Thinking Blogger

A NEW FLOWER BLOOMS was kind enough to give me a "THINKING BLOGGER AWARD". Besides the right to show off the graphic, the best benefit is the opportunity to nominate five other deserving bloggers.

So, here's my list:

BRONZE TRINITY: BronzeTrinity is an African-Canadian ray of sunlight. She attacks controversial issues with vigor, with innovation and with a true positive spirit. With a sense of vision, she genuinely believes in an empowered, informed grassroots movement for all kinds of social change. Most importantly, her positivity is infectious -- she'll get you to believe, too.

Bronzetrinity maintains the Afrospear Online Paper.

AfroSpear: A Think Tank For People of African Descent.

They describe what they're about better than I could: The origins of “AfroSpear” started from a discussion a group... [I]t developed into an idea to create a diasporic-wide think tank type blog.

We don’t always agree, but what we have in common is our love for our community and a commitment to the progress of those of African descent, both near and far. We are made up from a variety of voices with a variety of perspectives. Lubangakene, Sylvia and Field Negro reside in the United States. Asabagna is of Caribbean heritage residing in Canada. Aulelia is a Tanzanian woman living in France.

Adjunct to this blog is the "Afrospear Nation", the widest blogroll of black bloggers I've come across. Surf lots, but remember to bring your manners.

African American Political Pundit describes himself as, "African American Political Pundit is a former Democrat, turned Republican, now an Independent; who is politically biased, pretending to be neutral." A fiercely original thinker, his blog is the kind of intellectually honest blog that can be provocative for white readers... but then, he isn't blogging for white readers. Also, as most of the Afrospear Nation is blatantly leftist, for the Elephants in the crowd, you can find some conservative black bloggers on his blogroll.

Jack and Jill Politics, mentioned here before, is an incisive, left-leaning political blog from a self-described "Black Bourgeoisie perspective". What I like is the intellectual honesty and the fact that the "Black" perspective trumps the political ideology (a recent post about Edwards "code talking" is a solid example of this.

thefreeslave is one of the more challenging blogs on this list for a white audience, but, much like birth mom or adult adoptee blogs for adoptive parents, a blog like this that gives so much deep thought to racism, to me, is crucial. thefreeslave sees White European culture as a hypocritical, imperialistic society, and those values define white action. This is not the starting point of most white people on America... the "land of the free" and all that. If you've never framed the racism question in that way, thefreeslave will provoke thought and introspection.

So, there's my list. There are a host of other equally valuable black bloggers, representing a range of black thought. In general, I feel it's VITALLY important to understand issues within the black community. I have approached commenting with a tremendous amount of humility, thankful for their perspective and understanding that it's not any of their jobs to educate me, but my job to educate myself.

The N Word

Pop quiz! Who said...

To be plain, I wish to get quit of Negroes...

I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in endowments both of body and mind.

I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race...

Answers?

George Washington (in a 1778 letter to his plantation manger)
Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia, 1785)
and
Abraham Lincoln (1858)!!

These bon mots and more are revealed in Jabari Asim's new(ish) book, THE N WORD: WHO CAN SAY IT, WHO SHOULDN'T AND WHY. What Asim (syndicated columnist and deputy editor of the WASHINGTON POST BOOK WORLD) has accomplished in this slender, powerful book, is a concise history of African-Americans... as told BY whites TO other whites.

Through the lens of the "N" word, from first recorded usage through today, Asim makes the persuasive case that whites could not deal with the dichotomy of being good, God-fearing men of noble purpose AND slave owners. Instead of abolishing slavery at the birth of the nation, our glorious founding fathers created a myth around those they had brutally imported from Africa to MORALLY justify the Africans' enslavement. To do this, they created the "N-----", and bent reality to fit their story. It helped the whites sleep at night AND get their cotton picked. Africans were not the same race as whites. They were animalistic in their joys, passions and fears. Because their pleasure was only base sexual gratification and their pain was "transitory", there was no moral imperative to keep families intact, honor their history, allow them to keep their names or grant dignity to them in any way. Because they were "fearful" of freedom, and too stupid to be of use, slavery was, in fact, a COMPASSIONATE alternative to freedom.

Because they were not human, it didn't matter if white men slept with black woman, but it was an affront for any lust-crazed Negro to sleep with a white woman.

Because they were simpleminded, they loved to dance and sing merrily while working 18 hour days.

But, because they were animalistic, they could turn mean and evil and needed to be put down.

W.E.B. Du Bois cleverly called this "racial folklore", and insisted that it's presence made the "color line", as he called it, transcend simple economic exploitation. For example, while other ethnic minorities have been or are being exploited for their labor, it is unique to the black experience to have an identity manufactured by the dominant white society and then brutally and systemically imposed -- even imprinted -- onto them, the "...belief that somewhere between men and cattle, God created a tertium quid, and called it a Negro -- a clownish, simple creature, at times even lovable within its limitations."

In the subsequent pages, Asim traces the implementation of this "racial folklore" through American history, proving his point with devastating detail. Almost like a prosecutor, even if you have known all the facts, seeing them all pulled together in such a cogent way makes it clear to ANYONE that whites have tried to rewrite the reality of black America with the merciless, pernicious efficiency of Orwellian scope. "2+2=5". Winston Smith needed not just repeat it, but BELIEVE it. Internalize it.

Slaves not willing to work in subhuman conditions? They're lazy!
Slaves pretending to like whitefolk to get by? They're jolly darkies!
Slaves try to run away because they don't like being slaves? They're aggressive, violent, predatory animals out to rape white women and kill white men!

Again, a quote by W.E.B. Du Bois sums it up perfectly. "Everything Negroes did was wrong. If they fought for freedom, they were beasts; if they did not fight, they were born slaves. If they cowered on the plantation, they loved slavery; if they ran away, they were loafers. If they sang, they were silly, if they scowled, they were impudent... And they were funny, funny -- ridiculous baboons, aping men!"

Asim walks us through this twisted history, showing how this "folklore" became fact, through pseudo-science (initiated by Jefferson, himself!), white mistrelry, "plantation" literature, up through Michael Richards' onstage tirade.

What is so pernicious about the "n-----ization" of America is the way it self-perpetuates, creating false history, false "experts" and false "eyewitnesses", thus creating an inauthentic basis for the black experience. Asim deals with this explicitly in a chapter about the painful legacy of UNCLE TOM'S CABIN. The book (which I have never read), is, in fact, a Christ allegory, written by an ardent, Christian abolitionist. How, then, did it come to be synonymous, in the contemporary lexicon, with "sellout"? Asim explains that Harriet Beecher Stowe, having little first-hand experience with black people, used many of the racist conventions of (white-authored) "plantation literature", in their portrayal of black speech and attitudes. With a foundation of inauthentic "research", even the sympathetic portrayal of blacks in the novel served to perpetuate negative and harmful stereotypes.

Adding insult to injury, the rights to dramatize the book fell away from Stowe's control, allowing the masses to see play versions of the book, in which the character of Tom was altered from a robust young man to a dodering, simpering old man, sometimes nominally in keeping with Stowe's rhetorical point, but often, perverted to serve explicitly racist motives.

The racist stereotypes are even internalized by blacks. After generations of blacks being forcably corralled into a small sphere of possibility, after generations being told that they are base and less than human, or, certainly, less than whites, many blacks begin to live out the very grotesque "fables" of black life, as concocted by whites. From this, stems the smiling, dancing, "coon", a role still required of many African Americans on sit-coms and lame comedies, and the "bad N-----", the provocative, raping, stealing, killing machine that eventually became the "thug" or "gangsta", celebrated in film, in rap music and on the streets of America.

The most horrendous problem is the circle of unbroken white power, modern white politicians and authority figures using the self-comforting lies of their ancestors about the nature of the black race to justify the curtailment of blacks' rights. By using this "folklore" to decide that "urban blight" is a foregone conclusion, based on the nature of the black community, contemporary politicians are able to perpetuate their ancestors' racist policies, all while avoiding admitting that racist hiring practices, racist college admission policies, failing public schools and difficulty accessing financial services are NOT the result of failures within the black community, but the result of centuries-old racist, self-serving beliefs. Believing in these "truths" also allows contemporary whites to view any attempt to correct historical injustices to be "reverse" racism.

In the concluding chapters, Asim describes a black community caught between a desire to "own" the "n" word and those who wish to bury the "n" word, along with all of attendant white lies about the limits of black genius. Asim points out how, by perpetuating the use of the word, blacks may be reinforcing this "folklore" of black inferiority... to young blacks and, worse, to a new generation of whites, such as Quentin Tarantino, all of whom feel the liberty to play in the "n-----" sandbox". Using examples such as "Archie Bunker" and Dave Chappelle, he points out the limit of even intentional satire -- that those most in need of understanding the joke may be those most likely to dangerously misinterpret it. (In fact, on THE ACTOR'S STUDIO, Chappelle, himself, admitted that seeing too many white kids use his show as permission to use the "n" word was part of the reason he so publicly pulled the plug on production. This isn't mentioned in the book, but lends tremendous credibility to Asim's point.)

Asim feels that artists and historians should have permission to work within the poisonous world the "n" word created, but that for all others, the use and it's legacy should be ended, in favor of a more uplifting vision for black (and white) America, saying:

When Lemuel Haynes composed LIBERTY FURTHER EXTENDED in 1776, he wrote: 'I think it not hyperbolical to affirm, that even an African, has Equally as good a right to his Liberty in common with Englishmen.' He made no mention of "n-----s." When David Walker published his remarkable APPEAL in 1829, he addressed it to 'my dearly beloved Brethren and Fellow Citizens.' He did not mention "n-----s." When W.E.B. Du Bois published his landmark collection of essays in 1903, he called it THE SOUL OF BLACK FOLK -- not "n-----s." When Marcus Garvey formed his organization in 1916, he called it the Universal Negro Improvement Association. He made no mention of "n-----s." In his speech at the March on Washington in 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "America has given the Negro people a bad check"; he did not say America has given "n-----s" a bad check. A year later, when Malcolm X began his "Ballot or the Bullet" speech with a greeting to "Brothers and Sisters and Friends", not "n-----s" and friends. In her 1971 lecture at Tougaloo College, Fannie Lou Hamer urged, "Stand up, black men, this nation needs you." She did not say "Stand up, n-----s."

"Africans." "Negroes." "Black men." "Brothers." "Sisters." "Fellow Citizens." Each falls off the tongue with ease. None is hard to pronounce.

I for one can still visualize the "n-----," and perhaps because I'm a man, I usually see him as a man, odious and shiftless, violent and stupid, contemptuous of black women and obsessed with white ones -- a self-hating, devilish phantom whose footsteps can still be heard as we tread through the tentative early years of the twenty-first century... As long as we (meaning African-Americans) embrace the derogatory language that has long accompanies and abetted our systemic dehumanization, we shackle ourselves to those corrupt white delusions -- and their attendant false story of our struggle in the United States. Throwing off those shackles would at least free us to stake acclaim to an independent imagination.... I dream of a world where "n-----" no longer roams, confined instead to the fetid white fantasy land where he was born.

THE N WORD is ESSENTIAL to any parent adopting transracially. It provides the Rosetta Stone for the iconography of African-Americans in the mainstream (white) culture. Better than any other book I've read, explains WHY racism exists and HOW racism came to take the form it did. Are there better histories of African-Americans? Undoubtedly. Better books about the effects of racism? Sure. But no other book I've found articulates the psychosis of racism and it's origins as completely and powerfully as this one. This book explains, for example, that weird opinions about blacks my grandmother held actually date back to Jefferson, directly.

