Adoptionland as of late has been all abuzz with noise about Benjamin Wyrembek’s struggle through the courts in his effort to gain his son. Today’s Ohio Supreme Court ruling is but the latest step in Mr. Wyrembek’s long road.

The married woman he was having an affair with, Drucilla Bocvarov, (thus resulting in the pregnancy in the first place) sought to place the boy with another couple, Christy and Jason Vaughn.

Mr. Wyrembek registered with the Ohio putative Fathers registry (also see The Ohio Putative Father Registry–the WHAT? and Slowpoke Comic’s take on PF registries in general) within the Ohio allotted time frame, established paternity, and has sought to block the adoption of his son and gain custody instead.

The case has been dragged out over almost three years now, as the Vaughns used every stalling tactic in the book, and had previously engaged in a major media push in their attempt to garner sympathy.

By way of backgrounder on the case, it’s practically impossible to find articles not biased towards the would-be-adopters perspective, bearing that in mind, here are a couple of paragraphs from a piece from the Courier-Journal about today’s big news:

The Ohio Supreme Court said Thursday that it won’t reconsider a ruling that favored the biological father in a custody and adoption case that involves a boy a Sellersburg couple has raised since birth.The court also lifted the hold it had put on all Ohio lower court action in the matter. The ruling could clear the way for Benjamin Wyrembek, the biological father, to take custody of 2-year-old Grayson Vaughn, whom Christy and Jason Vaughn of Sellersburg have been trying to adopt for nearly three years.

But the full impact wasn’t immediately clear because the Vaughns and Wyrembek agreed at a hearing last month not to talk to the media about the case. Their attorneys did not return messages left Thursday, either.

The sides have been in mediation since a court hearing last month, according to friends and family of the Vaughns.

The Vaughns were in the process of trying to adopt Grayson when Wyrembek stepped forward to say he believed he was the boy’s father.

They’ve been embroiled in court battles since then. Then last month, an Ohio juvenile court judge ordered the Vaughns to return Grayson to Ohio.

When they refused, they faced enforcement of that order at a Floyd Circuit Court hearing. But the Ohio Supreme Court ordered a delay in all of that state’s action on the case until it could decide whether to reconsider an earlier ruling in the case.

In the original 4-3 decision, the Ohio high court had upheld the Lucas County Probate Court’s dismissal of the Vaughns’ adoption petition because the county’s juvenile court had declared Wyrembek the boy’s legal father.

The Supreme Court again ruled 4-3 Thursday to uphold that decision, while acknowledging that “the separation of children from family members is a matter of grave consequence with lasting implication.”

So much of the “reporting” on this case is utter crap.

Pieces like this out of Faux “News” can’t even be bothered to mention the father’s name, though the piece does note:

“The court also lifted a stay it put on all adoption and custody matters for the case.”

As lousy reporting goes, yesterday’s HuffPo turd, from the turdlish HuffPo itself*)  makes a fine example “A.”  In it, Robin Sax bemoans:

The decision by the Ohio court is just plain wrong.  A leading national group, the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys, is against the Ohio decision and filed a brief to the Court asking it to reconsider the ruling.

Gee, let me see if I can get this straight, the lawyers who make their livings doing adoptions are upset that a Father might regain his son and circumvent the much hoped for adoption the Vaughns want. Now the lawyers are filing a brief to the court to say the adoption should instead go through. It’s not like Adoption Attourneys have any personal financial interest in seeing adoptions go through… right? Give me a fucking break. This is merely adoption lawyers protecting their own business interests, nothing more.

Other remarkably unimpressive “reporting”, follows along the lines of  this Toledo Blade piece, Ohio Supreme Court affirms Swanton man’s right to biological son, first it runs a correct headline, and quotes the Father’s lawyer:

Mr. Wyrembek’s attorney, Alan Lehenbauer, contended that his client had followed all the appropriate legal procedures to obtain custody of his son after learning a former girlfriend was pregnant with his child. Mr. Wyrembek registered with Ohio’s Putative Father Registry and filed a petition in juvenile court to establish paternity and obtain custody of the child.

But then it falsely characterizes the Vaughns as the boy’s “adoptive parents.” This is the kind of lie that slips into such sloppy reporting. The Vaughns have never finalized their ATTEMPTED adoption.

The boy has been in legal limbo for years while the Vaughns dragged this out and worked hard to create the media impression that they boy was already “theirs.”

This is not a legal battle between a Father and an adoptive family. This is a legal battle between a Father who has used every avenue open to him to protect his parental rights while being stalled and thwarted time and again by those who WANT to adopt his son without his consent.

But that matters little, when the papers assume it’s already a done deal, falsely mislabeling the Vaughns as ALREADY the boy’s “adoptive parents:”

Still, nearly three years have elapsed while he battled in court with his son’s adoptive parents, Jason and Christy Vaughn of Sellersburg, Ind.

Then, almost as if to counteract their own headline, the paper runs the ever present photograph of the Vaughns, pulling out the the old dressed alike routine as if to visually assert and reinforce the impression of the Vaughns’ ownership of the boy. No other Father centric narrative is visually presented.

Finally, as always, the facebook page in support of the would-be-adopters is presented without any mention of the other facebook page, Give Grayson Back supporting the Father’s custody claim.

Adoption by Gentle Care did the placement.

(See this PDF of a filing by the Vaughns and the Mother here, where they disingenuously attempt to utilize Roe. w Wade  and other precedents relating to women’s reproductive privacy to maintain that adoption placement decisions are merely some kind of extension of the Mother’s reproductive privacy rights. Clearly, such do not apply to a now born child who also has a Father and  their constitutional rights, as reproductive privacy ends at birth. Other fascinating arguments are utilized in the filing as well, such as the notion that the man the Mother was married to when she had sex with Benjamin Wyrembek who is listed on the boy’s birth certificate as the father, despite having no biological relationship to the boy, should somehow have his “right of privacy as a marital unit”  govern the placement of the boy thereby overriding any right the boy’s biologically related Father should enjoy. Let’s just say it makes for an interesting read and provides some insight into both the thought process and the strategies being utilized by the Vaughns. )

To date, the Vaughns have dragged the case out across almost 3 years and  involved at least eight courts in two states and the federal system.

Birth Mother, First Mother Forum has done a useful breakdown, Transition Time in Contested Adoptions: Just Another Excuse for Delay, of how arguments in favour of “transition time” in these cases are really nothing more than yet another stalling tactic utilized by would-be-adopters to aid their “…but he’s been with us so long!” arguments in favour of keeping any given child.

The Toledo Blade piece with the Vaughn visual also points out a likely next course of action, the likely involvement of the Ohio General Assembly:

“The father of a child who registers with the Putative Father Registry in a timely fashion and who pursues a juvenile court determination of parentage cannot control either the timing of the juvenile court’s decision or the timing of the filing of a petition to adopt by prospective adoptive parents,” Justice Terrence O’Donnell wrote in Thursday’s decision.

“I would urge juvenile courts to give priority to parentage cases and decide them with dispatch. I would also encourage the General Assembly to carefully scrutinize our case law and revisit these statutes to clarify its intent if contrary to our result,” the justice wrote.

Nothing like the courts saying to Ohio legistlators, ‘hey, if you don’t like the outcome, feel free to rewrite the law to devise the kinds of outcomes you want.’

Considering the number of adoptive parents and otherwise adoption related individuals in the General Assembly, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to see just that.

about the way boarder babies, those born at hospitals and left there after birth are being systematically folded into babydump, or so called “safe haven” statistics in Ohio.

While this is nothing new, it’s good to see another article pointing out the failures of the “safe haven” legislative schemes (similar to the article about New Jersey doing the same that I blogged earlier, New Jersey- Boarder Babies being folded into “Safe Haven” statistics.)

While “safe haven” legislation pimps continue invoking images of desperate pregnant teens secretly giving birth and claim the legislation is vital, lest these women murder their newborn offspring, and insist that only legislation will keep these babies “SAFE” (from their mothers) clearly border babies, born in hospitals and left when the women check out are not exactly fodder for choking, drowning, suffocating headlines.

Conflating these two scenarios goes beyond disingenuous.

The dump pimps with their pet legislation get to relabel babies born safely in hospital “saves,” the states get to move babies out of their border babies columns and into the “safe havened” column in their statistics, making them look good (and potentially changing their financials as well) but at what cost?

That women who deliver in hospitals and then leave the child at the hospital are now viewed as “safe haven” mothers, or there but for this (et-hem) “Lifesaving” legislation (cough, cough) she may have turned to infanticide?

That the infant themselves will be permanently stripped of biological and family ties, their individual cultural and heritage, and most importantly, their authentic identity all in the name of sliding them into a new class of eventual adoptee or foster child, the anonymized by the state “havened” dumpees?

What does this say about how we as a culture view women and the lifelong genuine needs of the children themselves, in whose name this damnedable legislation was passed in the first place?

The Ohio stats begin to tell the ugly story:

Lucas County Children Services in Toledo has handled six cases since Ohio’s Safe Havens law took effect in 2002, Executive Director Dean Sparks said. All were infants born in hospitals and left there by mothers…

and

Franklin County documented three Safe Havens babies this year, two of which took place in the hospital where the babies were delivered.

Cuyahoga County has had two this year, both in the hospitals where the babies were born.

Neither of those counties, the state’s most populous, could provide details on how and where all of their Safe Havens cases have occurred since 2002.

