for an exemption for older siblings of adopted orphans to also be able to be adopted into the same family (otherwise the age limit on the US side is less than 16).
Then, in 2006, Congress amended the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to comply with the newly-signed Hague Convention. Unfortunately, they did this by creating a new definition of orphan child - complete with new section number and reference in the INA. But all the previously approved protections and exemptions only specifically referenced the original section number of the original definition of orphan child. These protections were LOST because they
did not specifically reference the new definition, and because whoever wrote the law did not check for cross-references in other parts of the law!! Because these cross-references in the INA were not checked, vaccination waivers went from being available to all internationally adopted orphans to only those from NON-Hague countries. The Notice from the Guangzhou Consulate-General is below:
http://guangzhou.usembassy-china.org.cnnotice_on_vaccination_requirements081219\.html
There is a bill right now in the Senate Judiciary Committee to correct this mistake. It is Senate Bill 1376. The link to the bill is here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1376
It has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It will then go to the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security. The link to the Subcommittee is below, and contains links to contact information for Committee members.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?id=SSJU4
The Subcommittee members are:
Sen. Charles Schumer [D-NY]
Sen. John Cornyn [R-TX]
Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL]
Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]
Sen. Charles Grassley [R-IA]
Sen. Jon Kyl [R-AZ]
Sen. Patrick Leahy [D-VT]
Sen. Jefferson Sessions [R-AL]
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse [D-RI]
Sen. Ron Wyden [D-OR]
If you live in one of these states, please contact your Senator and ask them to act on Senate Bill 1376 and re-instate the protections and exemptions that Congress so unanimously approved in 1997 and 1999, and which clearly were accidentally not extended to orphans covered under the Hague Convention.
Thanks for your help!
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Friday, July 03, 2009
A Little Goes a Long Way
I wasn't aware that when a person adopts, more often than none that they/we aren't just adopting our child. We adopt a whole orphanage full of babies, toddlers, teens, and nannies. We adopt babies that will soon be with their forever families and we adopt those that won't be adopted, that will call the orphanage their home. Our concern becomes for all orphans not just our son or daughter. It's inevitable...the heart swells when one adopts.
I belong to a Yahoo group that is comprised of all adoptive parents of children adopted from the same orphanage as where my child spent the first 6 months of her life. A few months ago, a father of a fellow "Bo" baby, started a fundraising campaign. Apparently, many months ago, he had read some things, including my blog post about the condition of the orphanage when my husband and I visited. The fact that it was so cold that we could literally see our breath, well, it chilled him and he wanted to do something about it. So he started a fundraising campaign to raise monies for water heaters to ensure that all Bo babies would have at least a warm bath. He put the call out to the group and in poured the monies. Within a week, the group raised $1000 through a special fund with Love Without Boundaries (LWB). LWB helped us communicate back and forth with the orphanage. Along with the donation, we sent a photo album that included pictures of all the families that had donated to the project. In the end here's what happened:
I belong to a Yahoo group that is comprised of all adoptive parents of children adopted from the same orphanage as where my child spent the first 6 months of her life. A few months ago, a father of a fellow "Bo" baby, started a fundraising campaign. Apparently, many months ago, he had read some things, including my blog post about the condition of the orphanage when my husband and I visited. The fact that it was so cold that we could literally see our breath, well, it chilled him and he wanted to do something about it. So he started a fundraising campaign to raise monies for water heaters to ensure that all Bo babies would have at least a warm bath. He put the call out to the group and in poured the monies. Within a week, the group raised $1000 through a special fund with Love Without Boundaries (LWB). LWB helped us communicate back and forth with the orphanage. Along with the donation, we sent a photo album that included pictures of all the families that had donated to the project. In the end here's what happened:
From the father who headed up the fundraising:
"they were able to get 8 water heaters. She has sent me some pictures of the heaters, the clothes and the snacks that they were able to purchase. You know, I think we all get it that what has been accomplished here is significant. But I don't really think that we will be able to fully grasp the total impact of this. We live such different lives than what is lived there. I have commented how hot water is an after thought for us but for them it is more than just a turn of a knob. I really believe that we have accomplished a lot. And I think we can accomplish a lot more. "
Letter from the orphanage workers:
"We have finished the babies' bathrooms. Sorry to you and the other families for the delay. There are lots of things to do every day, too busy. We sincerely apologize to you and the families. We are very happy to see the beautiful photos of the babies. The babies are all smiling. We appreciate everything you and the other families have done for us. We appreciate the love and concern from you and the families."