Through this book, a white parent is empowered to deconstruct contemporary examples of the "n-----ization" of black culture and politics -- by white and blacks (or, more specifically, by blacks serving the vision of -- and financially renumerated by -- whites). When a white college frat dons blackface, pull this book off the shelf and explain the history of minstrelry. When blacks are viewed as oversexualized -- either as predatory men or eager, available women, this book will be invaluable in explaining the root causes of that portrayal. Conversely, when blacks are the sexless facilitators of white nobility, allowing the white hero to save the day and get the girl, that, too can be explained through the prism conveyed in this book.

One last use for this book I wish to convey. This book could even lift the veil from the eyes of white racists, explaining that they have bought into a wholly fictional worldview. This is a personal issue for many, as I know a handful of you have family members who disapprove of your adoption. This book may help them understand their own unexamined racism and, hopefully, see their grandchild (for example) as the possessor of no less genius than any white grandchild.

NYT article about adoption from Ethiopia

In Ethiopia, Open Doors for Foreign Adoptions

By JANE GROSS and WILL CONNORS
Published: June 4, 2007

ST. PAUL — Ethiopia was not on Mark and Vera Westrum-Ostrom’s list when they first visited Children’s Home Society & Family Services here to explore an international adoption.

From Ethiopia to Minnesota Ukraine was first, because of their family heritage, until the couple discovered that the adoption system there was chaotic, with inaccurate information about orphans’ health and availability.

Vietnam was second, after they saw videos of well-run orphanages. But the wait would be at least a year and a half.

Then they learned about Ethiopia’s model centers for orphans, run by American agencies, with an efficient adoption system that made it possible for them to file paperwork on Labor Day and claim 2-year-old Tariku, a boy with almond eyes and a halo of ringlets, at Christmas.

From Addis Ababa, the capital city, they traveled to the countryside to meet the boy’s birth mother, an opportunity rare in international adoption. And at roughly $20,000, the process was affordable compared with other foreign adoptions, and free of the bribes that are common in some countries.

It is no wonder, given these advantages, that Ethiopia, a country more often associated by Americans with drought, famine and conflict, has become a hot spot for international adoption. Even before the actress Angelina Jolie put adoption in Ethiopia on the cover of People magazine in 2005, the number of adoptions there by Americans was growing. The total is still small — 732 children in 2006, out of a total of 20,632 foreign adoptions, but it is a steep increase, up from 82 children adopted in 1997.

Ethiopia now ranks 5th among countries for adoption by Americans, up from 16th in 2000. In the same period, the number of American agencies licensed to operate there has grown from one to 22.

The increasing interest in Ethiopia comes at a time when the leading countries for international adoption, China, Guatemala and Russia are, respectively, tightening eligibility requirements, under scrutiny for adoption corruption and closing borders to American agencies.

Ethiopia’s sudden popularity also comes with risks, say government officials there and in America.

“I don’t think we’ll be able to handle it,” said Haddush Halefom, an official at the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, which oversees adoption. “We don’t have the capacity to handle all these new agencies, and we have to monitor the quality, not just the quantity.”

Capping the number of agencies is one solution. And that is what some international adoption officials in the United States are now urging the Ethiopian government to do.

Of concern is the ability of agencies to handle the rising demand, which may have contributed to a recent mix-up involving two families sent home with the wrong children by Christian World Adoption, an established agency, although relatively new to Ethiopia. That case prompted inquiries by the State Department and the nonprofit Joint Council on International Children’s Services in Virginia, a child welfare and advocacy organization, and the adoption agency itself, said Thomas DiFilipo, president of the joint council.

Officials at Christian World Adoption did not reply to e-mail messages or telephone calls. But Mr. DiFilipo said the agency was reviewing its procedures and has hired immigration lawyers to resolve the mix-up.

The consensus, Mr. DiFilipo said, is that the mix-up was “an honest mistake.” But, he added, “This could be the byproduct of a staff handling 35 placements when they’re used to handling 20.”

Children’s Home Society & Family Services, founded in 1889, began working in Ethiopia in 2004. The agency completed about 300 adoptions in its first three years in Ethiopia, and expects to complete that many in 2007 alone. Along with Wide Horizons For Children in Waltham, Mass., the society is credited with helping Ethiopia create a model for international adoption.

Ethiopia, with a population of 76 million, has an estimated 5 million children who have lost one or both parents, according to aid organizations. Many African nations have outlawed or impeded the adoption of their children by foreigners. Ethiopia has welcomed American and European families who are willing to provide homes for children who have lost both parents to AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis or starvation, or who come from families too destitute to feed and clothe them. (The adoption process includes routine screening for HIV infection.)

Two elements distinguish Ethiopia’s adoption system, according to dozens of experts. One is the existence of transitional homes for orphans, in the countryside and in the capital, with services and staffing that are rare in the developing world — paid for by American agencies.

Not long ago, Sandra Iverson, a nurse practitioner from the University of Minnesota’s international adoption health clinic, the first of its kind in the United States, was invited to visit the Children’s Home Society’s Ethiopian centers.

She arrived with a neonatal otoscope, to diagnose ear infections; the Red Book, the bible of pediatrics; and scarce antibiotics. She left confident that Ethiopia’s orphans enjoyed unusual care.

“You don’t hear crying babies,” Ms. Iverson said. “They are picked up immediately.”

The other signature of the Ethiopian system is that adopting families are encouraged to meet birth families and visit the villages where the children were raised, a cutting-edge practice in adoptions. Some agencies provide DVDs or photographs that document the children’s past.

Russ and Ann Couwenhoven, in Ham Lake, Minn., recently showed one such video to 6-year-old Tariku, one of three children they have adopted from Ethiopia. The boy seemed proud of the beautifully painted house he had lived in, they said, and the uncle who had sheltered him for as long as he could.

Linda Zwicky brought 2-year-old Amale home five days before the Memorial Day weekend, with a letter from the child’s grandmother that described holding the motherless infant at her breast even though she had no milk. Sometimes such vividness is too much. Melanie Danke and her husband, of Minneapolis, adopted 6-year-old twins and a 3-year-old, all siblings. One of the twins “would work herself up until she was inconsolable” looking at photos of the aunt and grandmother who raised her, Ms. Danke said. So she has tucked the photos away for now.

David Pilgrim, vice president of adoption services at the Children’s Home Society, said the agency spends $2 million a year on its Ethiopian facilities.

At the main transitional home, on the outskirts of Addis Ababa, a staff of 170 care for about 120 children, ensuring that the children have consistent contact with adults, which experts say mitigates the most damaging psychological effects of institutionalization.

During a reporter’s recent visit, the two terra-cotta buildings where the children live, usually for no more than a few months, were spotless, with staff members scurrying to pick up toys and food spills as they hit the floor.

The transitional home has a primary school, open also to local students, where the children begin learning English. There is a medical clinic with two full-time doctors and 10 nurses. Down the road is a guest house for adoptive parents, who also can stay in a sleek hotel.

The children also enjoy the services of a “laugh therapist,” Belachu Girma.

“These kids come here and are very depressed at first, all with their heads down and not talking,” Mr. Girma said. “I come in and try to help them relax.”

There was laughter also at the nearby guest house, more of the nervous kind, as American parents waited to take their children back to St. Paul from the Horn of Africa.

Araminta and Jason Montague, from Atlanta, who picked up 17-month-old Natan last week, compared their experience in Ethiopia to an earlier adoption of a girl from China (where Americans adopted 6,493 children in 2006).

“Our daughter was in an orphanage with about 300 children and she was very dehydrated,” Ms. Montague said. “We were never told her origins. Her sheet just said ‘Status: Abandoned.’ ”

Some parents anguished, as did Karla Suomala of Decorah, Iowa, when she arrived in Addis Ababa to adopt 5-year-old Dawit and his 21-month-old sister Meheret.

“It’s hard to know what the right thing is to do,” Ms. Suomala said. “Should we just give all the money we’re spending on this to the children’s mother?” Ms. Suomala and her husband, David Vasquez, had already spent time with her.

“It was obvious the birth mother loved her children,” Mr. Vasquez said. “She said to us, ‘Thank you for sharing my burden.’ ”

Alessandro Conticini, the head of child protection at Unicef Ethiopia, is one of many who believe that international adoption is a good thing but must be “part of a larger strategy” that focuses on keeping children in their families or communities, with the help of humanitarian organizations.

Indeed, the Ethiopian government has taken the unusual step of requiring foreign agencies to provide social services and document the results. As a result, agencies like Children’s Home Society and Wide Horizons have built schools and medical facilities — including one for HIV-infected children.

But Mr. Conticini, of Unicef, worries about the mushrooming number of private adoption companies that “are not properly regulated by the government” because two different ministries are involved and working at cross purposes.

At the State Department, visa applications for children adopted from Ethiopia are getting extra attention, said Catherine M. Barry, deputy assistant secretary for overseas citizens services. “We will very quickly see if patterns are emerging,” she said, “and we will intervene in a timely fashion with anyone doing less than quality work.”

While the governments collaborate to protect a delicate adoption system from the perils of growth, adoptive families arrive each week in Addis Ababa to ease their children into new lives.

Last week, these included Mr. Vasquez and Ms. Suomala. While she had no trouble escorting Meheret from the orphanage, Dawit refused to budge, so Mr. Vasquez carried him toward the gate.

There, the child grabbed the bars and would not let go. Mr. Vasquez considered prying his hands loose and thought better of it. Instead he told Dawit that it was O.K. to cry.


Jane Gross reported from St. Paul, and Will Connors from Addis Ababa.

Bush Outlines Aid to Africa

Let's do our part to make sure the President gets the money he's asking for!

President Bush Discusses United States International Development Agenda
Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center
Washington, D.C.
10:07 A.M. EDT

MRS. BUSH: Thank you, George, for that kind introduction. Thanks to the United States Global Leadership Council for hosting us this morning. Next week, leaders from around the world will gather in Germany to advance goals shared by people of every nation: economic empowerment, education, and good health.

President George W. Bush delivers remarks on the United States International Development Agenda Thursday, May 31, 2007, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Center in Washington, D.C. "We're blessed to live in the world's most prosperous nation," said the President. "And I believe we have a special responsibility to help those who are not as blessed. It is the call to share our prosperity with others, and to reach out to brothers and sisters in need." White House photo by Shealah Craighead The eagerness of children to learn, the desire of individuals to provide for themselves and their families, and the longing of mothers to see their babies grow up healthy are universal. Yet poverty, a lack of education, and disease have kept millions from around the world from fulfilling these fundamental desires. Today the governments and citizens of many countries are working to overcome these crises. And the American people are proud to stand with them.

Through our government, the American people have given billions of dollars to lift the burdens of crushing debt, illiteracy, malaria and HIV/AIDS. At the end of June, I'll travel to the African nations of Senegal, Mozambique, Zambia and Mali to see the results -- some of these results firsthand. I'll visit homes protected by mosquito sprays, and go to clinics supported by the President's Malaria Initiative. There, volunteers distribute mosquito nets so that mothers can sleep knowing that their babies are safe.