Due to the lack of reporting requirements (that opponents of the dump laws like myself wanted at the time this terrible legislation was initially passed) the counties , who apparently are unable to account for their dump cases, are the primary form of ’statistical reporting’. The state only collects the data these counties inadequately report.

The bottom line is, no one CAN know how many of these kids have been created. Even the state itself has no idea.

The state doesn’t know, either. The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services cannot provide a statewide breakdown on how Safe Havens cases occur, because it doesn’t keep track, said Jennifer Justice, chief of the Bureau of Family Services.

The raw numbers it reports have varied from 52 to more than 70 since the law went into effect. Justice said the discrepancy probably is due to a new child-welfare computer system.

Michigan and Kentucky’s “stats” tell the same story of border babies routinely reclassified as “safe havens:”

In Michigan, a large majority of the 76 babies given up under the state’s “Safe Delivery” law have been born in hospitals and left there, said Jean Hoffman, a consultant assigned to the program.

In Kentucky, 22 of 24 babies given up since 2002 under that state’s safe-haven law were surrendered in the hospitals where they were born.

The “safe haven” scam is that ultimately these are border babies being given a new more palatable narrative and marketing scheme.

There is already a technical classification for these babies born in hospital, “border babies.” Only lack of awareness of said terminology allows those advocating such schemes to get away with this rebranding.

None-the-less, true believers continue to intone their broken mantra “if it saves just one”, or we need this legislation, otherwise women will kill!

Those of us critical of the emerging babydump industry can’t help but take one look at drivel such as this from an adoption lawyer,

Columbus lawyer Thomas Taneff, who handles many adoptions, said some women incapable of parenting need the option that safe-haven laws afford.

and can’t help but point out that the dump laws provide a new source of (largely information-free, or “as-is”) kids, infusing them into a landscape wherein wanna-be-adopters are a dime a dozen, whereas actual kids to adopt, particularly healthy, white infants, are not surprisingly, utterly scarce. Naturally adoption lawyers, those who earn income from adoptions, are going to be supportive of any law that frees up more “product” to the adoption marketplace.

In the end, the dispatch article points out precisely what critics of the laws have said all along,

On one point, the sides agree: The nation needs reliable data on safe-haven laws, which now are in effect in all 50 states.

Sadly (though not surprisingly,) no. Those who have advocated enacting these laws DO NOT support accurate data collection, they have consistently, actively worked to have any amendment requiring data collection stripped from the final versions of the bills.

They continue to oppose data collection requirements even now after the bills have passed, insisting that reliable data is unnecessary, after all, it allows their claims of ‘thousands of babies saved’ to go unsubstantiated, and unsubstantiatable.

Mind you, when their ’saved” babies are nothing more than born in a hospital, and remaining in a hospital until children’s services come to pick the kid up and enter them into the foster system the whole scheme sounds far less dramatic than the “saved (from ‘potentially murderous mothers’) babies!”

But then that’s the babydump laws for you, marketing and rebranding at it’s best, (well that and a paycheck for the dump pimps.)

To get readers up to speed, first a little history:

Ron has done a number of posts on CARE’s crap, including his latest, in which he nails the sappy overwrought emotionalism CARE is employing:

BB Church vs CARE, Nikfa and THE Adopton Institute, with one hand tied behind my back…

Marley also has a number of posts on her California Adoption Reform Effort tag, including her latest about the content of the CA bill itself:

CALIFORNIA: I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE! BAD BILL HITS THE BOARDS!

While you’re there, be sure to note Maryanne’s comment on Marley’s piece:

maryanne said…

I am mad as hell! I am a member of the CUB Board and we were flat out lied to to get us to support CARE’s bill. We were told in an email from Jean Strauss that they were going to introduce a clean bill, with the proviso that it “might” have to be modified somewhere down the road. This clearly not what happened; CARE did not even try to introduce a clean bill, but came out with this travesty.This group deserves no support from anyone who cares about adoptee rights.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:45:00 AM EST

If this is how the bill’s “supporters” are interpreting current events, I’d say CARE has a rocky road ahead of it.

The full text of CA AB 372 as introduced can be found on the California Open page.

Read it and judge for yourself, but simply put, it is not by any stretch a clean open records bill.

As Marley pointed out in her latest piece CARE felt the need to add this disclaimer of sorts to their webpage concerning the bill:

(a word about reading a bill: Legislative language, and the language of statutes, can be confusing. The language is based upon existing legal code which encompasses thousands of pages that are all interrelated. The chane that we are requesting will allow adult adoptees over the page of 18 access to their original record of birth. The text herein is written by the legislative counsel for the California Assembly and is written for lawyers, not for lay people. What’s important is that it cretes a legal right for adult adoptees to get their birth records.)

In other words, it’s a nice little condescending pat on the head, saying essentially, ‘there, there all you adoptees, it’s in legislate-ese, just TRUST US, it doesn’t mean what you thought you read, see? It’s now a “rights” bill, trust us!’

Which of course is ultimately not what it is. This is not a rights bill, this more of the usual conditional psuedo-access predicated upon desires and whims.

Again, Bastards buying that old “trust us” line, I’ve still got that old CARE bridge on the wrong coast to sell ya … .

Bastards have every reason to begin asking the hard questions when someone begins selling us the just “trust us” line in relation to legislation.

These are people’s real lives CARE is being so CARE-less with. The consequences of getting it wrong means real people left behind, screwed over, and trapped behind walls of lack of access.

In Ohio, I’m precisely that class of “left behind” Bastards. Had I been born just a few years earlier, or perhaps a few years later, my chances of actually gaining access to my authentic records would be quite different, but as it stands now, purely due to a “political compromise” I’m locked into those middle, and fucked over, years.

Messed up legislation has real world consequences to those bargained away.

And that is precisely what the CARE bill does, set up a new and damaged system going forward. If their bill were to pass Bastards would be left begging judges for scrubbed of identifying information (unless such is deemed necessary to assist in establishing a legal right) copies of their paperwork.

It says so right there in the CARE bill:

The name and address of the natural parents shall be given to the petitioner or requester only if he or she can demonstrate that the name and address, or either of them, are necessary to assist him or her in establishing a legal right. In all other cases, that information shall be redacted from all records and information provided, including a copy of an original record of birth.

CARE’s pre-emptive answer to such is of course, another pat on the head, ‘there there, you just don’t understand it, TRUST US!’

Trust people who have the unmitigated gall to write such into a bill and then try to proffer it off as a bill that “creates a legal right for adult adoptees to get their birth records”?

Like hell!

Yes, by and large I’m pointing my readers to others writings on the CARE-tastrope, in part because

• Ron himself is a California adoptee (as well as his previous work with California Open)
• and Marley in her Bastard Nation work as a “9-year member of CalOpen Partners” is also in a position to have something to say here.

Both of them not only have something to say about this monstrosity, they come from places to know of what they speak.

What I have to say is mainly in support of the good work they’re already doing.

None-the-less, being a left behind Bastard myself, who has petitioned the court for my records repeatedly, let me tell you, I at least hold out hope that if the judge were to actually sign off on allowing me my own paperwork, it would at least be complete, not routinely redacted by law.

CARE is thus taking a bad situation and ultimately making it worse, setting up NEW roadblocks. This is not merely a bad bill, it’s actively counterproductive.

Living as I do on the other end of a not altogether dissimilar process in Ohio, let me be the first to tell you, “compromises” that create new obstructions and make the already bad situation worse are no answer.

***

Disney’s “Stitch.”

Instantly recognizable as a “fellow traveler” to Bastard moviegoers and adopted “abominations” everywhere.

Not only does he hail from the one and only Disney movie to prominently feature a social worker, alongside the perennial Disney themes of:

• being orphaned, and of impending potential family disruption,
• the importance of family preservation, (even when families are self- found, “little, and broken” they are nonetheless worthy of being deemed “still good.”)
• how even those deprived of their history can come to create their own intentional forms of family, and be reunited with their Ohana of origin
• and how eventually, in movies anyway, the lead always comes to rediscover their previously obscured roots, (Bastards make the best plot twists!)

but Stitch, Lilo, and Nani also have a very great deal to say about notions of leaving people behind:

“Ohana means family, family means nobody gets left behind. Or forgotten.”

Widsom so simple, children have no trouble comprehending it.

Unfortunately, out here in the non-animated world, it’s a lesson all too many adults have yet to wrap their heads around.

***

Marley/Bastardette has written what I consider one of the most important posts on the Bastard condition I’ve seen in a long time.

In light of how some in the adoption blogosphere have gotten their knickers in a collective twist over both the California disaster and the NCFA piece (which simply is not news, except in that Bill Pierce is no doubt rolling over in his grave in light of how much psuedo-”openness” the new NCFA has come to embrace,) Marley brings up what is completely obvious to Bastards, that “reformers” and industry voices such as NCFA have far more in common with one another than either do with any genuine effort which has actually opened records and improved the lives for adopted people.

CARE, the Evan B. Donaldson Institute, and NCFA all have more in common with one another than any of them have to do with us.

Each of these, despite any “openness” language they may come to employ (usually grounded firmly in a cynical pragmatism and industry survival instinct), are ultimately willing to trade away access for some. An often undetermined number or percentage are written off as expendable, or “not politically expedient.”

Bastards on the other hand, leave no one behind.

Speaking as one of those left behind in an earlier Ohio deform effort, and as a black holed Bastard, let me add my voice to Marley’s, genuine Bastard-centric efforts leave no one behind.