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Adoption Voices
Are you aware of Adoption Voices, a new social networking site for anyone involved with adoption...think "Fac*book + adoption blogs on steroids". If not, get a cup of coffee, pull up a chair, and head over there ASAP. I'm just beginning to navigate all of the groups, forums, blogs, etc., but there is a wealth of information on this site...Truck-loads of it. Lots of food for thought can be found as well as thought-provoking posts to mull over. Oh, and if you join, be sure to add me as your friend :) Enjoy!
Image: Adoption Voices logo
Back to China for Another Daughter
The paperchase has officially begun for a sister from China for Elyza! We will be adopting through China's minor special needs program this time around. We feel strongly about adopting from China again for several reasons as we would like for her to have a sibling with the same ethnicity and adoption background. We also see it as a wonderful opportunity for Elyza to experience the trip back to her home country and to experience the adoption process first hand.
You never know where this adoption journey will take you exactly, but it's definitely an adventure that's worth the crazy ride!
You never know where this adoption journey will take you exactly, but it's definitely an adventure that's worth the crazy ride!
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Asian-Inspired Toys
I was searching on-line for some wooden play food and delighted to find this Asian-inspired stir fry set, by Melissa and Doug (those great chunky wooden puzzle people).
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Mandarin for Toddlers
I'm really excited about checking into the Muzzy language program, Mandarin for toddlers. I'll be adding this to Elyza's Christmas wish list ;)
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Learning Chinese
I saw this link to Learning Chinese Summer School Programs on asianmommy.com . Both of these sites are great resources!
Friday, April 17, 2009
China's Birth Limits Create Dangerous Gender Gap
From the Associated Press
BEIJING – China has 32 million more young men than young women — a gender gap that could lead to increasing crime — because parents facing strict birth limits abort female fetuses to have a son, a study released Friday said.
The imbalance is expected to steadily worsen among people of childbearing age over the next two decades and could trigger a slew of social problems, including a possible spike in crime by young men unable to find female partners, said an author of the report published in the BMJ, formerly known as the British Medical Journal.
"If you've got highly sexed young men, there is a concern that they will all get together and, with high levels of testosterone, there may be a real risk, that they will go out and commit crimes," said Therese Hesketh, a lecturer at the Centre for International Health and Development at University College London. She did not specify what kinds of crimes.
The study said analysis of China's 2005 census data extrapolated that males under age 20 exceeded their female counterparts by a whopping 32 million.
The study found that China has 119 male births for every 100 girls, compared with 107 to 100 for industrialized countries.
"Nothing can be done now to prevent this imminent generation of excess men," said the report by Hesketh and two professors from eastern China's Zhejiang province.
The study found that the biggest boy-girl gaps are in the 1 to 4-year-old group — meaning that China will have to grapple with the effects of that imbalance when those children reach reproductive age in 15 to 20 years.
China imposed strict birth controls in the 1970s to limit growth of its huge population, noting that resources, especially land, were increasingly strained and that changes were needed in its new push to modernize. The government says the controls have prevented an additional 400 million births in the world's most populous country of 1.3 billion.
But families, especially rural ones, cling to traditional preferences for a male heir, and infanticide of baby girls became a problem. In response, some parts of China allow couples to have a second child if the first is a girl.
The prevalence of sonograms in recent years has allowed parents to learn the gender of their fetus about 20 weeks into pregnancy, Hesketh said, leading to a rise in abortions based on sex. Abortion is legal and widely available.
China bans tests to determine the fetus' gender for non-medical reasons but they are still commonly done, mainly by underground private clinics in the countryside.
Many countries ban abortion after 12 or sometimes 24 weeks of pregnancy unless the mother's life is at risk. China's laws do not expressly prohibit or even define late-term termination.
A debate about the extent of China's gender imbalance has brewed for years among population experts. Some families hide the births of daughters, never registering them with authorities, so they can legally try for a son, making it harder to measure the problem.