I'll visit a pediatric hospital supported by the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, where doctors and nurses care for thousands of HIV-positive babies. I'll see new wells installed by the Play Pumps Alliance, which will provide as many as 10 million Africans with clean water. And I'll visit schools supported by our government's African Education Initiative. By supplying textbooks and training hundreds of thousands of teachers, the African Education Initiative gives African children hope for security, prosperity and good health.

These are just some of the things our government is doing around the world that Americans should be proud of. Through our development initiatives, we're helping to build free economies, teach children how to read, and save the lives of millions of men and women -- women like Kunene Tantoh. I first met Kunene two years ago when I visited a Mothers to Mothers center in South Africa. At Mothers centers, which receive PEPFAR seed money, HIV-infected women receive information and support to keep their unborn babies HIV free. When Kunene first arrived at the Mothers clinic, she had just discovered she was pregnant -- and HIV positive. A normal CD4 count, which measures a person's immune cells, is between 500 and 1,500. Kunene's count was 2. It seemed unlikely that she would survive.

President George W. Bush addresses the United States Global Leadership Campaign Thursday, May 31, 2007, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Center in Washington, D.C. "This is a fine organization and it's an important organization," said President Bush. "It's rallying businesses and non-governmental organizations and faith-based and community and civic organizations across our country to advance a noble cause, ensuring that the United States leads the world in spreading hope and opportunity." White House photo by Chris Greenberg But with the treatment Kunene received at the Mothers clinic, she did survive, and delivered a beautiful boy named Baron. He's HIV free. Kunene became a mentor to other mothers, and now she serves as a site coordinator at the largest Mothers facility. Today she and Baron stand as a symbol of hope to everyone living positively with HIV. Kunene and Baron. (Applause.) Kunene also represents the many lives that have been touched and saved by the compassion of the American people.

Now I'm proud to introduce a man of extraordinary compassion. Ladies and gentlemen, my husband, President George W. Bush. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Please be seated. Laura, thanks for that short introduction. (Laughter.) I'm proud to be introduced by my wife. I love her dearly. She's a great First Lady. (Applause.)

And I appreciate the chance to address the U.S. Global Leadership Campaign. This is a fine organization and it's an important organization. It's rallying businesses and non-governmental organizations and faith-based and community and civic organizations across our country to advance a noble cause, ensuring that the United States leads the world in spreading hope and opportunity. It's a big deal, and I appreciate your participation.

It's a big deal because your efforts are needed. Millions suffer from hunger and poverty and disease in this world of ours. Many nations lack the capacity to meet the overwhelming needs of their people. Alleviating this suffering requires bold action from America. It requires America's leadership and requires the action of developed nations, as well.

That's the message I'm going to take with me to Europe next week, when Laura and I go to the G8. At that meeting I will discuss our common responsibility to help struggling nations grow strong and improve the lives of their citizens. And today I'm going to describe some of the initiatives that I will be discussing with world leaders next week to help developing nations build a better future for their people.

Before I do so, I want to thank George Ingram, the President of the U.S. Global Leadership Campaign. I thank the members of my Cabinet who share the same passion I do for helping those less fortunate around the world -- that would include Carlos Gutierrez, Department of Commerce; Secretary Mike Leavitt, Department of Health and Human Services; Secretary Sam Bodman at the Department of Energy; Administrator Steve Johnson of the EPA. Thank you all for coming. Proud to be serving with you.

Mrs. Laura Bush delivers remarks about the United States International Development Agenda Thursday, May 31, 2007, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Center in Washington, D.C. "The eagerness of children to learn, the desire of individuals to provide for themselves and their families, and the longing of mothers to see their babies grow up healthy are universal," said Mrs. Bush. White House photo by Chris Greenberg I am glad that the Acting Director of the U.S. Foreign Assistance and Acting Administrator of USAID is here, Henrietta Fore. Thanks for coming. I appreciate John Danilovich, who is the head of the Millennium Challenge Corporation; Rob Mosbacher, the head of OPIC. I appreciate other members of my administration who joined us today.

I thank the members of the Diplomatic Corps who are here today. I thank the members of the U.S. Global Leadership Campaign.

We are a compassionate nation. When Americans see suffering and know that our country can help stop it, they expect our government to respond. I believe in the timeless truth, and so do a lot of other Americans, to whom much is given, much is required. We're blessed to live in this country. We're blessed to live in the world's most prosperous nation. And I believe we have a special responsibility to help those who are not as blessed. It is the call to share our prosperity with others, and to reach out to brothers and sisters in need.

We help the least fortunate across the world because our conscience demands it. We also recognize that helping struggling nations succeed is in our interest. When America helps lift societies out of poverty we create new markets for goods and services, and new jobs for American workers. Prosperity abroad can be translated to jobs here at home. It's in our interest that we help improve the economies of nations around the world.

When America helps reduce chaos and suffering, we make this country safer, because prosperous nations are less likely to feed resentment and breed violence and export terror. Helping poor nations find the path to success benefits this economy and our security, and it makes us a better country. It helps lift our soul and renews our spirit.

So America is pursuing a clear strategy to bring progress and prosperity to struggling nations all across the world. We're working to increase access to trade and relieve the burden of debt. We're increasing our assistance to the world's poorest countries and using this aid to encourage reform, and strengthen education, and fight the scourge of disease. We'll work with developing nations to find ways to address their energy needs and the challenge of global climate change.

Bringing progress and prosperity to struggling nations requires opening new opportunities for trade. Trade is the best way to help poor countries develop their economies and improve the lives of their people. When I took office, America had free trade agreements with three countries. Today we have free trade agreements in force with 14 countries, most of which are in the developing world. Three weeks ago, my administration and Congress agreed on a new trade policy that will be applied to free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia, Panama and South Korea. And I look forward to working with Congress to get all these trade bills passed. These bills are good for our economy.

But it's important for members of Congress and the people of this country to understand free trade is the best way to lift people out of poverty. And so the United States also seeks to open markets to the Doha round of trade negotiations. Doha represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to help millions in the developing world rise from poverty and despair. If you're interested in helping the poor people, you ought to be for trade and opening up markets for their goods and services. And the Doha round gives us an opportunity to do just that.

We put forward bold proposals to help conclude a successful Doha round. And at the G8 summit next week, I'm going to urge other nations to do the same. A successful Doha round will benefit all our countries and it's going to transform the world.

I know that trade can transform lives, I've seen it firsthand. Laura and I were recently in Guatemala. We went to a small village and saw what can happen when markets are open for local entrepreneurs. In this case, we met some farmers who for years had struggled to survive, worked hard just to put food on the table for their families by growing corn and beans. That's all they were able to do. It's a hard way to make a living, growing corn and beans. When we negotiated the trade agreement called the CAFTA DR, which opened up new markets for Guatemalan farmers, the entrepreneurial spirit came forth. There are entrepreneurs all over the world, if just given a chance, they can succeed.

Today, the farmers in that village are growing high-value crops, because they have new markets in which to sell their product. The business we met -- the entrepreneur we met now employs a thousand people. Trade will improve lives a lot faster than government aid can. It's in our interest that we open up markets, for our products, and for the products of others. People just want to be given a chance. And the United States will take the lead in making sure those markets are open for people to be able to realize a better life.

Building progress and prosperity to struggling nations requires lifting the burden of debt from the poorest countries. That makes sense. It doesn't take a Ph.D. in economics to figure out, if you're paying a lot of money on interest, you're not having enough money to support your own people. In the past, many poor nations borrowed money, and they couldn't repay the debt. And their interest payments were huge. And, therefore, they didn't have the opportunity to invest in education and health care. So the administration, my administration worked with G8 nations to ease the debt burden. We're not the first administration to figure this out. My predecessor did the same thing, because it's the right policy for the United States of America.

Two years ago at Gleneagles, the G8 nations agreed to support a multilateral debt relief agreement that freed poor countries of up to $60 billion in debt. This year, we built on that progress, when the Inter-American Development Bank approved another debt relief initiative for some of the poorest nations in our neighborhood, in our own hemisphere. This initiative will cancel $3.4 billion owed by five countries: Bolivia, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua. And that represents more than 12 percent of their combined GDP, an average of nearly $110 for every man, woman, and child in these countries. And this money is now free to help these nations invest in improving their lives of citizens. It makes sense to forgive debt. If you're interested in helping the poor, it makes sense for the developed world to forgive the debt. And that's what the United States will continue to do.

Bringing progress and prosperity to struggling nations requires increased American assistance to countries most in need. Since I took office, we have more than doubled U.S. development spending across the world -- from about $10 billion in 2000, to $23 billion in 2006. It's the largest increase in development assistance since the Marshall Plan.

The first four years of my administration, we doubled our assistance to Africa. At the G8 summit in 2005, I promised our assistance to Africa would double once again by 2010. I made a promise to the people. People expect us to deliver on that promise, and I expect the Congress to help. We must not shortchange these efforts. Congress needs to approve my full funding request for development assistance this year. We need to get the job done. (Applause.)

We're focusing increased American assistance for developing nations on three key goals -- in other words, we have some goals, we're not just going to spend money. We have a reason to spend the money and we expect there to be results when we spend that money -- so do the taxpayers of this country. It's one thing to be compassionate, it's another thing to be accountable for the money.

First, we're going to use our aid to help developing countries build democratic and accountable institutions and strengthen their civil societies. To succeed in the global economy, nations need fair and transparent legal systems; need free markets that unleash the creativity of their citizens; need banking systems that serve people at all income levels; and a business climate that welcomes foreign investment and supports local entrepreneurs.

The United States is helping developing nations build these and other free institutions through what we call the Millennium Challenge Account. Under this program, America makes a compact with developing nations. We give aid, and in return they agree to implement democratic reforms, to fight corruption, to invest in their people -- particularly in health and education -- and to promote economic freedom. Seems like a fair deal, doesn't it -- taxpayers' money from the United States in return for the habits and procedures necessary for a solid society to develop. We don't want to give aid to a country where the leaders steal the money. We expect there to be accountability for U.S. money and that's the principle behind the Millennium Challenge Account. Eleven nations have compacts in place worth nearly $3 billion. And now 14 additional nations are eligible to negotiate compacts with the Millennium Challenge Corporation, headed by Ambassador Danilovich.

Let me give you an example of how this program can make a difference. In Madagascar the leaders of this island nation set a goal in their compact to improve agricultural production. In other words, we work with a nation, they have set the goal; we support their goal. They want their farmers to be able to compete in the global marketplace. We agreed to help by investing in agricultural business centers that work with local farmers. In one village, this initiative helped a group of farmers who were surviving by collecting firewood and producing charcoal. That's how these folks were trying to get ahead. They'd find firewood and make charcoal out of it, and hope they could find a market. It's a tough way to make a living in a modern world.

The business center that the compact established helped the farmers work together to identify a new product, a natural oil used in skin care products. I probably could use some of that myself. (Laughter.) The center helped these farmers develop -- helped them to develop a business plan. They acquired financing to set up a distilling plant. They built relationships with buyers in their nation's capital.

Before America and Madagascar signed our compact, a typical farmer in this village could earn about $5 a week selling charcoal. After two months of bringing the new product to the market, the livelihood of these farmers increased. One farmer was able to raise his income enough to save about $500, money he plans to use for a child's education.

We're going to help encourage African entrepreneurs in other ways, as well. Today, I'm announcing a new project called Africa Financial Sector Initiative. Through this initiative, we'll provide technical assistance to help African nations strengthen their financial markets. The U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corps, OPIC, headed by Rob Mosbacher, will work with the financial community to create several new private equity funds that will mobilize up to a billion dollars of additional private investment in Africa.