No number or percentage should be left back or “forgotten.” Living daily, as one myself, allow me to tell you from firsthand experience, it’s inexcusable.

We will never trade away the person standing next to us. Any notion of “we’ll come back and open those up later” is failure. (Even the briefest study of political history will teach that lesson quickly enough.) We understand, either we all go together or we don’t go at all.

None of the adoption deformers speak for us.

In any case, go, read, and learn:

SWAPMEETIN’: NCFA, REFORMISTS, AND BASTARDS

Marley’s piece from where I sit is a mandatory Bastard backgrounder and has everything to say about where we find ourselves today.

(And ’cause I’m a space geek, enjoy a Black hole picture post.)

Between both the Ohio House and Senate there was but one sole dissenting vote cast by Sen. Jeff Jacobson (R.)

The expansion bill SB 304, now sits on Governor Ted Strickland’s desk awaiting his signature.

Aging up would merely condemn yet more kids to enduring state sanctioned legalized child abandonment. It would expand and further embed legalized child dumping into the Ohio infrastructure and schools.

Other states have faced similar attempts at expansion, California for example has time and again been faced with attempts to age up that have each time been refused, (see CALIFORNIA: THE TERMINATOR TERMINATES “SAFE HAVEN” BABY DUMP EXPANSION AGAIN.)

Marley, over on the Daily Bastardette also has an incredible piece up today about the dump-law mess in Ohio and first person recounting of the reactions opponents of the legalized child abandonment bill have received:

OHIO: LAME DUCKS SELL OUT FAMILIES, EXPAND SAFE HAVENS. CONSIDER ABANDONMENT A GIFT FROM MOM! (I STRONGLY recommend readers follow the link across.)

Her piece also details the broader background of the dump law landscape in Ohio and makes it clear, some of what Ohio is counting as “safe haven” cases are likely nothing more than boarder baby cases folded in to inflate the statistics. (See my earlier piece on how New Jersey is folding boarder babies into its “safe haven” stats.)

***

Governor Strickland needs to hear from opponents of the “age up”. (Ultimately the dump laws themselves need to be repealed.) For the purposes of this bill however, contacting the Governor and urging he not enlarge the already failed legalized child abandonment program is a starting point.

He can be contacted via his webpage contact form.

Phone- General Info: (614) 466-3555

Fax- Fax: (614) 466-9354

Or snail mail-

Governor’s Office
Riffe Center, 30th Floor
77 South High Street
Columbus, OH 43215-6108

As time is of the essence, I advise contact via e-mail and phone calls with faxes or letters as a form of follow up.

***

This is a copy of the brief note I sent through Governor Strickland’s contact page back on 12/10/08-

I am writing to urgently request you reject increasing the age limit on Ohio’s “safe haven”/legalized child abandonment law.

The legalized child abandonment expansion bill (SB 304) is a tragic expansion of an already disastrous policy.

It is bad enough that state encouragement of child abandonment has already become woven into the fabric of Ohio law and school curriculums, the expansion bill potentially increases the number of babies who will endure the lifelong effects of child abandonment.

I am an adult adoptee, born and raised in Ohio, who has spent several years researching the effects of legalized child dumping. Dump laws cause lifelong damage to kids, their families and communities.

They should be repealed, not expanded.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

-Lauren Sabina Kneisly
co-author of Children of the Corn (http://cornkids.blogspot.com/)
Reporting, Theory,and Opinion on Legalized Child Dumping in Nebraska

***

Children of the Corn
A new blog in support of Repealing legalized child abandonment laws and chronicling the Nebraska dump law case study.

Reporting, Theory, and Opinion on Legalized Child Dumping in Nebraska

***

As Marley Greiner (who blogs the Daily Bastardette) and I were both detailing the Nebraska disaster, we came to the conclusion that combining our shared blogging of the history into one common resource would be helpful to others researching the still unfolding mess. She and I both support nothing short of full repeal of all legalized child abandonment laws.

Our posts to date have often overlapped and referenced one another, going forward, we will likely each bite off separate pieces to tackle, or write from different angles about the same set of events.

For example, I am relying on her reporting this evening about the two latest teens who when taken to a Nebraska hospital ditched their dumper and ran-

BORN TO RUN! TWO ESCAPE SAFE HAVEN MOM

Children of the Corn will be the repository for our interwoven coverage from here on.

To be perfectly frank, I was honoured to be invited to join her. She and I are old friends. we have both spent years working, researching, and writing in support of adoptee rights and about the seemingly unending abuses kids and parents have endured in the name of what often passes for child welfare both in this country and internationally.

I’ve linked across to her coverage many times, but she’s long overdue a proper introduction for my readers here.

(This is one of my favourite older pictures of her.)

Marley’s background in American history brings a wealth of experience to her adoptee advocacy work.

As does her time spent abroad. As but one of many examples, her careful research and chronicling of the deaths of so many of the Russian adoptees, NIKTO NE ZABYT — NICHTO NE ZABYTO, Nobody is forgotten. Nothing is forgotten, is an incredible resource.

Marley is a maintainer of memory.

To all this, add her ongoing work and years of experience as Executive Chair and Co-founder of Bastard Nation and it readily becomes clear why she’s the right person to team up with. BN has been one of the strongest most consistent voices against all dump laws, from the very dawning of them back 9 years ago. Year after year BN fought the dump laws, building in the testimonies given state after state, perhaps the most clear articulation of why the dumps laws must be repealed. She is also the creator of the Adoptee Rights News Blog.

It’s her passion and unflinching tenacity that makes this a natural pairing. She through the years has shown again and again her willingness to turn over the rocks, and not turn away at what she finds crawling about beneath. Her realistic view of the current state of child welfare and adoption is a vitally needed counterweight voice in opposition to the so often Vaseline smeared lenses the adoption industry, dump marketeers and others would prefer we all look though.

When legislators or media fall for the marketing, Marley has been there time and again, bringing forth the facts that undercut the lies.

She’s been more than willing to do the legwork and follow through to look at what the kids themselves are really experiencing; homelessness, being passed around in the endless circle jerk of referrals to nowhere, kids who end up living on the streets, abused, even murdered. (Herein of course, I’m speaking more broadly, not merely about Nebraska.)

Perhaps most pertinent to the Nebraska situation though, is that for a number of years now, since 2001, Marley has been the creator and sole editor of the Baby Dump News, “a weekly e-chronicle of newborn abandonment, infanticide, safe haven legislation, and related issues.” E-mailed out week after week, very little of the BDN is online, but the 2007 index can be found here.

Marley has been case by case, article by article tracking abandonments and child dumps for years. In short, she has been nose down in the details of the dump laws for about forever.

She is also a board member of and writer for the (Columbus, Ohio) Free Press. She and I both share interests as activists and researchers writing about issues of womyn’s autonomy and those would impose their interpretation of theonomy.

When it comes to the things kids are enduring, from denial of equality under law to state encouraged abandonment, she understands the critical importance of holding those responsible’s feet to the fire, as well as both looking and working systemically at how interlocking aspects of systemic structures are broken and failing kids and families.

In short, I’m damn proud to team up with her. Honoured actually, that she wants to place my work alongside hers.
I hope regular readers here will understand the vital contribution she has been making and continues to make, both in relation to the Nebraska situation and dump laws more broadly, but also in her many years of tireless work on behalf of all dumped kids sitting alongside her work on for adopted people and their families.

If there’s anyone who should be listened to at this critical juncture in the Nebraska process, it’s Marley.

All of this of course, is a mere thumbnail sketch. Marley is all this and much more. But mostly she’s got a wicked sense of humour, historical perspective, and a particular way with penning a poem.

This is the CotC announcement she has added to Bastardette tonight, feel free to pass it along to others who are researching the Nebraska mess:

Lauren Sabina Kneisly (Baby Love Child) and Bastardette are happy to announce the posting of our new blog: Children of the Corn: Reporting, Theory, and Opinion on Legalized Child Dumping in Nebraska.

Since we were both writing so much on the topic of Nebraska child dumping law, LB 157, we decided it would be a good idea to put our work together in an easy-to-access format. The blog is a repository of our Nebraska writing, in chronological order, since the first “legal” abandonment took place in September. It is intended as a resource for those researching so-called “safe haven” or “Baby Moses” laws, Nebraska LB 157 , adoptee rights activists, adoption reformers, child welfare advocates, bastards, legislators, the media, and those who are just plain disgusted.

We may occasionally add the work of another blogger or scholar. Over the next week or so we add more links and other resources.

We will continue to post our Nebraska blogs on our individual blogs as well.

CHILDREN OF THE CORN

http://cornkids.blogspot.com

please distribute freely!

Consider this babystep towards writing Ron and Bastard Nation back into the ARD history as well, particularly in light of statements made by Gershom, the current organizer such as

I have done EVERYTHING. Not you, not bastard nation, not ron, ME.

from this Bastardette comment thread posted by Gershom at June 5, 2008 12:25:00 AM EDT.

Why would I start with such a quote in the prelude? Because it’s belies exactly how much history Gershom doesn’t know and precisely how vicious she became when those who had been around through it called her on her crap.

I’m not writing on behalf of anyone in this other than myself. And as I’ve said in my “about page” I consider myself, particularly in relation to the current Adoptee Rights Demonstration from which I’ve resigned,

far enough external to the industry, and the seats of power that it’s relatively ‘independent’ by comparison.

***

Long before the Adoptee Rights Demonstration (which will take place in New Orleans this week) was even a glimmer in the eye of those who eventually began down the path of starting work upon it, there was the original “ARD”, the “Adoptee Rights Day”.