Nancy Riley, a professor of sociology at Bowdoin College in Maine who was not involved with the study, said its methodology looked fine but questioned whether selective abortion indeed counted for almost all the excess males.
"From other research, it is clear that sex-selective abortion does indeed contribute to these high sex ratios, but so do other things (such as) non-reporting of girl births, abandonment, even infanticide," Riley said.
For their study, Hesketh and professors Li Lu of Zhejiang University and Zhu Weixing of Zhejiang Normal University examined data on 4.7 million people under the age of 20 from all parts of the country.
Ratios in Jiangxi and Henan provinces were the highest in the country, with 140 boys for every 100 girls in the 1-4 age range, the study said.
Hesketh told The Associated Press she thought rates were highest there because both provinces are poor and have largely secular Han Chinese populations. China's often disadvantaged ethnic minorities are exempt from birth limits, and researchers found normal sex ratios in the minority regions of Tibet and largely Muslim Xinjiang.
Ratios were also particularly high among second children as parents again try to ensure they have a son and not another daughter.
China has launched subsidy programs and education campaigns encouraging families to have girls, but they have had a limited impact.
The study said enforcing the existing ban on sex-selective abortion could lead to normalization of the ratios.
BEIJING – China has 32 million more young men than young women — a gender gap that could lead to increasing crime — because parents facing strict birth limits abort female fetuses to have a son, a study released Friday said.
The imbalance is expected to steadily worsen among people of childbearing age over the next two decades and could trigger a slew of social problems, including a possible spike in crime by young men unable to find female partners, said an author of the report published in the BMJ, formerly known as the British Medical Journal.
"If you've got highly sexed young men, there is a concern that they will all get together and, with high levels of testosterone, there may be a real risk, that they will go out and commit crimes," said Therese Hesketh, a lecturer at the Centre for International Health and Development at University College London. She did not specify what kinds of crimes.
The study said analysis of China's 2005 census data extrapolated that males under age 20 exceeded their female counterparts by a whopping 32 million.
The study found that China has 119 male births for every 100 girls, compared with 107 to 100 for industrialized countries.
"Nothing can be done now to prevent this imminent generation of excess men," said the report by Hesketh and two professors from eastern China's Zhejiang province.
The study found that the biggest boy-girl gaps are in the 1 to 4-year-old group — meaning that China will have to grapple with the effects of that imbalance when those children reach reproductive age in 15 to 20 years.
China imposed strict birth controls in the 1970s to limit growth of its huge population, noting that resources, especially land, were increasingly strained and that changes were needed in its new push to modernize. The government says the controls have prevented an additional 400 million births in the world's most populous country of 1.3 billion.
But families, especially rural ones, cling to traditional preferences for a male heir, and infanticide of baby girls became a problem. In response, some parts of China allow couples to have a second child if the first is a girl.
The prevalence of sonograms in recent years has allowed parents to learn the gender of their fetus about 20 weeks into pregnancy, Hesketh said, leading to a rise in abortions based on sex. Abortion is legal and widely available.
China bans tests to determine the fetus' gender for non-medical reasons but they are still commonly done, mainly by underground private clinics in the countryside.
Many countries ban abortion after 12 or sometimes 24 weeks of pregnancy unless the mother's life is at risk. China's laws do not expressly prohibit or even define late-term termination.
A debate about the extent of China's gender imbalance has brewed for years among population experts. Some families hide the births of daughters, never registering them with authorities, so they can legally try for a son, making it harder to measure the problem.
Nancy Riley, a professor of sociology at Bowdoin College in Maine who was not involved with the study, said its methodology looked fine but questioned whether selective abortion indeed counted for almost all the excess males.
"From other research, it is clear that sex-selective abortion does indeed contribute to these high sex ratios, but so do other things (such as) non-reporting of girl births, abandonment, even infanticide," Riley said.
For their study, Hesketh and professors Li Lu of Zhejiang University and Zhu Weixing of Zhejiang Normal University examined data on 4.7 million people under the age of 20 from all parts of the country.
Ratios in Jiangxi and Henan provinces were the highest in the country, with 140 boys for every 100 girls in the 1-4 age range, the study said.