If you're interested in job creation, there's got to be capital available. It's in our interest that we help provide capital to African entrepreneurs. We want them to find access to capital, and we want them to have access to markets because we want to improve their lives. And when people's lives in countries on the continent of Africa improve, it helps the United States of America. It's what our taxpayers have got to understand. It's in our interest. (Applause.)

All of this will go for naught if people don't have a good education. So the second way we're using our aid is to improve education so that the young in the developing world have the tools they need to realize their God-given potential. Many parents across the world either have no access to education for their children, or simply cannot afford it. It's a fact of life, something the world needs to deal with, particularly those of us who have got some money.

In many nations, girls have even less educational opportunity. It robs them of a chance to satisfy their ambitions or to make use of their talents and skills, and it's really sad, when you think about it. It really is. The question is, does the United States care? Should we do something about it? And the answer is, absolutely. If boys and girls in Africa and other developing nations don't learn how to read, write, and add and subtract, this world is just going to move on without them. And all the aid efforts we'll be trying will go to naught, in my judgment.

And so in 2002, I launched the African Education Initiative to help address the great need. Through this initiative, we have provided about $300 million to expand educational opportunities throughout the continent, and we're going to provide another $300 million by 2010. We will have doubled our commitment. (Applause.)

One young woman who has benefited from this program is a woman named Evelyn Nkadori, from the Masai people of the grasslands of Kenya. In her rural community, girls are rarely offered an education -- just never given a chance. They're expected to care for younger children until they're married themselves at an early age. That was the custom. She had a different vision for her future, and our initiative helped her realize it. Our program helped her complete high school, and now she's attending Chicago State University on a scholarship. She's one of the first -- she is one of the first women from her village ever to receive a college education. She hopes to attend medical school, and then go home and help others.

Evelyn, I appreciate you being here today. I'm honored by your presence. Thank you for your courage. We can't make you want to succeed, but we can help you succeed. Thanks for coming. (Applause.)

And we need to do more, for not only children on the continent of Africa, but poor children throughout the world. And so I'm calling on Congress to fund $525 million over the next five years to make our educational initiatives even more robust. And the goal is to provide basic education for 4 million additional children on the continent of Africa and across the globe.

We've got another interesting idea, and that is to establish new Communities of Opportunity centers in poor nations to provide skills and language training for 100,000 at-risk youth; giving these young people in these countries the skills they need to succeed, we're going to give them keys to a brighter future.

The third way we're using our aid is to fight the scourge of disease in Africa and other parts of the developing world. Epidemics like HIV/AIDS and malaria destroy lives and they decimate families. They also impose a crippling economic burden on societies where so many are struggling to lift their families out of poverty. We've taken action to fight these diseases. We've done so because it's in our nation's interest to do so.

In 2003, my administration launched a new initiative to combat HIV/AIDS -- the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR. We pledged $15 billion over five years for AIDS prevention and treatment and care programs in many of the poorest nations on Earth. This level of support was unprecedented. I'm proud to report, on behalf of our citizens, that it remains the largest commitment by any nation ever to combat a single disease. (Applause.)

And the program is working. Three years ago, about 50,000 people on the continent of Africa were receiving antiretroviral drugs for help. Today, over 1.1 million people are receiving lifesaving drugs. And this is a good start. It's a necessary start, and it's a promising start; but we need to do more. So yesterday in the Rose Garden, Kunene and Baron and the good Doc -- and I don't know where the Bishop is -- (laughter) -- anyway, they were standing with me up there when I called on Congress to greatly expand our efforts in the fight against HIV/AIDS, by doubling our initial commitment, by dedicating an additional $30 billion to this struggle over the next five years in the year 2009. (Applause.)

And here's the goal: support treatment for nearly 2.5 million people, to prevent more than 12 million new infections, and to provide compassionate care for 12 million people, including 5 million more orphans and vulnerable children. We set the goal for the past initiative, and we met it. And we're going to set the goal for this one, and we're going to meet it. But Congress needs to get that money as quickly as possible so it makes it easier to meet the goal. I proposed this unprecedented investment for a reason -- it's in the world's interest and our nation's interest to save lives. And that's exactly what this program is doing.

We saved a life of a fellow named Robert Ongole. He's with us today. John Robert Ongole -- not yet, not yet, John Robert. (Laughter.) I'm going to make it a little more dramatic than that. (Laughter.) You probably didn't know who I was talking about when is skipped the "John." (Laughter.)

John Robert has a family of two children; he has HIV/AIDS. This disease ravaged his body. His weight dropped to 99 pounds. He developed tuberculosis and other health problems. He and his family felt certain that he would die. Then John Robert began receiving antiretroviral treatment through PEPFAR in Uganda. The treatment restored his strength. He returned to the classroom and he continued being a dad.

John Robert is earning his bachelor's degree in education. He's volunteering to help other people. The American people need to hear what he had to say: "When you talk of PEPFAR, that's my life, because it worked. Because without it, I couldn't have lived. Now I want to save the lives of other people." Thanks for coming, John Robert. (Applause.)

Does it matter to America if John Robert lives? You bet it does. That's why this initiative is an important initiative. That's why it's important Congress continue to spend taxpayers' money to save lives like John Robert's, and Kunene's, and Baron's.

As we increase our commitment to fight HIV/AIDS, we're also continuing an unprecedented commitment to fight against malaria. Malaria takes the lives of about 1 million people a year in the developing world, and the vast majority are under five years old. In some countries, this disease takes even more lives than HIV/AIDS. Every 30 seconds, a mother in Africa loses her child to malaria. It's a tragic disease because it's preventable and treatable. We can do something about it.

In 2005, I announced the President's Malaria Initiative. Through this initiative, we're spending $1.2 billion over five years to fight the disease in 15 targeted African countries. This initiative provides insecticide-treated bed nets, indoor spraying, and life-saving anti-malaria medications. This strategy works. It really isn't all that complicated. It takes money and organization and effort.

In Angola, this initiative helped increase the number of children protected by nets from less than 5 percent to nearly 70 percent. You buy the nets, you educate the people, you get the nets to them, and when they start using them, lives are saved. This initiative has expanded malaria protection for more than 6 million Africans in its first year, and by the end of the second year, in 2007, we expect to reach a total of 30 million people. (Applause.)

At the G8 summit, I'm going to urge our partners to join us in this unprecedented effort to fight these dreaded diseases. America is proud to take the lead. We expect others to join us, as well. If you want to help improve lives on the continent of Africa, and around the world, join with the United States and provide substantial help to fight HIV/AIDS and malaria.

Bringing progress and prosperity to struggling nations requires growing amounts of energy. It's hard to grow your economy if you don't have energy. Yet, producing that energy can create environmental challenges for the world. We need to harness the power of technology to help nations meet their growing energy needs while protecting the environment and addressing the challenge of global climate change.

In recent years, science has deepened our understanding of climate change and opened new possibilities for confronting it. The United States takes this issue seriously. The new initiative I am outlining today will contribute to the important dialogue that will take place in Germany next week. The United States will work with other nations to establish a new framework on greenhouse gas emissions for when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.

So my proposal is this: By the end of next year, America and other nations will set a long-term global goal for reducing greenhouse gases. To help develop this goal, the United States will convene a series of meetings of nations that produce most greenhouse gas emissions, including nations with rapidly growing economies like India and China.

In addition to this long-term global goal, each country would establish midterm national targets, and programs that reflect their own mix of energy sources and future energy needs. Over the course of the next 18 months, our nations would bring together industry leaders from different sectors of our economies, such as power generation and alternative fuels and transportation. These leaders will form working groups that will cooperate on ways to share clean energy technology and best practices.

It's important to ensure that we get results, and so we will create a strong and transparent system for measuring each country's performance. This new framework would help our nations fulfill our responsibilities under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. The United States will work with all nations that are part of this convention to adapt to the impacts of climate change, gain access to clean and more energy-efficient technologies, and promote sustainable forestry and agriculture.

The way to meet this challenge of energy and global climate change is through technology, and the United States is in the lead. The world is on the verge of great breakthroughs that will help us become better stewards of the environment. Over the past six years, my administration has spent, along with the Congress, more than $12 billion in research on clean energy technology. We're the world's leader when it comes to figuring out new ways to power our economy and be good stewards of the environment.

We're investing in new technologies to produce electricity in cleaner ways, including solar and wind energy, clean coal technologies. If we can get a breakthrough in clean coal technologies, it's going to help the developing world immeasurably, and at the same time, help protect our environment.

We're spending a lot of money on clean, safe nuclear power. If you're truly interested in cleaning up the environment, or interested in renewable sources of energy, the best way to do so is through safe nuclear power. We're investing in new technologies that transform the way we fuel our cars and trucks. We're expanding the use of hybrid and clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel.

We're spending a lot of your money in figuring out ways to produce ethanol from products other than corn. One of these days, we'll be making fuel to power our automobiles from wood chips, to switchgrasses, to agricultural wastes. I think it makes sense to have our farmers growing energy, so that we don't have to import it from parts of the world where they may not like us too much. And it's good for our environment, as well.

We're pressing on with battery research for plug-in hybrid vehicles that can be powered by electricity from a wall socket, instead of gasoline. We're continuing to research and to advance hydrogen-powered vehicles that emit pure water instead of exhaust fumes; we're taking steps to make sure these technologies reach the market, setting new mandatory fuel standards that require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels by the year 2017. It's a mandatory fuel standard. We want to reduce our gasoline consumption by 20 percent over the next 10 years, which will not only help our national security, it will make us better stewards of the environment. The United States is taking the lead, and that's the message I'm going to take to the G8.

Last week, the Department of Energy announced that in 2006, our carbon emissions decreased by 1.3 percent while our economy grew by 3.3 percent. This experience shows that a strong and growing economy can deliver both a better life for its people and a cleaner environment at the same time.

At the G8 summit, I'm going to encourage world leaders to increase their own investments in research and development. I'm looking forward to working with them. I'm looking forward to discussing ways to encourage more investment in developing nations by making low-cost financing options for clean energy a priority of the international development banks.

We're also going to work to conclude talks with other nations on eliminating tariffs and other barriers to clean energy technologies and services by the end of year. If you are truly committed to helping the environment, nations need to get rid of their tariffs, need to get rid of those barriers that prevent new technologies from coming into their countries. We'll help the world's poorest nations reduce emissions by giving them government-developed technologies at low cost, or in some case, no cost at all.

We have an historic opportunity in the world to extend prosperity to regions that have only known poverty and despair. The United States is in the lead, and we're going to stay in the lead.

The initiatives I've discussed today are making a difference in the lives of millions; our fellow citizens have got to understand that. We're talking about improving lives in a real, tangible way that ought to make our country proud. That's why we've asked these folks to come. It's one thing for the President to be talking about stories; it's another thing for the people to see firsthand what our help has done.

I'm so proud of the United States of America. This initiative shows the good character and the decency of the American people. We are a decent people. We feel responsible for helping those who are less fortunate. And I am proud to be the President of such a good nation. Thanks for coming, and God bless. (Applause.)

END 10:46 A.M. EDT



Fact Sheet: Commitment to International Development

Today, President Bush spoke about the Administration’s commitment to international development. The President discussed expanded education for the world’s poorest children and Africa Financial Sector Initiative, and called on Congress to fully fund his foreign assistance budget request in FY2008.