The First Adoptee Rights Day was celebrated in 1998 to mark the one year anniversary of the passage of Oregon’s measure 58, the statewide referendum that eventually led to open records. Which means we need to go back even further still to understand how things came to the point of even having an Oregon victory to celebrate.

We have to go back to July 18-20th 1997, in Chicago, IL where Bastard Nation first held their initial conference, “Birth of a Bastard Nation.” I wasn’t there. I missed it entirely.

(Instead, I first met Marley staffing the BN table over Comfest in Columbus, Ohio that same summer. Having been a Queer Nation member, I took one look at Bastard Nation’s “spermburst” logo and I knew I where I had to be. You can see Marley’s write up of the tabling here, I was one of those “These are MY records” types.)

That was all back in those halcyon days of our youth before we learned just how ugly adoption politics really can be, what with entrenched industry interests demanding their own actions be covered by sealed records on the one side, and adoption ‘deformers’ willing so often to sell genuine open records down the river in exchange for a pittance on the other. (”Here I am, stuck in the middle with you,” I rather like the Bob Dylan version myself.)

But the Chicago conference was a watershed event.

One of the workshops, “Applying the Principles of Tactical Activism: Fostering the growth and political clout of Bastard Nation” given by “Activist/Attorney/Author Randy Shaw got some Bastards thinking. (Shaw: founder and Executive Director of San Francisco’s Tenderloin Housing Clinic and more recently BeyondChron named in part due to its criticism of the San Francisco Chronicle, importantly, he’s also the author of “The Activist’s Handbook: A Primer for the 1990’s and Beyond“, a book that got many Bastard Nationals thinking, and strategizing.) Ballot initiatives are one of the things Shaw views as an important tool in the activist’s toolbox.

Again, you would have to speak with those who were actually there at the time, but the ‘action path’ that came out of that first BN conference eventually became the statewide general election referendum in Oregon in 1998 that came to be known as “Measure 58.” (Unfortunately Bastards would have to wait until May 30th, 2000 at 5:01pm for Measure 58 to finally go into effect due to challenges winding their way through the courts.) You can read about the history of the initiative here.

Now I’m not saying Bastard Nation did it all by our lonesomes (speaking as a lifelong BN member, myself), but I am saying the spark that grew into measure 58, came from the rubbing of Bastard Nation members, specifically a few BN related individuals (steel) against early Bastard Activism and wanting to actually gain our records (flint).

You see, Helen Hill, the Chief Petitioner in Oregon, and Shea Grimm, both Bastard Nationals had been at the Chicago conference. They went home, rolled up their sleeves, and set about changing the world. You can read about how coming off the conference moved into measure 58 in E. Wayne Carp’s book “Adoption Politics: Bastard Nation and Ballot Initiative 58.” (Page 32 is kind of a jump to starting point mentioning the conference.) I’m not saying the book is perfect, not by a long shot, but it does at least lay out some of that “spark” in published form.

BN itself of course was crucial to Oregon’s measure 58. It was certainly a real focus by the time of the second conference, Bastards by the Bay: The Convergence, in San Francisco. My partner, Sleeps with Bastard and I were both involved by then. Keynoters Christina Crawford, Ricki Solinger, and Anne Babb gave us lots to chew on, before folks headed out to do a sealed records protest.

Indeed a key piece of that (first ever) Birth of a Bastard Nation (Chicago) conference was moving from theory to practice. Randy’s session was Friday July 18th, 1997 from 10:30am to noon. From 12pm to 3pm was Bastard Nation’s “Sealed Records Protest” which you can see the now historic photos of here.

Many of the people who went on to form the backbone of BN were present, specifically, I’ll mention both Marley Greiner and Ron Morgan as they form perhaps the bridge from that moment in Chicago to what became the “Adoptee Rights Demonstration”.

Now the conference may have been titled “Birth of a Bastard Nation”, but BN activism was born long before Chicago. On the these BN pages (here and here as but two examples) you can explore bits and pieces of Bastard activism going back toward the mid nineties.

In any case, the current Adoptee Rights Demonstration’s roots lie in those events and those early Bastard activist friendships that formed in the early days of Bastard Nation.

Which brings us up to Adoptee Rights Day. As I said, the first was back in 1998, “Commemorating the Anniversary of Oregon’s Historic Adoptee Rights Initiative” (to use a particular turn of phrase the Adoptee Rights Day came to use.)

ARD has always been both an educational event and an activism event. Legislators were contacted, and many Bastards went to Vital Statistics, to request copies of their (sealed) records, to protest, and to pass out educational material. More than just a single day, ARD has also been envisioned as a week of actions, including educational events and street theater. You can see this How to ARD page leading into the third anniversary to help you get a better idea what ARD was all about. (you will note that it is on the BN site.) Also be sure to see Anita Field’s (she’s a current Bastard Nation ExecCom member) Editorial written for ARD.

There was also a NARD e-mail group on Yahoo. There was always a focus on tying ARD events to what was happening state by state legislatively. State legislators were contacted concerning upcoming open records legislation, but also sometimes contacted about the ARD event itself, particularly bill sponsors and cosponsors.

To anonymously quote one e-mail from a Bastard in the wake of holding their state’s ARD event:

…I want to thank BN for providing us the avenue of ARD.

Clearly, the original ARD was of mutual benefit, organizationally it was good for BN nationally, and those in their home states also found it a productive tool both individually and organizationally.

It’s important to note that even back of the days of the original ARD, there was participation by parents and adoptive parents alongside Bastards.

This is a press release from what was then called “NARD” or “National Adoptee Rights Day.” Note that it contains sentences such as this:

Bastard Nation, the leading national adoptee rights organization, is helping coordinate events at Vital Statistics offices nationwide to show solidarity with the adoptees of Oregon and to celebrate National Adoptee Rights Day: a day dedicated to supporting dignity and ending government-sanctioned shame in adoption.

And that Ron Morgan, himself a Bastard National, was the “National Leader” as well as the contact person for the protest in San Francisco:

Contact National Leader Ron Morgan

You may also want to note the leadership of other sites, Helen Hill, for example, in Oregon. Bastard Nation was an intrinsic part of (N)ARD, so much so that the NARD webpage was hosted by BN.

When all was said and done, the first “ARD event” had occurred at 20 sites spread across 16 states.

In 1999, Bastards were at it again. The second ARD encompassed 27 sites in 15 states.

Want to read some individual state reports, see pictures, and even read press related to those original ARDs? You guessed it, you’ll find several ARD archives on the Bastard Nation page; here and here. Also note the e-mail address on the second link:

To get involved in your neck of the woods email nardinfo@bastards.org

Here, out of Bastard Nation’s Bastard Quarterly, you’ll see a write up and many pictures from ARD ‘01.

Starting to see a pattern? That’s because BN and (N) ARD were absolutely interconnected. Without BN how much ARD do you suppose would have happened?

And yes, Ron Morgan was a huge part of all of that, his role in it can not be understated. As I said, he was the “National Leader” on the original ARD in addition to pulling the SF event together. ARD was in some very concrete ways, his ‘baby’ so to speak. It is also important to note that both he and other BN activists worked together on CA open (see the CA section out of Bastard Nation’s Bastard Quarterly, the June ‘99 LegWatch). As early as ‘99, perhaps even earlier, Ron was the contact person in the “CA open” efforts and was doing the legwork of building towards CA open 2000, this grew into CA open 2001, etc.)

In short, both on the state and national levels BN and BN activists like Ron were working in their home states, doing work legislative, educational, and yes in the streets.

Which brings us up to the Adoptee Rights Demonstration. As I’ve said here on my blog before, Ron had been strategizing the idea of targeting the National Conference of State Legislators annual meeting for some time. He was interested in putting together a “mass action,” a large national (or even international?) event in which Bastards brought pressure on state legislators.

Note that I said “pressure,” as what Ron envisioned was an event or series of interconnected events that could be used together to essentially force the issue. This was going to take people fully versed in what the issues were, what language to use (and not to use), people who were thinking and strategically, and ultimately, the bottom line, an awful lot of them. Not just a few. Not ’some’, or even ‘many’, PRESSURE LOTS!

Which brings us up to last year. No doubt there are many other bits and pieces I should have included in the Original ARD (O-ARD) history, but I’ll leave that for those who experienced it directly to help fill out if they so chose. For the sake of brevity, I leave this portion at that. So last year… .

(First I’m going to have to do some adoption related blog introductions, please bear with me.)

Ron aka B.B. Church (who blogs Are you adopted? Are you sure? A Blog About Late Discovery Adoptees and B.B. Church’s Funhouse.)

and

Gershom (who blogs (Without a Tribe)/The Adoptee Rights Demonstration July 22, 2008, CALOpen, Anti-Adoption, and the Adoptee Rights Demonstration page itself. )

The two ran across one another and decided to move on Ron’s idea of an Adoptee Rights Demonstration outside the National Conference of State Legislators annual meeting.

Ron had written about the strategic importance of their annual meeting back in March of ‘07 in this post where he took on previous attempts at open records “marches” (on Washington in particular), his post is perhaps the articulation of his earlier vision for the Adoptee Rights Demonstration as requiring a mass movement kind of effort willing to utilize pressure tactics:

If Open Records leaders wanted to get the loudest bang for their buck, they would take a pass on WDC and go to Boston this August, for the annual meeting of the National Conference of State Legislators. These are the guys and gals that hold the keys to our records. We should be dogging their steps. We should be camped outside their hotels. We should be glad-handing at their receptions. We should be demanding that our so-called and self-styled leaders organize a march to the real heart of the matter or get out of the way…

Out of this and other such seeds, Ron and Gershom agreed to turn such ideas into an actual event slated for this July in New Orleans, as that was where the annual conference was being held this year.