Hesketh told The Associated Press she thought rates were highest there because both provinces are poor and have largely secular Han Chinese populations. China's often disadvantaged ethnic minorities are exempt from birth limits, and researchers found normal sex ratios in the minority regions of Tibet and largely Muslim Xinjiang.
Ratios were also particularly high among second children as parents again try to ensure they have a son and not another daughter.
China has launched subsidy programs and education campaigns encouraging families to have girls, but they have had a limited impact.
The study said enforcing the existing ban on sex-selective abortion could lead to normalization of the ratios.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Children
And a woman who held a babe against her bosom said, "Speak to us of Children."
And he said:
Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts.
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;
For even as he loves the arrow that flies, so He loves also the bow that is stable.
Poetic Essay by Khalil Gibran, author of The Prophet
And he said:
Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts.
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;
For even as he loves the arrow that flies, so He loves also the bow that is stable.
Poetic Essay by Khalil Gibran, author of The Prophet
Monday, March 23, 2009
The Adoption Tax Relief Guarantee Act
This is an important article from Adoptive Families:
You can make a difference for children in the U.S. and around the world by contacting your Senator and Congressional representative now! Urge them to support "The Adoption Tax Relief Guarantee Act of 2005," legislation to make the tax credit permanent. Unless legislation is passed, the adoption expense tax credit that allows many adopting families to take a credit of up to $10,000+ against their federal income taxes is scheduled to expire in 2010.
The Adoption Tax Relief Guarantee Act of 2005 was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R.305; Rep. Wilson, Joe [SC]) on January 25, 2005 and the Senate (S. 246; Bunning [KY]) on February 1, 2005.
Last year, legislation to make the adoption tax credit permanent passed by an overwhelming majority in the House, but stalled in the Senate, making bipartisan support in the Senate imperative if this legislation is to become law this session.
Here's how to alert your Congressional representatives that you want their support for this legislation that helps so many adoptive families and children without homes:
Find the name and Washington, D.C. mailing address of your Representative and Senators at http://www.congress.org/. To find e-mail addresses, click through to the Senator's or Congressperson's Web site.
Next, log on to http://thomas.loc.gov/ to find out whether your Congresspersons are already co-sponsors of the legislation.
GO HERE FOR A LIST OF SENATE SPONSORS.
GO HERE FOR A LIST OF US REP SPONSORS.
If your representatives have not signed on as co-sponsors of the bill, send them your request that they do so. Tell them how important the tax credit was to you when you adopted your children, or how much you and other families you know are counting on it to be available in the future. Emphasize that the tax credit truly results in more children finding homes. Tell them that this is so important to you that you will be following the bill's progress through Congress.
INCLUDE A FAMILY PHOTO: While e-mails are valuable, a written note with a picture of your family or your children will be most effective. If sending e-mail, you'll actually want to avoid attaching a photo; the large size of the message and the attachment could, potentially, mark it as junk or harmful e-mail.
If any of your Congresspersons are already co-sponsors, write them a thank-you note. Again, letters sent by snail-mail with photos of your children will receive more attention.
GO HERE FOR SAMPLE LETTERS
You can make a difference for children in the U.S. and around the world by contacting your Senator and Congressional representative now! Urge them to support "The Adoption Tax Relief Guarantee Act of 2005," legislation to make the tax credit permanent. Unless legislation is passed, the adoption expense tax credit that allows many adopting families to take a credit of up to $10,000+ against their federal income taxes is scheduled to expire in 2010.
The Adoption Tax Relief Guarantee Act of 2005 was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R.305; Rep. Wilson, Joe [SC]) on January 25, 2005 and the Senate (S. 246; Bunning [KY]) on February 1, 2005.
Last year, legislation to make the adoption tax credit permanent passed by an overwhelming majority in the House, but stalled in the Senate, making bipartisan support in the Senate imperative if this legislation is to become law this session.
Here's how to alert your Congressional representatives that you want their support for this legislation that helps so many adoptive families and children without homes:
Find the name and Washington, D.C. mailing address of your Representative and Senators at http://www.congress.org/. To find e-mail addresses, click through to the Senator's or Congressperson's Web site.