* President Bush committed to expand assistance for education in the world’s poorest countries. Our investment in disadvantaged children will help foster the development of stable and productive environments where social justice, economic development, and democratic principles thrive.

* President Bush announced the Africa Financial Sector Initiative (AFSI) to strengthen financial markets, mobilize domestic and foreign investment, and help spur job creation and economic growth. This initiative is expected to mobilize up to $1.0 billion in privately-managed investment funds for Africa and provide expert technical assistance specifically tailored to help address structural impediments in Africa’s financial sector.

Expanding education and developing the private sector are two essential long-term investments that can help break the cycle of poverty in the word’s poorest countries.

President Announces Expanded Education for the World’s Poorest Children

Today, President Bush committed to expand assistance for education in the world’s poorest countries. The U.S. will establish a new after-school skills development program, Communities of Opportunity, for young girls and boys. The U.S. will also expand support for other new basic education activities to ensure that children have access to quality schooling. Additional U.S. funding will total $525 million over five years.

* The President will work closely with Congress to implement this new transformational approach to promoting education in poor countries.

* A new Coordinator for Education, based at the U.S. Agency for International Development, will direct a strategic use of resources that builds on America’s current support for basic education, child health, and nutrition overseas. Resources will be targeted to countries that demonstrate a strong commitment -- including Fast Track Initiative endorsed education plans, financial transparency, and increased government spending on education.

* Education promotes progress, reduces poverty, and helps girls and boys become productive and active citizens. It allows women to fully use their talents to build just and innovative societies. Moreover, education offers opportunity and counters the forces of extremism and violence.

A Transformational Approach To Education

The approach will build upon the Administration’s existing efforts by:

* Providing up to 4 million more children with access to quality basic education through comprehensive programs in a select number of initial target countries;

* Giving 100,000 at-risk youth extra training in English, computer skills, science, math and finance, and critical thinking through “Communities of Opportunity”;

* Coordinating with child health interventions -- including school feeding and vaccinations -- in support of broader basic education and training activities; and

* Establishing partnerships in support of targeted interventions with local communities, parents, and the private sector -- including business and non-government organization leaders.

The Africa Financial Sector Initiative Strengthens And Mobilizes Funding And Markets

To strengthen and deepen African capital markets, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) will support the creation of several new private equity funds that may mobilize up to $800 million of additional investment in Africa. This investment will address critical gaps in the sources of financing available to African businesses. The financial community submitted 25 proposals to OPIC for consideration pursuant to its recently completed Africa Capital Markets Call for Proposals. By September 2007, OPIC will select funds to support based on its assessment of developmental impact and potential for success. These dedicated funds will:

* Offer new financial instruments and services to African businesses, such as long-term debt, local currency debt, mezzanine financing, securities underwriting, and corporate bond issuance.

In addition, on June 6, OPIC will issue an innovative call for proposals seeking private equity funds to provide capital to businesses serving important social needs in Africa and contributing to the grass roots development of its private sector. These dedicated funds will:

* Provide capital to businesses in sectors with a high developmental impact, such as water, healthcare, small and medium enterprise development, and education.

* Attract investors that prioritize both financial and social returns.

To date, OPIC has supported four Sub-Saharan Africa investment funds that will mobilize roughly $1.9 billion in private investment over time.

AFSI technical assistance will help to improve financial sector climates with the goal of facilitating increased domestic and international investment. Activities will:

* Strengthen country and regional debt markets by providing up to 10 Treasury Department advisors over the FY08-10 period.

* Launch remittance programs in Nigeria and West Africa through USAID to increase private sector competition, lower the cost of remittance transfers, and bring the un-banked into the formal financial system.

* Provide training through FDIC for banking regulators in order to improve the security and stability of the region’s financial systems.

* Develop payment systems and credit bureaus through USAID to support local retail and commercial banking.

Keeping Pledges On Development

At the Monterrey U.N. Conference for Financing for Development in 2002, the President proposed a 50-percent increase in our core official development assistance over the next three budget years. Starting from a base of $10.0 billion in 2000, the United States surpassed its Monterrey commitment in 2003 when official development assistance levels increased to $16.3 billion.

The 2006 preliminary estimate from the OECD Development Assistance Committee of $22.7 billion in official development assistance is the second highest annual expenditure ever provided by any donor country after the U.S. level of $27.6 billion in 2005. Preliminary 2006 ODA statistics on bilateral U.S. aid show:

* Aid to the Least Developed Countries was a record $5.5 billion.

* Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa increased by $1.4 billion, or 33%, to a record $5.6 billion.

* Aid to Latin America increased from $1.3 billion in 2005 to $1.6 billion

* Aid to South/Central Asia increased to $2.8 billion from $2.6 billion.

At the Gleneagles G8 Summit in 2005, President Bush announced that the United States would double assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa between 2004 and 2010 to $8.67 billion. The United States is on track to meet that goal with a preliminary estimate of $6.5 billion of bilateral and multilateral assistance in 2006.

In 2002, the President announced the Millennium Challenge Account, devoted to projects in nations that govern justly, invest in their people and encourage economic freedom. Since then, the MCA has put this pledge into practice signing compacts and threshold programs worth over $3 billion.

Robert Zoellick

President Bush Nominates Robert Zoellick As President Of The World Bank
The Roosevelt Room

11:02 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. I thank Secretary of Treasury Paulson for joining us today. I'm pleased to announce that I will nominate Bob Zoellick to be the 11th President of the World Bank.

Bob Zoellick has had a long and distinguished career in diplomacy and development economics. It has prepared him well for this new assignment. He is a committed internationalist. He has earned the trust and support of leaders from every region of the world. He is deeply devoted to the mission of the World Bank. He wants to help struggling nations defeat poverty, to grow their economies, and offer their people the hope of a better life. Bob Zoellick is deeply committed to this cause.

President George W. Bush is joined by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, right, and former Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick Wednesday, May 30, 2007, in the Roosevelt Room at the White House, as President Bush nominates Zoellick to be the new president at the World Bank replacing Paul Wolfowitz. White House photo by Chris Greenberg Since the end of the second world war, the advance of trade and technology has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. Some call this globalization; I call it the triumph of human liberty, stretching across national borders. Every day the expansion of trade creates tremendous new opportunities for people. Unfortunately, too many people are shut out from these opportunities, especially the nearly 1 billion men, women and children who live on less than $1 a day. Bob Zoellick understands that there are about 1 billion men, women and children who live on less than $1 a day, and he's committed to doing something about it.

The United States has a moral and national interest in helping poor and struggling countries transform themselves into free and hopeful societies. The job of the World Bank is to help reduce poverty and raise living standards in the poorest nations. The Bank does this by helping these nations strengthen good government, develop sound financial markets, uphold property rights and combat corruption.

The United States is the Bank's largest donor, and the reason we are is because we believe that it is essential to help developing nations build growing economies that will provide jobs and opportunities for all their citizens.

Bob Zoellick brings a wealth of experience and energy to this task. Over the past three decades he's held important posts in government, business and higher education. And in these posts he has worked on issues ranging from German unification, Latin American debt relief, to the transition of post-Soviet economies. For the past six years -- or most of the past six years, he has served as a member of my Cabinet. As the United States Trade Representative, he helped bring China and Taiwan into the World Trade Organization, launched the Doha Round of trade talks at the WTO, and significantly increased the number of U.S. free trade agreements.

Bob has had a strong voice for Africa. He's helped implement the African Growth and Opportunity Act that has increased America's trade with that continent. He has served on the board of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, an initiative designed to change the way we deliver foreign aid. In 2005, I asked Bob to serve as the Deputy Secretary of State. In that role, he managed a global staff of 57,000 people, he played a leading role in our engagement with China, and he traveled frequently to Darfur and Southern Sudan to help find a path for peace. Most recently, he has been vice chairman international at Goldman Sachs. In short, it would probably be easier to list all the jobs Bob hasn't had.

President George W. Bush listens as former Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick addresses members of the media Wednesday, May 30, 2007, in the Roosevelt Room at the White House following President Bush’s nomination of Zoellick to be the new president at the World Bank. White House photo by Chris Greenberg This man is eminently qualified, and when he takes his place at the World Bank he will replace another able public servant, Paul Wolfowitz. Paul is a man of character and integrity. Under his leadership, the World Bank increased its support for the world's poorest countries to a record $9.5 billion in 2006. Half of this money goes to sub-Saharan Africa. It's hope to some of the poorest folks. As Paul has helped steer more resources to these countries, he has instituted reforms designed to make sure that these resources are used wisely and achieve good results.

Paul took control over the World Bank at a critical moment. He's taken many steps to ensure that the Bank can meet the needs of developing nations in this new century. These steps include strengthening the Bank's role in combating malaria. The steps include establishing a rapid response in fragile states policy, to respond more quickly to nations recovering from crisis or war. These steps include the Clean Energy Investment Framework, a Bank initiative designed to help bring cleaner and more efficient technologies to developing countries.

In these and many other ways, Paul Wolfowitz has made the World Bank a more effective partner for development. I thank him for his dedication to the poor and his devotion to the good work of the World Bank.

Bob Zoellick is the right man to succeed Paul in this vital work. He's a leader who motivates employees. He builds constituent support, and focuses on achieving goals. I'm pleased that he has, once again, agreed to serve our country.

Congratulations.

AMBASSADOR ZOELLICK: Thank you, Mr. President, for the confidence you've always placed in me, and for the strong support you've continually offered. Your vision of public service is to strive for great goals, and with your help, I'll do my best. I also want to thank Secretary Paulson. The United States is most fortunate to have him as Secretary of the Treasury.

The World Bank is one of the cornerstones of the architecture designed by the founders of the international marketplace and system of security after World War II. The Bank is just as important today as it was then, although in different ways, because circumstances have changed much. The World Bank has a vital mission to overcome poverty and despair through sustainable growth and opportunity. Parents everywhere want better lives and prospects for their children.

In 2001, with the encouragement of the United States, the United Nations established the Millennium Development Goals. To help achieve these targets, the World Bank needs to work in concert with a wide-ranging network of other multilateral institutions, national governments, private businesses, foundations, non-governmental organizations, as well as civil society groups. We need to approach this task with humility and creative minds, because the challenges have thwarted good intentions and efforts in the past.

In recent years, some developing countries have achieved access to finance and boost growth to impressive levels. But too many lands, particularly in Africa, are denied opportunity because of disease, weak health care and child mortality, hunger and poor agricultural infrastructure, lack of good schools, discrimination against girls and women, unsound governance and corruption, the want of property rights and the rule of law, and endangered environment, and impediments to business, investment, economic liberty, entrepreneurs, trade, and a thriving free market economy.

These people and places need hope and help and partners. Even developing countries moving up the ladder with higher growth rates still have many poor citizens and staggering problems. They need support, too. Fortunately, there's a new generation of leaders in many developing countries that is assuming responsibility for showing that poverty can be surmounted.

This work, the purpose of the World Bank, is not about charity. The United States has been a strong supporter of the World Bank since its inception. The Bank's reliance on markets, investments, sound policies, good governance and partnerships for self-help are in keeping with the values that Americans esteem. The Bank is about working with men and women around the globe, no matter what their burdens or birth, to have the opportunity to achieve their potential and contribute to the well-being of others in their environment.