Gershom, apparently completely unaware of the pre-existing Original ARD (O-ARD) history described from her perspective, how that coming together took place on her blog (on a piece from many months later, after Ron had left the Adoptee Rights Demonstration he had helped build.)

Last year I was an active poster on Soul Of Adoption, and there was this other quirky, yet intelligent, to the point, man there who went by the name of Late Discovery. His avatar had this man who looked like he’d been playing the blues and I liked what he had to say.

So on April 20, 2007 I declared my “passion” for the movement:

I think it would be powerful to have at LEAST one person from every closed record state across our country to enter their counties birth and record department at the exact same time, on the exact same day with media coverage behind them. We will be requesting our ORIGINAL birth records ( which will be denied ) and at the moment they are denied we can begin to have a non violent protest. I am willing to be arrested for this. And i am looking for other like minded adoptees who are willing to do the same. HOPEFULLY we wouldn’t be arrested but that COULD happen.

Sure my vision was a little “blurry” i didn’t understand the politics of adoption and open records, it not being a vital records department issue, but a state issue that had to be taken to the legislatures. That, is where Ron came in. That is when he told me about the NCSL.

By Gershom’s own admission, she’s new to all this. At the dawning of the “Adoptee Rights Demonstration/Day for Adoptee Rights”, as New Orleans protest came to be called Ron was going to be the voice of experience, essentially the lead organizer. Gershom was inexperienced, but learning many new skills from him. Again to quote Gershom’s piece:

Over the next few months he taught me a lot, about politics, about people, about utilizing opportunities to their greatest potential. He taught me so much in those first few months I felt like a student. Most of all, he believed in me.

May 25th, 2007 They put out an announcement entitled A Day for Adoptee Rights, July 2008, New Orleans LA! a copy of which can be found on his B.B.Church’s Funhouse blog. To the best of my knowledge this is the inital announcement of the event. Note that, it is was named “Day for Adoptee Rights,” which to many of us, not just Ron, had a pre-existing history attached.

This time instead of acting in our individual states, they proposed bringing Bastards from all 50 states to the legislators in one place and time, essentially a national action under the DAR name. Basically, as the announcement put it, a PROTEST FOR ADOPTEE RIGHTS (PAR?) which over time evolved to the event in N’awlins being called any number of variations along those lines, the “Adoptee Rights Demonstration”, the “Adoptee Rights Protest”, “Day for Adoptee Rights”, (among others, shall we say.)

Clearly, from the start what was being proposed was not anything on the scale of what Open Records related protests had resembled in the past.

We propose a mass action of adoptees representing all fifty states, a one-day rally that will be an opportunity for adoptees demonstrate their commitment to adoptee rights and to meet their state delegation.

We’re back to Ron’s use of the mass action concept- go big or go home. Anything less, again, going back to Ron’s March 7th 2007 blog entry was only a means by which to ultimately shoot ourselves in the foot to his thinking:

Past marches on Washington by Open Records organizers were a bad idea, poorly executed. I think it’s fair to say that they had minimal effect in changing any laws. Worse, by bringing together a few dozen Open Records supporters in the largest possible venue, they create the perception that the Open Records movement is weak and small. Bad political actions discourage people from participating in further actions. Why should they follow leaders that waste their time and resources?

So the effort was begun, the parameters of what they were setting out to achieve were laid out, and they were to be honest, pretty damn ambitious.

Sadly what happened next was the unforeseen, quoting Gershom again:

When his family needed him however, he knew that he couldn’t “be” here for the protest. He withdrew his leadership immediately to myself and a few others on a private board. He would be here for guidance, but his primary concern, like any good man ( and I say that with extra bitterness because I currently can’t STAND my childrens father ) was his family.

The event to which Gershom alludes to is elaborated upon here on Ron’s post announcing his no longer being involved in the Adoptee Rights Demonstration and his

retirement from “adoptee politics”, such as it is

As Ron says in the post:

When I first advocated an action at the National
Conference of State Legislatures lat year I knew how
much hard work it would take to be successful. I knew
it was possible for a small team to organize such an
event, but that the burdens would be great. Then, late
last summer, my wife was diagnosed with a malignant
brain tumor and my entire life focused on her
wellbeing and care.

Unfortunately, this unimaginably sad and difficult set of events changed the entire dynamic of how the Adoptee Rights Demonstration went forward from there on. With Ron unavailable, and later not overseeing the day to day of the preparations many things fell to Gershom. And thus many of the preparations ended up in her name.

As Ron said:

In retrospect it was a serious mistake on my part not to call for a suspension of planning for the ARD event at that time.

Which is not to say, Ron at the time of his stepping away from the current Adoptee Rights Demonstration wanted the idea to die, rather, he advocated a suspension, working towards ‘doing it right’ so to speak, at some future date.

My original vision for the ARD protest was that it
would be a mass action, that it would create an
impact, as opposed to the small-scale adoption reform
actions of the recent past. As the low numbers of
committed attendees attest, this is not happening. I
would like to call for a suspension of the New Orleans
ARD protest. I say suspension rather than cancellation
because I still believe that a protest at an NCSL
annual meeting at some point in the future is a viable
and effective action if executed properly. A
suspension, rather than a cancellation, would allow
the committed attendees to meet in NOLA face to face
and plan next steps.

Now that Ron has “retired,” I would not expect him to be back working for some other year’s event (though I suppose to whatever degree, anything is possible.) Point being, when he initially called for a suspension he had not yet retired and clearly those circumstances have changed now.

But the call for suspension of the N’awlins protest from Ron came many months later. Allow me to back up yet again.

Once Ron was in many ways simply out of the picture the day to day making things happen fell to Gershom. A website was up, donations were being collected, but there was no structure to the “Adoptee Rights 2008 Committee” that had announced the action (as you can see on Ron’s May 25th 2007 post.) There was no non-profit status, there was no fiscal agent, and the webpage never clearly delineated precisely WHO that full committee was. Later, who was and was not an organizer with the event would become an issue, and because there was no publicly available listing of who was responsible for what, it ended up making a bad situation worse.

To this day, the current ARD organizers have never publicly listed exactly who was organizing the event, nor into quite what people were making donations. I am not alleging any fiscal misconduct, I am merely saying one of the reasons I chose not to donate directly to ARD was that there was no visibility into the process and thus it was in some significant ways ultimately ‘accountable’ to no one.

Bastard Nation was a cosponsoring organization, as was “the adoption show” and internet broadcast, along with “Adoptees Unite” a cafepress page selling various logoware.

(The logo is based on a tree with roots which has gone on to become the Adoptee Rights Demonstration’s logo, something many of us objected to as ‘family trees’ are about search and reunion, which are interpersonal issues, not a civil rights issue, and not inherently about restoration of the records confiscated by the State. See Bastard Nations’s FAQ page section entitled “Is Bastard Nation a search organization?” to get a clearer understanding of the issues involved.)

Various individuals were picking up bits and pieces taking on tasks, and preparing to come to N’awlins in July. Well some of us anyway. Speaking for my partner and myself, we certainly had hotel reservations reserved in the Bastard Nation block.

In some ways I felt very ‘late to the party’ when I first blogged about the Adoptee Rights Demonstration back in January ‘08. I contacted Gershom about where things stood and what needed doing, offering to help back in February. She passed my e-mail on to Ron. Later, in March, Ron contacted me and asked if I would be willing to take on a position as the “March/Protest Volunteer Trainer and Head Monitor.” While I had concerns (among others, about coming on what I felt to be so late,) I ultimately agreed to help however I could.

Then we enter a period I’ve already blogged a fair amount about (see my “Adoptee Rights Demonstration” tag for my writings on this matter, the tag will them up in reverse order, newest to oldest), but I’ll draw out a quick sketch for new readers,

May 28th, Gershom coming back to organizers with what quite honestly were pathetic numbers of people who had bothered reserving hotel rooms in the non-BN hotel block (BN’s numbers were likewise, unimpressive) Neither of which amounted to ANYTHING on the scale of the event proposed.

May 29th Ron called for a suspension, which again, you can see the full text of here. AND ARD organizers learned an adoption agency, Abrazo Adoption Associates out of San Antonio Texas, had set up a facebook fundraising page collecting monies off our event, without our knowledge or consent. (At the time, I was still involved, hence my use of “our”.)

The Abrazo fundraising was going into their own 501c3, and had come to over $900. This led to the dual problems of whether the money which was unbeknownst to us up until this point was ultimately supposed to end up in their own agency coffers or whether such would be transfered from their account (now that we knew about the money) into ARD. Which raised it’s own issues.

BN has a policy against entanglement with agency money, I personally take a similar stance.

No matter where the money was going to end up (and actions spoke far louder than words, they money was already in their agency’s 501c3 and they had never told us of it’s existence, despite them utilizing our event to raise it in the first place) the circumstances under which it was raised were to say the least highly questionable.

The two simultaneous issues, that of the projected minimal attendance AND the Abrazo fundraising along with the previous history many of us ‘long timers’ had with both Ron and and the Day for Adoptee Rights in its previous incarnation led us to take Ron’s call for suspension very seriously.