Next, log on to http://thomas.loc.gov/ to find out whether your Congresspersons are already co-sponsors of the legislation.
GO HERE FOR A LIST OF SENATE SPONSORS.
GO HERE FOR A LIST OF US REP SPONSORS.
If your representatives have not signed on as co-sponsors of the bill, send them your request that they do so. Tell them how important the tax credit was to you when you adopted your children, or how much you and other families you know are counting on it to be available in the future. Emphasize that the tax credit truly results in more children finding homes. Tell them that this is so important to you that you will be following the bill's progress through Congress.
INCLUDE A FAMILY PHOTO: While e-mails are valuable, a written note with a picture of your family or your children will be most effective. If sending e-mail, you'll actually want to avoid attaching a photo; the large size of the message and the attachment could, potentially, mark it as junk or harmful e-mail.
If any of your Congresspersons are already co-sponsors, write them a thank-you note. Again, letters sent by snail-mail with photos of your children will receive more attention.
GO HERE FOR SAMPLE LETTERS
Friday, March 20, 2009
Cheap Mamas
I think we all know...kids grow up way too fast, which makes me take a second look at buying new stuff for the tot, who will outgrow a majority of it in a season. I've found that consignment sales have pretty much all a toddler needs and then some...and I've also found that shopping at these sales can be, well, addictive. An adorable spring outfit for only $6, bingo...a smocked dress for under $10, well heck yeah...and before you know it you're lugging a ton of loot behind you. It's pretty fantastic. You can go here to join me in the obsession. A few tips: Work the sale if you can. You'll end up getting better dibs on the cream of the crop. Another piece of advice...take a list of needs, otherwise the cheap prices could make you starry-eyed, blowing your budget in record minutes. Keep your cool, cheap mamas.
Given the economy, mamas are getting smarter about how they spend their mula. I was happy to find out about this handy site called www.handmedown.com, classifieds for moms. Happy shopping!
Given the economy, mamas are getting smarter about how they spend their mula. I was happy to find out about this handy site called www.handmedown.com, classifieds for moms. Happy shopping!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Thought for the Day
"The true liberty of the human being comes from having been created in the image and likeness of God, and therefore should be exercised with responsibility, always opting for the true good so that it becomes love, gift of self. For this, more than theories, the intimacy and love characteristic of the familial community are needed. It is in the home where one learns to truly live, to value life and health, liberty and peace, justice and truth, work, concord and respect." - Pope Benedict
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Does the World Need A Global Population Control Agency
By: Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of Population Control: Real Costs and Illusory Benefits.
The idea of controlling human fertility deserves to be as thoroughly discredited as Marxist-Leninism.
FRONT ROYAL, Va. (Catholic Online) - Overpopulation hysteria has real world consequences. One of these is a United Nations population control agency that goes by the name of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA).
Started in 1969 following a massive lobbying effort by billionaire John D. Rockefeller III, the UNFPA claims to work to “reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV/AIDS, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.” In fact, the UNFPA, like its founder, believes that the way to reduce poverty is to reduce the numbers of the poor through sterilization, contraception, and abortion campaigns.
We know.We have conducted repeated investigations of UNFPA operations around the world. We have found that, despite its soothing rhetoric about improving “reproductive health,” and “safe motherhood”—the UNFPA spends a huge chunk of its budget on soporific propaganda--the agency continues to be fixated on the numbers. We have documented its involvement in coercive population control policies in countries like China, Vietnam, Peru, and North Korea, as well as in refugee camps around the world.
Its intimate connection to China’s brutal one-child policy merits special attention. For three long decades, the Chinese government has aborted and sterilized millions of women each year. For three long decades, the UNFPA has provided financial aid, ideological encouragement, and international sanction to these abuses through its offices in Beijing and around the Chinese countryside. This shameless pattern of complicity in some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet is the chief reason why the Bush Administration, for seven years running, has refused to fund the UN agency.
We at PRI have hard evidence on the UNFPA’s involvement in coercion—videotapes, cassette tapes, written and spoken testimony from dozens of witnesses. Our information was verified by the U.S. State Department, and is accessible on our web site, as well as in our new video series: Exposure: Investigative Realism from PRI. Even Secretary of State Colin Powell, who in the past has been friendly towards the UNFPA, declared the UNFPA ineligible for U.S. funding because of its complicity in forced abortion and forced sterilization.