The World Bank has passed through a difficult time for all involved. There are frustrations, anxieties, and tensions about the past that could inhibit the future. This is understandable, but not without remedy. We need to put yesterday's discord behind us and to focus on the future together. I believe that the World Bank's best days are still to come.

I look forward to working with the World Bank team, professionals whose overriding goal is to help others. I want to hear their ideas on how to do so. I plan to meet soon with contributors and borrowers and many partners of the World Bank to listen to their perspectives on how the World Bank can best fulfill its purpose. If the board and members of the Bank then concur with this nomination, it will be my aim to work closely with and learn from the institution's dedicated and talented staff. Together, we can consult closely with the Bank's many stakeholders and partners to set a course to advance its missions.

It would be an honor to help lead this key institution and to work with the many fine professionals from all over the world who are dedicated to overcoming poverty and creating opportunity.

I would like to thank the U.S. Congress, the people of America, and the governments and peoples of other contributing countries for their generous support of this valuable institution. And I'd like most of all to thank the President, again, for offering this opportunity to lead the World Bank as a steward of development, growth and hope.

Thank you, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

END 11:11 A.M. EDT

TV Alert

Watch the Presidential Candidates Debate Faith, Values, and Poverty

Oxfam America is sponsoring a CNN live broadcast of presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama on Monday, June 4. CNN will broadcast the event as a special edition of "The Situation Room" from 7-8 p.m. E.D.T. Be sure to tune in and see what the candidates have to say about eradicating poverty around the world.

UNICEF

There's a lot of stuff on the right-hand side, books, magazines, toys, baby gear, etc. Way back when, I thought it would help pay for the adoption. It hasn't really paid for a cup of coffee, and we've pretty much figured out how to pay for the adoption, anyway.

In a previous post, I created a UNICEF account for SWERL.

As I've been figuring out better ways to combine activism for Africa with the adoption experience/adoption community, I've decided to funnel any money I earn from the various affiliate programs to the left to UNICEF. They do awesome work.

So, if you want to buy anything from Amazon or Wal-Mart online or any of that other stuff, the money (typically 4%) will go to me, and I will put it in the Swerl account at UNICEF, which you can examine by hitting the UNICEF button at the bottom of the right-hand column.

With Friends Like These...

Hat tip to Jack & Jill Politics.

Here's a hysterical, satirical website that offers wincingly funny example of how not to treat your African-American friends: BLACK PEOPLE LOVE US!

From 50 Cent to $400 Million

With "G Unit" and countless other ventures, 50 Cent has shown how to turn street cred into Wall Street cred. In a recent deal, 50 leveraged his celebrity for a 10% stake in a small beverage company. When Coca Cola took it over, 50 netted $400 million.

While I wouldn't want my daughter humming "Candy Shop", it'll be interesting to see how he continues to develop as an African-American entrepreneur.

Bush Imposes Sanctions on Sudan

For all of you who took the opportunity to sign an internet petition or call the White House comment line, be proud:

Watch Bush's address.

Bush Toughens Sanctions Against Sudan Over Darfur

Brendan Murray and Kevin Carmichael Tue May 29, 12:27 PM ET

May 29 (Bloomberg) --
President George W. Bush imposed economic sanctions against Sudan in a bid to curb the violence in Darfur and called on the United Nations to step up financial pressure on a leader who hasn't stopped what the U.S. describes as genocide in the African country.

``The people of Darfur are crying out for help,'' Bush said at the White House. ``I promise this to the people of Darfur: The United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world.''

Bush said the U.S. Treasury has blocked two Sudanese government officials and one rebel leader from the U.S. financial system; frozen the assets of 30 companies owned or controlled by the Sudanese government; and sanctioned one other company, Azza Air Transport Co., for violating an arms embargo.

The penalties against the oil-producing country follow a warning Bush gave April 18 in a speech at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. He said then that the world has a moral obligation to halt genocide in Darfur, a region in western Sudan.

``One day after I spoke, the military bombed a meeting of rebel commanders designed to discuss a possible peace deal with the government,'' Bush said today. ``The result is that the dire security situation on the ground in Darfur has not changed.''

New UN Resolution

Bush said he instructed Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice to consult with the U.K. and other allies to draft a new UN Security Council resolution that would apply additional punitive measures on Sudan. France will support the U.S. push for a resolution, Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere said today.

Bush's envoy to Sudan, Andrew Natsios, told CNN that ideas floated privately by the new French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, lead the U.S. to believe France may get more involved in the Darfur issue.

Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte told reporters in Washington that the U.S. will seek from the UN Security Council a ``binding ban on military flights over Darfur.'' Natsios, who joined Negroponte at the briefing, declined to say how such a prohibition against Sudan's military would be enforced.

More than 200,000 people have died in Darfur in the past four years in a campaign of violence directed at rebels seeking a greater share of oil revenue and political power from the central government in Khartoum. The fighting has spread to include violent clashes among rival tribes in the region and has spilled over into neighboring Chad, where a dozen major refugee camps house thousands of Darfur refugees.

``The world has a responsibility to help put an end to it,'' Bush said.

Sudan's `Obstruction'

Bush said the Sudanese government failed to honor pledges to stop the violence. Sudanese President Umar al-Bashir's ``actions over the past few weeks follow a long pattern of promising cooperation, while finding new methods for obstruction,'' Bush said.

``I call on President Bashir to stop his obstruction and to allow the peacekeepers in, and to end the campaign of violence that continues to target innocent men, women and children,'' Bush said.

Sudan's envoy at the UN criticized Bush for the sanctions steps. Bush is ``polluting'' progress toward a new peace agreement in Darfur and efforts by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki- moon to persuade the government in Khartoum to accept UN peacekeepers, Sudanese Ambassador Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad said in an interview.

AU, UN Troops

The African Union has about 7,000 peacekeepers in Darfur who aren't able to provide full protection to civilians in the region, which is as big as France. Sudan to date has approved the deployment of 2,500 UN troops to support the AU force and has rejected a much larger UN-led force.

The Treasury Department said three Sudanese officials will be sanctioned for their roles in fomenting the violence:

Ahmad Muhammed Harun, Sudan's state minister for humanitarian affairs, who already is accused of war crimes by the International Criminal Court, and Awad Ibn Auf, the head of military intelligence and security, both acted as liaisons between the Sudanese government and the Janjaweed militias that have attacked Darfur residents, the Treasury said.

Khalil Ibrahim, leader of the Justice and Equality Movement, was also cut off from the U.S. financial system. The JEM refused to sign a peace agreement, and Ibrahim is ``personally'' responsible for rebel activity aimed at destabilizing the situation, the Treasury said.

Arms Exporter Targeted

Among the 30 companies targeted by the Treasury are GIAD Industrial City, which supplied armored vehicles to the government for military operations in Darfur; Sudatel, the national telecommunications company; and five companies in the petrochemical industry, including Advanced Petroleum Co., RAM Energy Co., Bashaier, Hi-Tech Petroleum Group and Hi-Tech Chemicals, according to the department's release.

Humanitarian groups and experts on Africa said the sanctions may have little effect on the government or its victims.

``Unilateral sanctions on a couple mid-level officials and expanding unilateral sanctions for which the Sudanese were fully prepared will have no impact on the regime's calculations,'' John Prendergast, an Africa analyst at the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, said today in an e-mailed response to questions. ``This appears to be posturing for domestic constituencies on Washington's part.''

``For many people in Darfur, these sanctions mean very little,'' said Ted Dagne, a specialist in African affairs at the Congressional Research Service in Washington.

``For the 450,000 people who were killed over the past four years and for the millions who are still in the displaced camps, the sanctioning of Sudanese companies will not end the suffering,'' Dagne said. ``The issue in Darfur is protection of the helpless and ending the suffering.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Brendan Murray in Washington at bmurray@bloomberg.net

The N Word

Pop quiz! Who said...

To be plain, I wish to get quit of Negroes...

I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in endowments both of body and mind.

I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race...

Answers?

George Washington (in a 1778 letter to his plantation manger)
Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia, 1785)
and
Abraham Lincoln (1858)!!

These bon mots and more are revealed in Jabari Asim's new(ish) book, THE N WORD: WHO CAN SAY IT, WHO SHOULDN'T AND WHY. What Asim (syndicated columnist and deputy editor of the WASHINGTON POST BOOK WORLD) has accomplished in this slender, powerful book, is a concise history of African-Americans... as told BY whites TO other whites.

Through the lens of the "N" word, from first recorded usage through today, Asim makes the persuasive case that whites could not deal with the dichotomy of being good, God-fearing men of noble purpose AND slave owners. Instead of abolishing slavery at the birth of the nation, our glorious founding fathers created a myth around those they had brutally imported from Africa to MORALLY justify the Africans' enslavement. To do this, they created the "N-----", and bent reality to fit their story. It helped the whites sleep at night AND get their cotton picked. Africans were not the same race as whites. They were animalistic in their joys, passions and fears. Because their pleasure was only base sexual gratification and their pain was "transitory", there was no moral imperative to keep families intact, honor their history, allow them to keep their names or grant dignity to them in any way. Because they were "fearful" of freedom, and too stupid to be of use, slavery was, in fact, a COMPASSIONATE alternative to freedom.

Because they were not human, it didn't matter if white men slept with black woman, but it was an affront for any lust-crazed Negro to sleep with a white woman.

Because they were simpleminded, they loved to dance and sing merrily while working 18 hour days.

But, because they were animalistic, they could turn mean and evil and needed to be put down.

W.E.B. Du Bois cleverly called this "racial folklore", and insisted that it's presence made the "color line", as he called it, transcend simple economic exploitation. For example, while other ethnic minorities have been or are being exploited for their labor, it is unique to the black experience to have an identity manufactured by the dominant white society and then brutally and systemically imposed -- even imprinted -- onto them, the "...belief that somewhere between men and cattle, God created a tertium quid, and called it a Negro -- a clownish, simple creature, at times even lovable within its limitations."

In the subsequent pages, Asim traces the implementation of this "racial folklore" through American history, proving his point with devastating detail. Almost like a prosecutor, even if you have known all the facts, seeing them all pulled together in such a cogent way makes it clear to ANYONE that whites have tried to rewrite the reality of black America with the merciless, pernicious efficiency of Orwellian scope. "2+2=5". Winston Smith needed not just repeat it, but BELIEVE it. Internalize it.

Slaves not willing to work in subhuman conditions? They're lazy!
Slaves pretending to like whitefolk to get by? They're jolly darkies!
Slaves try to run away because they don't like being slaves? They're aggressive, violent, predatory animals out to rape white women and kill white men!

Again, a quote by W.E.B. Du Bois sums it up perfectly. "Everything Negroes did was wrong. If they fought for freedom, they were beasts; if they did not fight, they were born slaves. If they cowered on the plantation, they loved slavery; if they ran away, they were loafers. If they sang, they were silly, if they scowled, they were impudent... And they were funny, funny -- ridiculous baboons, aping men!"

Asim walks us through this twisted history, showing how this "folklore" became fact, through pseudo-science (initiated by Jefferson, himself!), white mistrelry, "plantation" literature, up through Michael Richards' onstage tirade.