However, as I pointed out above much of the preparations were in Gershom’s name, so even had the rest of us decided to ‘turn it off’, she still could have gone ahead. This was problematic, not merely in terms of the event itself, but in terms of what it meant to the entire legacy of what DAR had originally been. Some of us were not aware things were in Gershom’s name until we were well into this process. When I was contacted to work with DAR, for example I was under the impression the Adoptee Rights Demonstration was also Ron’s ‘baby’ with Gershom working as an assistant, and learning from him. Instead, we found ourselves in the situation where it was not under Ron’s control. The ‘buck stops here’ had shifted.

Simply put, Ron’s (and BN’s) ‘babies’ had been ‘adopted’.

And so the Adoptee Rights Demonstration essentially lost all the people with Day for Adoptee Rights institutional memory; Bastard Nation organizationally looked at the numbers and the ethical issues raised by the Abrazo fundraising and came to the conclusion that they organizationally had to withdraw their support from the event. The evening of the 29th, Bastard Nation (which to some of us was synonymous with what ARD had always meant in the past) withdrew. Early the next week, Bastard Nation posted their statement on the withdrawal.

This left the Adoptee Rights Demonstration with no national open records membership organization supporting it.

Two webpages and the people behind them as your sponsors along with numerous individuals simply cannot equate to what losing BN meant. When current DAR representatives speak with state legislators over the course of this event, they speak for themselves, not the broader adoptee civil rights/open records movement.

Going ahead with plans to continue the event with such non-mass movement numbers when that was part of what had been at the heart of the event signaled a fundamental change in the very nature of the event. It was no longer true to the original articulation of what people had signed on for, nor the vision of the event they had originally donated to.

The previous history Bastard Nationals and others had working under the name Adoptee Rights Day was likely an important part of why donations were given to the Adoptee Rights Demonstration, in essence, it was building on a foundation laid by Ron, and with Ron’s name on the ARDemonstration, no doubt many people took his and Bastard Nation’s presences as an indicator of a good thing, worthy of donations.

My partner and I stayed on for an additional 24 hours, waiting to see if the Abrazo mess had any hope of being straightened out before we made our final decision of whether to stay or go.

The following evening, (the 30th) Ron reported back the results of his phone call with the executive director of Abrazo, Elizabeth Jurnovich, she refused to acknowledge Abrazo had done anything wrong.

My partner and I resigned that evening, and I posted my two sentence statement.

Later, we would find one of the ARD organizers, Amyadoptee was pointing readers of her blog into the Abrazo fundraising, which was still ongoing and Abrazo continued on until what appears to have been June 4th, despite Abrazo being contacted by Ron on the 30th.

This was how the post originally appeared back when it was originally posted on May 31rst-

OPEN ADOPTION ROCKS

I have only been in avid support for one agency in my time of writing this blog. They are the only agency that puts their money where their mouth is. Abrazos Adoptions Services have began a fundraiser for the Adoptee Rights Protest. If you can join them on facebook, please do. Introducing OPEN ADOPTION ROCKS. Thank you so much for doing this for us adoptees. We really appreciate all the hard work that your agency does for adoptees and their families.

Amy has since changed the text, obliterating her link into Abrazo’s “open adoption rocks” fundraising page, which has also undergone dramatic changes since we first discovered it as well.

To the best of my knowledge Amy continues on as an ARD organizer to this day.

On June 5th Ron posted his statement.

Also on the 5th, Bastard Nation’s Executive Committee unanimously voted Amy off the Bastard Nation Legislative Committee. Amy posted BN’s letter on her blog (she has since removed her post):

June 5, 2008

Dear Amy:

The Executive Committee of Bastard Nation: the Adoptee Rights Organization has voted unanimously to remove you from the Legislative Committee effective immediately.

Bastard Nation has a long time policy of not accepting support from the adoption industry. Without saying, we do not advocate for the adoption industry or any adoption agency or professional within it. You have done both. As an private individual you have the perfect right to do so, but as a member of BN’s Legislative Committee your duty is to uphold BN principles, practices, and integrity.

Your relationship with Abrazo as documented in your own blog, “Regarding Bastard Nation’s Withdrawal” posted on June 2, 2008 at 3:51 pm and your actions on the original DAR Action List clearly demonstrate a lack of understanding of and concern for Bastard Nation’s mission, activities, and ethics, as well as the security and integrity of the original DAR. We are astounded that you failed to grasp the ethics and motives of an adoption agency funding the DAR protest, much less their procedure of funneling funds sent to them into their own 501(3)(c) account. This funding was done without the knowledge DAR sponsors and leaders, and would never have been approved had they been informed of the scheme.

We take this step to insure the security of Bastard Nation correspondence and the upholding of our principles and rules.

Bastard Nation Executive Committee
Anita Walker Field
Patricia Marler
Marley Greiner, Executive Chair

As I mentioned above, Amy, to the best of my knowledge is still working with nuDAR.

These withdrawals, Bastard Nation, my partner and I, and Ron represented more than half of the original organizing committee for the event.

Gershom had by now announced she was going ahead with the event. Those who were left from the original organizing committee, and other people organizing on adultadoptees.org’s forum decided to try to make an orders of magnitude scaled down Adoptee Rights Demonstration go forward.

Apparently, far from filing the streets, the current Adoptee Rights Demonstration does not even have a permit for the march from Layfayette Square to the convention center. So they, and their attempts at mandated signage will be ‘marching’ on the sidewalk.

For clarity’s sake, some of us ‘old’ DAR organizers have taken to calling this new incarnation, nuDAR. So you have O-DAR, DAR, and nuDAR, or O-ARD, ARD and nuARD.

O- meaning Original, pre-Gershom

just plain ARD or DAR being the period where the two overlap,

and nu, meaning those pretty much without the benefit of history.

Unfortunately nuDAR is not the only thing being built upon the bones of the pre-existing history, thereby leading to confusion. As Gershom has set up her Calopen that too, will no doubt be confused with pre-existing history, not only in that state, but more broadly with other states’ “open” efforts. One can only hope Gershom’s Calopen is with the knowledge and consent of the previously existing CAopen activists, else, well, I wouldn’t want to be in her shoes.

The sad part is how much of original Day for Adoptee Rights information is still available publicly on the web, and yet the nuDAR organizers often appear oblivious.

And with that lack of history and experience at least on the part of Gershom have come other problems.

Not the least of which being perhaps the single worst example of ‘activist’ tone-deaf insensitivity I have seen in my going on way too many decades of activism (not merely Bastard activism, but my years as an activist period!)

I had been speaking for some time now, both on my blog and behind the scenes about my love for N’awlins itself and how working in the city in this post-Katrina aftermath was going to take sensitivity and cluefulness. As recently as July 10th, I tried to make this abundantly clear in my post ARD- For those going to N’awlins:

Those still going would do well not be ‘tone deaf’ to the realities of N’awlins.

Unfortunately, Gershom, here on the eve of the event has managed to do the unthinkable.

In her July 19th blog post she likened the (nu) Adoptee Rights Demonstration to a “storm”:

The calm before the storm has come and past and the storm is here, WE ARE THE STORM, and we are NOT going away.

Girl, trust you me, the last thing N’awlins needs right now is another “storm.” Let alone one that won’t leave. (Natural impossibility, but truly a nightmare prospect for those who have already had to endure too much!)

Are you daft?

Likening those working to regain our basic rights and restore the records that were taken from us, (i.e. rebuilding what was lost, hoping to regain what we once had that is now gone) to the destructive power of a “Storm” heading towards NEW ORLEANS is in a word unforgivable. Period.

As I said, perhaps the single worst example of ‘activist’ tone-deaf insensitivity I have seen.

So that’s it. A last straw if you will. Any benefit of the doubt accorded to inexperience, gone.

My disgust runneth over.

By all means, go ahead, tell someone who’s living on the street, having lost everything in the last storm, that there’s ANOTHER storm headed their way.

Think they can’t wait for you to get there? Think again.

On this one, my heart is with my friends, still living in the city.

Not with at least one self professed ‘activist’ who even after reading this may still not understand she did anything wrong.

Unfortunately the legacy of what once was Adoptee Rights Day has fallen into the hands of a least a ‘leader’ the very opposite of what the Adoptee Rights Demonstration was intended to be: politically savy, clueful, streetsmart, mass enough to create political pressure, and most importantly, effective, creating measurable tangible results.

Instead she brags of having people coming from around the world to:

SCREAM WITH US

Effective that’s not.

If you want to throw a little party in New Orleans for yourself and your friends from adultadoptees, knock yourselves out, doesn’t have much to do with the realities of the New Orleans you’ll be sitting in the middle of, but hey, they could use the tourist bucks, as I said, tip well. But right this moment? Words like ‘political activist’ aren’t exactly what come to mind.

(Just a hint, utilizing phrases such as “our discrimination” when what one means is “the discrimination we endure” leads preexisting Adoptee Rights Day folks, not just me to cringe. (Oh, and “eyes roll in disgust”, a late breaking addition from across the room. He’s entitled.)

So folks, bring your sunscreen, pack a hat, drink tons of water, and don’t feel like a wuss for recognizing your limits in the N’awlins heat. The ARD you’re about to get is unrecognizable to the ARD that was originally planned.

And me? I’m just disgusted. Not with youth and inexperience, but with the narcissistic insensitivity.

See, you’re visiting someone else’s home, and while there, it’s best not to put your muddy boots on the antique heirloom coffee table.