Now, none of this matters to the radical base of the population control movement, which remains determined to shovel as many U.S. tax dollars into the UNFPA maw as possible. The Huffington Post went so far as to call us lunatics for daring to challenge the UNFPA’s programs.In an opinion piece published Tuesday, December 2nd, insultingly entitled “The Pro-Lie Movement Targets Hillary,” columnist Cristina Page had this to say about PRI:
"Just when UNFPA was succeeding in proving to the Chinese the one-child policy was not only inhumane but also ineffective, PRI swooped in with its claims of complicity. Bush, eager to lock lips with his fanatical base, ignored the advice of his own state department, as well as many allied nations, and opted to go with the swirly eyed lunacy of the six staffers of PRI. At their request, Bush quickly froze all U.S. funds to UNFPA, which represented 12 percent of its budget".
Like other population control hardliners, The Huffington Post does not attempt to refute our evidence. The piece is nothing more than yet another mindless recitation of the UNFPA’s party line. Does the Post really believe that the UNFPA was “succeeding”—after thirty long years—in bringing an end to a policy that the Chinese government proudly proclaims will persist until 2050? Moreover, it is factually wrong to say that Bush ignored the advice of his state department. The reality is that he trusted the judgment of his Secretary of State, who said, in effect, “Stop the Funding.” My video response to these and other bootless claims of the Huffington Post is available here.
The Internet news service has no real arguments to make, and so it resorts to sandlot slurs. We, on the other hand, stand by our research and our findings. And we remain firmly convinced that the UN Population Fund serves no useful purpose, and should be dissolved. The population control programs of the past half-century, born in the dark fear of “the unchecked growth in human numbers," have been a quiet but profound disaster for the poor and marginalized half of humanity.
Hundreds of millions of poor women (and men) have had their fundamental rights--i.e., to control their own reproductive systems and to determine the number and spacing of their children--grossly violated. An even larger number have had their overall wellbeing compromised as resources have been drained away from primary health care programs, with some succumbing to HIV/AIDS and other epidemics. While the cost of such programs in terms of human lives and suffering has been all too real, the promised benefits have proven largely illusory. Is the U.S. more secure, the global environment better protected, and the world wealthier today because of population control programs? Are the poor better off? The evidence suggests not.
The idea of controlling human fertility "for the good of the state and its people," as Beijing is fond of saying, is a 20th century anachronism. It deserves to be as thoroughly discredited as Marxist-Leninism, and for the same reason: It is at heart a philosophy of state coercion. In its more extreme manifestations in China and elsewhere, it has given rise to terror campaigns. But even in its mildest guises, it encourages a technocratic paternalism that effectively subjugates individual and familial fertility desires to the wishes of the state.
The U.S. should not only continue to avoid funding the U.N. Population Fund, it should withdraw entirely from the organization. The UNFPA, the creation of Rockefeller and his cronies, should simply be disbanded. Whatever legitimate health functions it performs can be transferred to the World Health Organization, UNICEF, or other international organizations. Some small programs, like that instituted to address the problem of obstetric fistula, may be worth saving. Others are Potemkin facades erected to con critics and deceive women.
We—and the women of China—are not fooled.
The idea of controlling human fertility deserves to be as thoroughly discredited as Marxist-Leninism.
FRONT ROYAL, Va. (Catholic Online) - Overpopulation hysteria has real world consequences. One of these is a United Nations population control agency that goes by the name of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA).
Started in 1969 following a massive lobbying effort by billionaire John D. Rockefeller III, the UNFPA claims to work to “reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV/AIDS, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.” In fact, the UNFPA, like its founder, believes that the way to reduce poverty is to reduce the numbers of the poor through sterilization, contraception, and abortion campaigns.
We know.We have conducted repeated investigations of UNFPA operations around the world. We have found that, despite its soothing rhetoric about improving “reproductive health,” and “safe motherhood”—the UNFPA spends a huge chunk of its budget on soporific propaganda--the agency continues to be fixated on the numbers. We have documented its involvement in coercive population control policies in countries like China, Vietnam, Peru, and North Korea, as well as in refugee camps around the world.