What is so pernicious about the "n-----ization" of America is the way it self-perpetuates, creating false history, false "experts" and false "eyewitnesses", thus creating an inauthentic basis for the black experience. Asim deals with this explicitly in a chapter about the painful legacy of UNCLE TOM'S CABIN. The book (which I have never read), is, in fact, a Christ allegory, written by an ardent, Christian abolitionist. How, then, did it come to be synonymous, in the contemporary lexicon, with "sellout"? Asim explains that Harriet Beecher Stowe, having little first-hand experience with black people, used many of the racist conventions of (white-authored) "plantation literature", in their portrayal of black speech and attitudes. With a foundation of inauthentic "research", even the sympathetic portrayal of blacks in the novel served to perpetuate negative and harmful stereotypes.

Adding insult to injury, the rights to dramatize the book fell away from Stowe's control, allowing the masses to see play versions of the book, in which the character of Tom was altered from a robust young man to a dodering, simpering old man, sometimes nominally in keeping with Stowe's rhetorical point, but often, perverted to serve explicitly racist motives.

The racist stereotypes are even internalized by blacks. After generations of blacks being forcably corralled into a small sphere of possibility, after generations being told that they are base and less than human, or, certainly, less than whites, many blacks begin to live out the very grotesque "fables" of black life, as concocted by whites. From this, stems the smiling, dancing, "coon", a role still required of many African Americans on sit-coms and lame comedies, and the "bad N-----", the provocative, raping, stealing, killing machine that eventually became the "thug" or "gangsta", celebrated in film, in rap music and on the streets of America.

The most horrendous problem is the circle of unbroken white power, modern white politicians and authority figures using the self-comforting lies of their ancestors about the nature of the black race to justify the curtailment of blacks' rights. By using this "folklore" to decide that "urban blight" is a foregone conclusion, based on the nature of the black community, contemporary politicians are able to perpetuate their ancestors' racist policies, all while avoiding admitting that racist hiring practices, racist college admission policies, failing public schools and difficulty accessing financial services are NOT the result of failures within the black community, but the result of centuries-old racist, self-serving beliefs. Believing in these "truths" also allows contemporary whites to view any attempt to correct historical injustices to be "reverse" racism.

In the concluding chapters, Asim describes a black community caught between a desire to "own" the "n" word and those who wish to bury the "n" word, along with all of attendant white lies about the limits of black genius. Asim points out how, by perpetuating the use of the word, blacks may be reinforcing this "folklore" of black inferiority... to young blacks and, worse, to a new generation of whites, such as Quentin Tarantino, all of whom feel the liberty to play in the "n-----" sandbox". Using examples such as "Archie Bunker" and Dave Chappelle, he points out the limit of even intentional satire -- that those most in need of understanding the joke may be those most likely to dangerously misinterpret it. (In fact, on THE ACTOR'S STUDIO, Chappelle, himself, admitted that seeing too many white kids use his show as permission to use the "n" word was part of the reason he so publicly pulled the plug on production. This isn't mentioned in the book, but lends tremendous credibility to Asim's point.)

Asim feels that artists and historians should have permission to work within the poisonous world the "n" word created, but that for all others, the use and it's legacy should be ended, in favor of a more uplifting vision for black (and white) America, saying:

When Lemuel Haynes composed LIBERTY FURTHER EXTENDED in 1776, he wrote: 'I think it not hyperbolical to affirm, that even an African, has Equally as good a right to his Liberty in common with Englishmen.' He made no mention of "n-----s." When David Walker published his remarkable APPEAL in 1829, he addressed it to 'my dearly beloved Brethren and Fellow Citizens.' He did not mention "n-----s." When W.E.B. Du Bois published his landmark collection of essays in 1903, he called it THE SOUL OF BLACK FOLK -- not "n-----s." When Marcus Garvey formed his organization in 1916, he called it the Universal Negro Improvement Association. He made no mention of "n-----s." In his speech at the March on Washington in 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "America has given the Negro people a bad check"; he did not say America has given "n-----s" a bad check. A year later, when Malcolm X began his "Ballot or the Bullet" speech with a greeting to "Brothers and Sisters and Friends", not "n-----s" and friends. In her 1971 lecture at Tougaloo College, Fannie Lou Hamer urged, "Stand up, black men, this nation needs you." She did not say "Stand up, n-----s."

"Africans." "Negroes." "Black men." "Brothers." "Sisters." "Fellow Citizens." Each falls off the tongue with ease. None is hard to pronounce.

I for one can still visualize the "n-----," and perhaps because I'm a man, I usually see him as a man, odious and shiftless, violent and stupid, contemptuous of black women and obsessed with white ones -- a self-hating, devilish phantom whose footsteps can still be heard as we tread through the tentative early years of the twenty-first century... As long as we (meaning African-Americans) embrace the derogatory language that has long accompanies and abetted our systemic dehumanization, we shackle ourselves to those corrupt white delusions -- and their attendant false story of our struggle in the United States. Throwing off those shackles would at least free us to stake acclaim to an independent imagination.... I dream of a world where "n-----" no longer roams, confined instead to the fetid white fantasy land where he was born.

THE N WORD is ESSENTIAL to any parent adopting transracially. It provides the Rosetta Stone for the iconography of African-Americans in the mainstream (white) culture. Better than any other book I've read, explains WHY racism exists and HOW racism came to take the form it did. Are there better histories of African-Americans? Undoubtedly. Better books about the effects of racism? Sure. But no other book I've found articulates the psychosis of racism and it's origins as completely and powerfully as this one. This book explains, for example, that weird opinions about blacks my grandmother held actually date back to Jefferson, directly.

Through this book, a white parent is empowered to deconstruct contemporary examples of the "n-----ization" of black culture and politics -- by white and blacks (or, more specifically, by blacks serving the vision of -- and financially renumerated by -- whites). When a white college frat dons blackface, pull this book off the shelf and explain the history of minstrelry. When blacks are viewed as oversexualized -- either as predatory men or eager, available women, this book will be invaluable in explaining the root causes of that portrayal. Conversely, when blacks are the sexless facilitators of white nobility, allowing the white hero to save the day and get the girl, that, too can be explained through the prism conveyed in this book.

One last use for this book I wish to convey. This book could even lift the veil from the eyes of white racists, explaining that they have bought into a wholly fictional worldview. This is a personal issue for many, as I know a handful of you have family members who disapprove of your adoption. This book may help them understand their own unexamined racism and, hopefully, see their grandchild (for example) as the possessor of no less genius than any white grandchild.

What I Think I Know About Adoption

As some may have noted, I've been exploring doubts about international adoption. In previous posts, I discussed my own family history with adoption, and spoke frankly about my second thoughts. In the comments, a few of my closer "net" friends suggested checking out a discussion at THIRD MOM about the ethics of adoption (framed in an "adoption vs. orphanage" debate). Her call for responses got over 50 (!) comments. Troublemaker that I am, one of my comments prompted another post from Third Mom about feelings of guilt over adopting. I thanked her for her clarifying post, and said I would respond.

Well, I've been thinking about it for nearly 10 days, trying to think of how to fit it all in.

I decided to start a new series of posts, called "What I Think I Know about Adoption". It will basically convey, in a declarative way, what I feel is the "truth" of adoption.

I WELCOME people to either support my thoughts with research or anecdotes (thus transforming what I THINK I know into what I KNOW I know), or tear down my thoughts, so I can think something different:

What I Think I Know about Adoption

"Family Expansion" is the favored term within the adoption community for the desire to add children to your family. The desire for family expansion through the process of adoption (as apposed to pregnancy, surrogacy, etc.) has as many motivating factors as there are adoptive families.

A few include:

Infertility
A desire for a child of a specific gender
A religious conviction to adopt
A desire for siblings for children already in the family
A desire for a child without the risk of pregnancy and childbirth

Family expansion can refer to a single parent or a couple, gay or straight, with biological children, previously adopted children or no previous children at all.

Self-interest is at the core of family expansion. You are adding a child becasue you feel it is a benefit FOR YOUR FAMILY.

Another motivation can impact the thinking of family expansion through adoption: that of "saving" a child. This is especially true in cases of INTERNATIONAL adoption. One should be careful in the examination of one's motivations and intellectual honesty before ascribing too much weight to this reason for adoptiong.

Consider:

1. If the money you spent on an adoption was diverted to food aid, etc., more children could be helped.
2. If all the money you would spend RAISING a child (including college tuition, etc.) were devoted to sponsoring children, more good would be done for children.
3. In "saving" a child, you are also "robbing" the child of an indigenous culture, language and extended family.
4. Some alledge that -- especially in the case of infants -- it is the DEMAND for babies which is driving the supply. This dynamic can easily lead to unethical practices, including "buying" babies (agents of adoption paying money to the families of those who offer children for adoption), stealing babies or unduly pressuring mothers to surrender their children for adoption.
5. International adoption can help restrictive governments uphold bad policies and prevent the development of forward thinking policies regarding family planning, reproductive rights, women's rights and child welfare. Adoption helps China from modifying it's "One Child" policy, for example. Korea continues to marginalize single mothers, using international adoption as an outlet for these "shameful" children. Other countries allow their brutalized poor to turn to adoption, rather than make efforts to keep birth families intact.
6. Many of the children "saved" are the easiest to place, while the most traumatized, older children, the children more likely to have lost both of their parents, for example, are nearly impossible to be placed.

Still, the idea of "saving" a child is a powerful notion. Before you even adopt, many may commend you for being "bighearted" or "generous", when, in fact, you are being self-motivated (not in a bad way, you simply want a child!)

How to answer this "commendation" from family and friends is often one of the first schisms between how those deep within the adoption culture views things, compared to those outside of this culture. Some people get angry. Some simply say, if told that their child will be "lucky"; "No, we're the lucky ones."

Being conciously self-motivated is probably a healthy outlook. Adoption parenting is not easy, and you will probably be more engaged over the long-haul if adoption is something you are doing for your own gratification than out of a sense of charity. There are other ways not buying into this pattern of thought will make you a better parent. Traumatized adult adoptees are quite forthcoming about the damage it does, hearing things like, "If it wasn't for us, you'd be starving... a child prostitute... a drug addict... dead." Usually, these comments are made in the throes of a massive fight, probably when the adopted child was a teen... and richly deserved getting scolded. Still, without the pernicious notion that the child was "saved", such comments wouldn't roll off the tongue so easily in heated situations.

Thinking critically about what adopted child would fit best in your family (even if the family is just a single would-be parent) will help make the best "fit", and give the family the best opportunity for happiness for all involved.

A few things to consider about the child:

1. Country of origin
2. Gender
3. Age
4. Race
5. Religion

Are you interested in a sibling group?
A child with special needs?

Again, it's good to be honest, because to be a postive influence on your adopted child, you will need to embrace all aspects of that child's history and do your utmost to instill pride in your child. So, if you don't like Chinese culture, or if you are uncomfortable around black people, for two examples, you need to be self-aware enough to face these facts and plan your family's expansion accordingly. A far worse crime than admitting these pedispositions is adopting children of a different racial, national or cultural background, then, out of discomfort or disinterest, failing to help you child connect with these crucial aspects of his or her identity.

Such failures only bear their bitter fruit as the child matures and feels alienated from those who look like him or her, or, even worse, has internalized a sense of anger or hatred towards himself for being "different". As adult adoptees attempt to fill in these blanks themselves, they can grow resentful towards their adoptive parents. Adoptive parents can feel threatened by the aggressive exploration of this denied identity, and relationships can become strained.

ETHICAL ADOPTIONS

Another important consideration is to ensure that your adoption is ethical.