So let’s be real clear, Gershom and by extension the Adoptee Rights Demonstration do not and cannot speak for me this week in New Orleans. Further they do not speak for any National or International adoptee rights membership organization.

Individuals from adoptee organizations, and for that matter, individuals related to adoption agencies may be present, but even T-shirts with adoptee rights groups logos such should not be mistaken for any organizational involvement.

On a more personal note? In light of the blatant lack of empathy on display?

Far as I’m concerned, Tuesday is the anniversary of one of my blogs.

***

Перевести на русский

***

(For new readers, please see my earlier two pieces; *Updated* The death of Dmitry Yakolev/Chase Harrison and the Russian announcement; 2 agencies accreditations pulled & a 3rd under investigation and Dmitry (Dima) Yakolev/Chase Harrison and the 3 agencies; new details emerge to get up to speed.)

***

Update- This is one of a series of posts about Dmitry’s death. Please follow my Dmitry Yakolev tag to read more.

***

Thanks to the ongoing research on Dmitry’s case over at Pound Pup Legacy, by way of this small article, Adoption agencies shut after Russian child dies in U.S., (from back on the 12th,) we finally find an image of Dmitry:

The image appears to have been first published in this article, Russia bans three adoption agencies following baby’s death in the U.S. on the 11th.

By way of news articles update, the Baltimore Examiner, published this piece yesterday, U.S.-Russian tensions rise over infant’s death, about how Dmitry’s death has fanned the flames of the already tense U.S./Russian ongoing adoption situation:

But Chase’s death has spread concern among Russian officials that Americans aren’t regulating and keeping tabs on the parents who adopt children from Russia.

The article then goes on to repeat the claim that European Adoption Consultants has been banned.

The earlier Moscow times article, originally published on the 15th, says EAC has not been banned, but are being investigated by the Russian Education and Science Ministry.

The actual current status of EAC continues to be unclear in light of conflicting news reports and no statement (that I’ve come across anyway) mentioning the current status from EAC, the U.S. State Department, nor Russian Authorities.

To date the one statement I’ve come across, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement, deals only with the investigation into Dmitry’s death, not the banning of Cradle of Hope Adoption Center and Family and Children’s Agency, nor of an investigation into EAC.

I will continue to try to find a clarification of the Russian position on EAC.

The article goes on to state:

Russian officials claim the adoption agency didn’t alert the government within the legally required time of Chase’s death.

As a result, Russian officials said, European Adoption Consultants Inc. and two other unnamed companies have been banned from Russia.

A spokesman for EAC declined to comment Tuesday, saying that the company is still trying to figure out what action the Russians have taken.

and

Calls to the U.S. State Department were not returned.

The United States and Russia already have a dicey past over adoption. In 2006 a Manassas woman was convicted of beating her Russian-born adopted daughter to death.

By way of blog updates, Bastardette brings us Damage Control: Dmitry Yakolev/Chase Harrison which points readers across European Adoption Consultants current brief front webpage statement about Dmitry’s death:

To our EAC Families and Friends

It is with deep regret that we acknowledge the unfortunate loss of one of our own. Chase (Dmitry) Harrison, adopted from Russia 03/2008, died on July 8th. Our thoughts and prayers are with the family in this time of sorrow.

We are currently assessing the situation and continuing to work with the Russian Federation on this matter.

As additional information becomes available we will keep you apprised.

I find this a rather stunning statement in light of the circumstances.

It makes no mention of how Dmitry died, nor that his death apparently occurred as a result of actions taken by his foster father, Miles H. Harrison, (I’m still looking for confirmation, but it appears the adoption itself was still been in process.) His foster father is currently facing charges of manslaughter for his role in Dmitry’s death.

The EAC statement makes it appear Dmitry simply up and died, when it’s relatively clear (we are still awaiting final autopsy results), that Dmitry died as a result of the actions of a man who had apparently gone through EAC’s approval process to adopt him. This is not merely a case of Dmitry being one of EAC’s “own”, Miles Harrison was also apparently one of EAC’s own.

The statement also says nothing about, nor even acknowledges that there may be an investigation into EAC for having apparently broken Russian law requiring Russian authorities be notified of Dmitry’s death in a timely fashion. (News of his death reached Russian authorities days after the fact. The officials at the Russian Embassy learned via the media.)

Nor is there any mention of EAC’s current status in regard to whether or not they are still accredited to do Russian adoptions.

Bastardette, in her comment thread on the same piece also points readers at a 2008 “Business Spotlight” profile piece of Margaret Cole’s European Adoption Consultants in the Bay Village Ohio Community Advocate entitled Uniting Orphaned Children with Loving Parents:

European Adoption Consultants, Inc. is presently one of the largest international adoption agencies in the world, and the top agency in Russia and Guatemala.

As I pointed out earlier, Dmitry is not the only Russian adoptee European Adoption Consultants has placed who has died due to the actions of their American adopters.

Logan Higgenbotham had also been placed by EAC and killed by her adoptive mother, Laura Higgenbotham in Vermont in 1988. (She pled no contest to a charge of involuntary manslaughter and received a 1 year prison sentence after having intentionally slammed 3 year old Logan’s head into a wall.)

Marley’s/Bastardette’s “Memoriam to Russian Adoptees Murdered by their Forever Families,” NIKTO NE ZABYT — NICHTO NE ZABYTO, (Nobody is forgotten. Nothing is forgotten.) contains further information about Dmitry and Logan.

***

Перевести на русский

***

This piece has been retitled. The text below remains as was originally posted July 14th, 08, however the update below, posted on the 15th contradicts some of the information I had available to me on the 14th. Please read down through.

This is one of a series of posts about Dmitry’s death. Please follow my Dmitry Yakolev tag to read more.

***

(I am somewhat ‘late’ blogging this, but particularly as there has been so little print media about Dmitry’s death, I thought it was important to be as thorough as I could be in blogging the story.)

21 month old Russian adoptee Dmitry Yakolev, renamed Chase Harrison by his adopters, died a miserable death in Herndon, Virginia last week. His adoptive father “forgot” about him; after failing to drop Dmitry off at daycare, he drove on to work, parked, and went in to the building, leaving Dmitry in the back seat in his child safety seat. Many hours later, around 5pm, a coworker noticed something through the SUV’s tinted windows and alerted the office receptionist. Despite attempts at CPR on the unresponsive child, he could not be resuscitated.

(Among the many questions this raises, I am not the only one puzzled that the day-care center apparently did not call either parent to determine Dmity’s whereabouts when he failed to arrive.)

Temperatures on Tuesday (July 8th) in the area reached 91 degrees. Inside the SUV, where the windows had been left rolled up, temperatures may have ranged from 131-172 degrees (according to estimates by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention.) Dmitry, still strapped in, apparently slowly roasted to death over the course of hours. It is unclear exactly how many hours he was alone in the vehicle. An autopsy was scheduled for late last week to make a final determination on cause of death.

It is recommended that placing a stuffed animal or similar in the passenger seat alongside a driver, or to place a purse or briefcase in the back seat when adults have a child in the back seat may help them focus on remembering the child and their wellbeing. Children left in vehicles in summer are certainly a far broader problem than confined to those who adopt, there have been multiple instances just in Virginia in the last week.

However, the extent to which focus, time, and effort, have gone into adopting a child, as well as this having been mere months after Dmitry came to America also raises questions. If an adoptive couple has waited for and worked so hard to finally get a child, should that make any difference in how much they are aware of and focused on said child after he ‘comes home’? Should children newly brought to the country, or adopted be somehow less at risk of being forgotten under circumstances such as these? Clearly, not in Dmitry’s case.

According to this Fairfax Times article, Dmitry’s adoptive father, Miles H. Harrison, (49, of Purcellville, Virginia), has been charged with manslaughter but not served, as of last Thursday as he had apparently ‘collapsed in shock’ after realizing he had left the child. The maximum sentence he could receive on the charge would be ten years.

This (Friday July 11, ‘08) Washington Post article, Father Whose Son Died in Hot Car is Hospitalized, has a few more details:

Harrison, 49, was taken to Reston Hospital Center after Chase was discovered, then to the Herndon police station to be interviewed by detectives. Harrison collapsed again at the station, and was returned to the Reston facility before being transported to an undisclosed private hospital, said Herndon Police Lt. Jeff P. Coulter. Coulter said police are to be called when Harrison is ready to leave the hospital.

“If he needs some short-term treatment to get stabilized, I would not interfere with that. I can certainly understand that might be in order given what’s occurred here,” Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Ray Morrogh said. “There’s no rush. If he needs treatment he should get it, and then he will face what he has to face.”

Harrison’s wife, Carol, was questioned by detectives at the Herndon police station about an hour after Chase was found, Coulter said. She was interviewed about background information and “what went on during the day,” he said, adding that the investigation will seek to answer what happened “leading up to that day, what all has taken place in these people’s lives.”

Dmitry was the Harrison’s only child.

Further down in the Washington Post article, Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Ray Morrogh explained the reasoning behind the manslaughter charge thusly:

Morrogh said the decision to charge Harrison with manslaughter followed an impartial look at the facts. Murder was out because there was no intent, he said. While states have a hodgepodge of practices on whether or not to charge in such cases, doing so seems appropriate here, he said.

“From where I sit, I have to enforce the law, and the law places certain requirements on people when it comes to many things, especially with children,” Morrogh said. “It’s just such an emotional thing, and rightly so. As a parent myself, I can’t imagine. It’s just a tragedy all the way around.”