Its intimate connection to China’s brutal one-child policy merits special attention. For three long decades, the Chinese government has aborted and sterilized millions of women each year. For three long decades, the UNFPA has provided financial aid, ideological encouragement, and international sanction to these abuses through its offices in Beijing and around the Chinese countryside. This shameless pattern of complicity in some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet is the chief reason why the Bush Administration, for seven years running, has refused to fund the UN agency.
We at PRI have hard evidence on the UNFPA’s involvement in coercion—videotapes, cassette tapes, written and spoken testimony from dozens of witnesses. Our information was verified by the U.S. State Department, and is accessible on our web site, as well as in our new video series: Exposure: Investigative Realism from PRI. Even Secretary of State Colin Powell, who in the past has been friendly towards the UNFPA, declared the UNFPA ineligible for U.S. funding because of its complicity in forced abortion and forced sterilization.
Now, none of this matters to the radical base of the population control movement, which remains determined to shovel as many U.S. tax dollars into the UNFPA maw as possible. The Huffington Post went so far as to call us lunatics for daring to challenge the UNFPA’s programs.In an opinion piece published Tuesday, December 2nd, insultingly entitled “The Pro-Lie Movement Targets Hillary,” columnist Cristina Page had this to say about PRI:
"Just when UNFPA was succeeding in proving to the Chinese the one-child policy was not only inhumane but also ineffective, PRI swooped in with its claims of complicity. Bush, eager to lock lips with his fanatical base, ignored the advice of his own state department, as well as many allied nations, and opted to go with the swirly eyed lunacy of the six staffers of PRI. At their request, Bush quickly froze all U.S. funds to UNFPA, which represented 12 percent of its budget".
Like other population control hardliners, The Huffington Post does not attempt to refute our evidence. The piece is nothing more than yet another mindless recitation of the UNFPA’s party line. Does the Post really believe that the UNFPA was “succeeding”—after thirty long years—in bringing an end to a policy that the Chinese government proudly proclaims will persist until 2050? Moreover, it is factually wrong to say that Bush ignored the advice of his state department. The reality is that he trusted the judgment of his Secretary of State, who said, in effect, “Stop the Funding.” My video response to these and other bootless claims of the Huffington Post is available here.
The Internet news service has no real arguments to make, and so it resorts to sandlot slurs. We, on the other hand, stand by our research and our findings. And we remain firmly convinced that the UN Population Fund serves no useful purpose, and should be dissolved. The population control programs of the past half-century, born in the dark fear of “the unchecked growth in human numbers," have been a quiet but profound disaster for the poor and marginalized half of humanity.
Hundreds of millions of poor women (and men) have had their fundamental rights--i.e., to control their own reproductive systems and to determine the number and spacing of their children--grossly violated. An even larger number have had their overall wellbeing compromised as resources have been drained away from primary health care programs, with some succumbing to HIV/AIDS and other epidemics. While the cost of such programs in terms of human lives and suffering has been all too real, the promised benefits have proven largely illusory. Is the U.S. more secure, the global environment better protected, and the world wealthier today because of population control programs? Are the poor better off? The evidence suggests not.
The idea of controlling human fertility "for the good of the state and its people," as Beijing is fond of saying, is a 20th century anachronism. It deserves to be as thoroughly discredited as Marxist-Leninism, and for the same reason: It is at heart a philosophy of state coercion. In its more extreme manifestations in China and elsewhere, it has given rise to terror campaigns. But even in its mildest guises, it encourages a technocratic paternalism that effectively subjugates individual and familial fertility desires to the wishes of the state.
The U.S. should not only continue to avoid funding the U.N. Population Fund, it should withdraw entirely from the organization. The UNFPA, the creation of Rockefeller and his cronies, should simply be disbanded. Whatever legitimate health functions it performs can be transferred to the World Health Organization, UNICEF, or other international organizations. Some small programs, like that instituted to address the problem of obstetric fistula, may be worth saving. Others are Potemkin facades erected to con critics and deceive women.
We—and the women of China—are not fooled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