The Harrisons were still in the state mandated six month supervision period required for international adoptions after Dmitry came from Russia three months ago.

Unfortunately, his death is only the latest of a number of Russian children who have died due to the actions of their American adopters, something those of us living in the broader DC metropolitan area may have some awareness of considering the recent sentencing of Samuel and Donna Merryman for the death of their Russian born adopted son Dennis Uritsky this past April (see my blog post about such here.)

There has been an ongoing history that forms the context into which Dmitry’s death has fallen internationally as well, Russian adoptions have come to the brink, in the aftermath, stricter rules had already been placed on agencies working in Russia. Frustrations with the number of Russian children who have died post adoption were already running high.

The Russian reaction to Dmitry’s death has been swift.

The Friday Washington Post article detailed the Russian Embassy involvement:

Yevgeniy V. Khorishko, press officer for the Russian Embassy, said consulate officials are “trying to figure out the details of this accident.”

“We are in contact with U.S. officials in this case,” Khorishko said. Russian officials are also working to determine whether the boy still had Russian citizenship, he said.

Also on Friday this RIA Novosti article hit, Russia bans 3 adoption agencies following baby’s death in U.S., which I’ll quote several paragraphs from:

Three international adoption agencies, including one that failed to inform Russia of the death of a baby in the U.S. this week, have been banned from operating in Russia, the country’s adoption authorities said on Friday.

and

The Russian Education and Science Ministry’s adoption commission said in a statement: “The agencies to be banned from working on the territory of the Russian Federation include a representative office that violated the requirements of Russian law on swiftly informing us of the death of an adopted child.”

and

The incident had been expected to prompt new calls in Russia for tighter controls on adoptions following several other scandals, notably the killing of a two-year-old girl from Siberia by her adoptive mother in the United States. The woman, Peggy Sue Hilt, was sentenced to 25 years in prison in May 2006 for beating the child to death.

Around 120,000 Russian children were adopted both in Russia and abroad in 2007, a 6.4% increase on 2006, according to the Science and Education Ministry.

(The child Peggy Sue Hilt murdered, mentioned above, was two and a half year old Nina Hilt/Viktoria Bazhenova.)

To date, I have only found the single article mentioning three agencies were essentially booted out last Friday, and unfortunately, the article fails to give the names of any of the three. (I will continue to search for more details.) While such usually would be ‘bigger news’ here in the States at least, there’s been scant mention. Other than on a blog here and there, it’s gotten very little public attention.

In short, under Russian law, when an adopted child dies, the agency is required to notify Russian authorities. One of the three agencies that have since been banned failed to live up to its obligations as part of doing adoptions in Russia. As for the other two, Russia halting their in country operations may or may not have been in any way related to this latest incident.

As the reasons are unknown at this time, I will focus upon the agency that failed to notify Russian authorities of Dmitry’s death. The article quoted above leads to another set of questions. As the agency appears not to have given notice at all (”one that failed to inform Russia of the death”) were they attempting to keep Dmitry’s death from his country of birth, possibly in an attempt to protect their own accreditation to do business there?

Russian authorities appear to have done what they could, kicking the agency out, but then, Russian law requires an agency inform them if a child dies. Not every country has such a requirement.

Other than losing the ability to do business in Russia will there be any other consequences to the agency that failed to report?

Further, what of other countries the agencies do business in? Will they in any way be informed that the agencies lost their Russian accreditation, in one case for failing to comply with Russian law by reporting and adopted child’s death?

So who then, are the three agencies (including the one that failed to notify?) Well, by way of at least one of those three, over on Bastardette’s comment thread here, Niels of Pound Pup Legacy pointed readers at this page, by way of citation in a comment that contained in part, the following:

The adoption agency involved in the placement of Chase Harrison (Dmitry Yakovlev) was European Adoption Consultants, Inc.

Which would be European Adoption Consultants, 12608 Alameda Drive, Strongville, Ohio 44149.

Be sure to see their Russian program here, which flatly states “The referral process for infant boys is quick right now”, their Russian program news page, and their FAQ under the question “Q: Is EAC licensed to do adoptions in Russia?” The “Returning Home to the USA – Russia – Word Document” off this page lays out some of the follow up visits etc expected after a Russian adoptee has ben brought to the States. Finally, this link, view the letter, will take you to a confirmation letter to EAC informing them of their Russian Accreditation (English version is on page 2.)

Their basic intake application forms, both online (click the “apply online” link on this page) and printable, ask questions such as the religious affiliation of prospective adopters and essay questions such as “Briefly explain how you intend to raise your child with religious/moral values”or “Please describe the child that will complete your “forever family”.”

Further down in the same comment thread E. Case pointed out that European Adoption Consultants had previous placed another Russian child, Logan Higgenbotham (in Vermont back in 1998), who had been killed by her adoptive mother, Laura Higgenbotham. (She pled no contest to a charge of involuntary manslaughter and received a 1 year prison sentence after having intentionally slammed 3 year old Logan’s head into a wall.)

Marley/Bastardette has blogged twice about Dmitry’s death;

Another Russian Adoptee Dies: Chase Harrison

and

Russian Updates

She has also created and maintains an online “Memoriam to Russian Adoptees Murdered by their Forever Families,”"

NIKTO NE ZABYT — NICHTO NE ZABYTO

(Nobody is forgotten. Nothing is forgotten.)

Each of the dead or murdered Russian adoptees I’ve mentioned in my blog post (Dmitry Takolev/Chase Harrison, Dennis Uritsky/Dennis Merryman, Logan Higgenbotham, and Viktoria Bazhenova/Nina Hilt) are also memorialized on her site with details about each child and their deaths; photographs whenever possible, some links to media coverage, and importantly, where known, those who did the children’s homestudies and the agencies responsible for the placements are also named.

In Dmitry’s/Chase’s case, in addition to the more general profile, she has a few important details listed:

Chase was adopted from the Pechora City Children’s Home, Psov area; in the US 3 months. Home Study: Adoption Connections, Falls Church, Virginia. Social Worker: Christine Hessinger. Adoption Agency: European Adoption Consultants, Strongsville, Ohio.

I’ll end by quoting a few sentences from a comment Bastardette made on her own blog here:

Dima’s adoption was not yet finalized. He was a Russian citizen who died of neglect (accidental or not) at the hands of a person who was deemed “responsible” enough to adopt someone else’s child by the Russian and US governments and a prominent …adoption agency.

*********************

UPDATE

*********************

July 15th, 08

See Bastardette’s blog entry from 9:51 last night:

ANOTHER RUSSIAN UPDATE: DIMA YAKOLEV/CHASE HARRISON

I’ll quote the crucial bits:

The English language Moscow Times reported four hours ago that European Adoption Consultants, contrary to earlier news reports in RPC News and Gazetta, has not been banned from operating in the Russian Federation.

and

The agency, however, is under investigation over its failure to immediately report the death last week of Dmitry Yakolev (adopted name Chase Harrison) in Virginia. The Moscow Times also said that the accreditation of two other agencies, The Cradle of Hope Adoption Center and Family and Children’s Agency has been withdrawn over failure to keep the Russian Education and Science Ministry informed on the well-being of adoptees placed by them as required by Russian law. Vladimir Kabanov, head of the ministry’s adoption department denied that the agencies were connected to the Yakolev/Harrison case, saying they are guilty of separate violations.

I’d strongly advise reading her entire piece.

Yesterday, Bastard Nation responded to the Evan B. Donaldson Institute e-mail from Ms. Hicks with an important “Open Letter” a copy of which, with an introduction from Bastard Nation’s Executive Chair, Marley Greiner, can be found on her personal blog, The Daily Bastardette.

Go read the piece, it will get you up to speed on the situation.

In response to the Bastard Nation open letter, I wrote the following:

That SO needed saying.

Speaking as one of those ‘Black Holed Bastards’ (from Ohio, myself,) I found the EBD e-mail from Susan Hicks appalling.

Ohio’s black hole is precisely the situation we who care about genuine open records have worked to eradicate. So when Massachusetts built a new black hole for Massachusetts Bastards, we were horrified.

It is “example A” of the kind of legislation we have fought and continue to fight against. It is, to put it mildly, what not to do.

For EBD to then turn around and HIRE a person who proudly brags of having played (to use her term) an “instrumental role” in the Massachusetts disaster shows either profound ignorance of what black hole legislation does to Bastards (something that as Marley pointed out even EBD’s own report rejects) or outright stupidity.

You don’t REWARD people who were part of destroying records access/genuine open records by placing them in the position of the Institute’s ‘project administrator’ on open records! Good grief!

Putting forward Ms. Hicks as any kind of liaison with the rest of the open records and adopted people’s community would be laughable, were it not so tragic.

It is beyond insulting.

Marley and BN are if anything, being far too polite.

Once again, EBD shows that despite even the content of their own reports, their current set of actions reflect a profound unawareness of the issues faced by, and real needs of, adopted people.

Perhaps instead of e-mailing AT adopted people, EBD would do well to LISTEN to those of us who have been working towards our own open records instead.

As I’ve said before, when it comes to adoption, and open records, we (pro-uncompromised open records adopted people) are the experts.

In the mean time, EBD does not and can not, speak for me. Certainly not if they view Ms. Hicks as an Institute appropriate ‘project administrator’ on open records.

As for those of us who ARE black holed Bastards ourselves, we will continue to speak and work on our own behalf- uncompromisingly.

Why? Because my life, my access to my own State confiscated records, and my authentic genetic identity are all not things I’m willing to ‘compromise’ away.