Some countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia and most Eurpoean countries have joined such contries as China, India, Colombia, Philippines, Mexico, Poland, Thailand, Brazil and Moldova have joined the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption is an international treaty that seeks to prevent corruption in the adoption process for signatory countries by:

1) Ensuring that intercountry adoptions take place in the best interests of children; and
2) Preventing the abduction, exploitation, sale, or trafficking of children.

As a result, all of the adoption agencies within the United States are regulated according to these stadards. In a perfect world, this means that even when adoptions occur from non-sigatory countries, such as South Korea, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia or Russia, these programs are held to the same high standard as adoptions between signatory countries.

Unfortunately, being a signatory country does not guarantee that the goals stated above are met. Such was the case with the Guatamala program. Currently, although Guatamala is a signatory country, their program showed many signs of problems and abuses. Currently, many countries have suspended adoptions from Guatamala. The United States is proceeding on a case-by-case basis, with strict oversight.

Guatamala has failed to regulate notaries processing adoption or the foster care that occurs between relinquishment and adoption. As a result, some foster care allowed for the physical abuse of kids. The conflict of interest that existed (and still exits) for notaries dealing directly with relinquishing families and adoptive families created an environment ripe for pay-offs, bribes, baby buying and even baby stealing. The situation has gotten so bad the the United States government now demands a DNA match between supposed birthmothers and the children they are relinquishing, due to the "numerous cases in which impostors who were not the children's actual birth mothers attempted to relinquish rights to children who were not theirs."

Imagine finding out, or even SUSPECTING that your child was STOLEN from his or her mother's arms? Such horror is a reason why EVERYONE involved in adoption must go to superhuman efforts to make sure that all adoptions remain legal, all processes remain transparent and all actions are taken for the benefit of the children.
A good agency in the US does not guarantee a "clean" adoption.

The US State Dept. advises:

"Even if a U.S. adoption agency has an unblemished record with such offices, however, and even if the agency itself is operating completely with the best intentions, the lack of oversight and regulation over the other actors in the Guatemalan adoption process make it extremely difficult for even the most ethical agency to be completely certain that everything has been done in accordance with the law and in the best interests of all the parties."

Of course, it is easy to substitute ANY country for "Guatemala", which means that ANY international adoption program has the potential for the kind of corruption that trades paltry amounts of money for the devistation and abuse of children.

Another option for many countries is PRIVATE ADOPTION, in which you hire an attorney or other advocate in a country to directly pursue an adoption through that nation's courts. I don't know much about this process, but would love to find out more from those who've gone this route.

I'd like to end this post with a question -- how, as waiting adoptive parents, do you ensure ethical adoptions the world over?

Next, I plan to discuss first families, poverty and adoption.

Oprah at Howard University

I was watching C-Span the other day, much to my wife's endless amusement. Evidently, I have the viewing habits of a 90 year old man, as I cannot watch something without seeing a commerical for the Hoveround. But I digress.

I saw Oprah speak at Howard University, and I thought she did a great job (like she needs my approval). Like a lot of guys, I was not always on the Oprah train. But the special about the Leadership Academy turned me around and the PBS show about her discovering her geneology cinched it.

Here's the biggest chunk of it I could find on the 'net, courtesy of CNN.

Here's another massively informative post from the wittily named SELAM WITH CHEESE ON WRY about the dirty little matter of AFFORDING adoption. Not much discussed, perhaps because it adds to the impression of adoption as a branch of America's economic imperialism (not my opinion, obviously). However, outside of one or two people, I don't know any millionaires adopting. Hope this helps inform and inspire, as well as kick-start a dialog about even MORE ideas:

Selam with Cheese on Wry: How to Help

When we started researching ways to pay for this adoption — and all of the nickel-and-dime fees that seem to inflate the cost (our expected costs actually doubled) — we were simultaneously shocked, pleased, and saddened by the fact that we already practiced most money-saving tips offered by others. We were also determined to find creative avenues to creatively pinch pennies. So, with the help of several authors and seasoned adoptive parents, we came up with this list of creative ideas to share with other prospective adoptive parents as well as family and friends who might be inspired to help. It’s by no means comprehensive or complete, so post your comments if you have more suggestions. We’ll keep adding to it as we find new resources. While the focus is on funding, we also offer other suggested ways to help. The journey to adoption is not always (not ever?) a smooth ride and adoptive parents will also need emotional (and spiritual) support from family and friends.Why should you help? That’s something you really need to answer yourself. But if you can, it’s one way to really show your support for the adoptive parents, their choice to adopt, and the adoption itself. Here are some things you can do to help adoptive parents:

PREPARE YOURSELF

Do your best to educate yourself about adoption so that you can support the adoptive parents as they embark on this (often tumultuous) journey. We recommend starting with this book: Adoption is a Family Affair: What Relatives and Friends Must Know.

DONATE DOUGH

This is an expensive venture and few adoptive families have the funds to cover all of the costs even after going into some serious debt. While giving a cash donation directly to an adoptive family isn’t a charitable deduction for tax purposes, most immediate family members can gift up to $11,000 per year tax-free. (Note: Some agencies have a charitable fund set up to accept donations from family or friends, so that giving is tax-deductible. Check with your agency to see if they offer this service.) Even small amounts are much appreciated. If you feel compelled to give in this way, the adoptive family would be most grateful.

Click here to contribute $5, $10, or any amount you choose to Dan and Shannon’s adoption.

OFFER A LOW-FEE (OR NO-FEE) LOAN

For most adoptive families, a one-, two-, or even a five-year no-interest loan would rock! While the adoption process and fee schedule is often spread out over time, there’s almost always a “balloon payment” at some point, usually towards the middle of the process, but often before the referral. (For instance, about 3-4 months into the process, we’ll have to come up with about $15,000 in fees. Yikes!) Many adoptive families will qualify for the adoption tax credit (which is applied after all expenses are paid) and that credit can be carried over from year to year for up to five years. There are, however, several restrictions. Check with your tax advisor or the IRS website for details. Adoptive parents, click here to find resources for grants and loans.

PARTICIPATE IN FUNDRAISERS

There are any number of ways to support adoptive families by helping them raise funds. Check out some of these options:

INK JET RECYCLING - Collect used printer ink cartridges from friends, family, and/or local businesses and schools. The program is free for everyone and it’s a great way to be green and help out the adoptive family! Most programs (like ours) provide free collection boxes and pre-paid labels/mailing supplies. We earn a small amount for each cartridge mailed in. The super groovy thing about this program is that even non-earning cartridges get recycled and stay out of the landfill. Please let us know if you’d like any mailers (or if you live nearby, feel free to drop off your empties)…

CELL PHONE RECYCLING - Collect used late modelcellphones from friends, family, and/or local businesses/schools. This is similar to the Ink Jet recycling program with free mailers, etc. Some inkjet recyclers also recycle cell phones and vice versa.

SALES FUNDRAISERS - Adoptive parents might try to raise funds by selling goods. Often these fundraisers are similar to those you might find in schools: popcorn, candy, or small goods. Some adoptive parents may even try to coordinate a fundraiser that also raises awareness (for international adoptions, this often involves free-trade goods that benefit craftspeople or co-ops in other countries). We are currently investigating options to sell fair-trade Ethiopian coffee. Stay tuned!

PATRONIZE THE ADOPTIVE FAMILY’S HOME BUSINESS - Does either adoptive parent have a side-business (e.g., Pampered Chef, Creative Memories, or even the dreaded Amway)? Hey, you’ve got to buy gifts for birthdays and holidays anyhow, so why not kill two birds with one stone and stock up early? Or if either of the adoptive parents have a specialized skill, perhaps you could offer introductions that would help them get side jobs on evenings or weekends. Help out those adoptive parents, especially if you know that the extra income will go to the adoption!

Shannon runs three different businesses and is channeling all profits into the adoption:

1. Consulting - Shannon is a professional consultant and grant writer for non-profits and charges reasonable fees. Pass along her contact information to anyone who may be able to pay for her services.


2. Custom Gifts - Shannon sells her darling (if we do say so ourselves) hand-crafted wares — everything from invitations and cards to scrapbooks and gift ensembles! Click here to visit Shannon’s stamping blog and see examples of her work. Click here to view a sample price list of common items to order.
   


3. Scrapbook and Stamp Supplies - Shannon sells top-of-the-line rubber stamps, scrapbooks, ink, paper and cardstock, and accessories through Stampin’ Up! Place an order for yourself or, better yet, collect orders from friends, family, and co-workers. Orders will ship direct to you. Click here to view the current Stampin’ Up! catalogs (and share with friends), then contact Shannon to place your order. Beginning immediately, all profits (20% of all catalog sales before tax/shipping) will be applied to our adoption fundraising. Or, if you’re interested in retired stamps and scrapbook accessories, visit Shannon’s Sale Table!
   

BUY NEW SHOES! - Seriously, keep on shopping, but with a slight twist. There are several programs that do this, but we’re looking into OneCause (similar to a rewards program, you can click-through shop online at many of your favorite merchants, and those merchants do the donating. Up to 36% of each dollar you spend goes to the National Adoption Foundation, and they’ll split the buckaroos with the adoptive family). But, the process is quite unclear to us at the moment. When we get more information, we’ll update this section. Another option is to sign up with any of the online rebate companies, like ebates — or for a fee-free cash-back credit card, like Discover (if you don’t already have one) — and pass along the rebate check to the adoptive family.

COLLECT ON THE FAMILY’S BEHALF - If you really want to help out an adoptive family, do a fundraiser on their behalf. Either choose to take the lead on one of their established fundraisers or start one on your own: sell candy bars or cookie dough or something you make yourself, ask local merchants to contribute items that you can sell for profit, host a car wash, sponsor a golf tournament, rally a local community group or classroom to fundraise on the family’s behalf… You can actually raise some pretty decent money doing this and, believe me, it takes a huge stress off of the adoptive family.

GIVE IN KIND

Another way to help is giving in-kind gifts or your time. This won’t always help with the adoption fees, but it might free up the adoptive parents’ budget or time, which is sometimes even more valuable. Here are a few examples:

THINGS THAT WOULD HELP EARLY IN THE ADOPTION PROCESS

• Books to build a good library. See our wishlists for adoption and Ethiopia.


• Help with non-adoption-related stuff - Though adoptive parents can get tunnel vision about the adoption, many still have other everyday tasks piling up. Some parents might need help with household repairs, yardwork, or other tasks. If you have a specialized skill — or even specialized equipment– that you could donate or loan out, please do!
  


• Babysit - For adoptive families who already have kids, this could be a huge help, especially when stress levels are high and parents just need a break. Keep it gratis or do it in trade.


• Pass along savings - found a great coupon for something (free!) that you probably won’t use? Everything from free food to free entertainment would be appreciated, so pass it along. Most likely, the adoptive parents are already clipping coupons, but every little bit extra helps.


• Pass along your hand-me-downs - the adoptive family has probably given up what most people consider “basics,” not huge indulgences, but the little extras that spice up day-to-day existence: magazines, video subscriptions, new clothes (new anything!), going to the movies, theatre, or museum. Don’t hesitate to offer, especially if you’re ready to toss it out or give it away anyhow.
  


• Be a workout buddy, especially for the adoptive mother. Pregnant moms-to-be naturally adapt to carrying heavy loads over a 9-month period. And they continue to develop their carrying muscles as children grow from teeny tiny newborns to larger kiddos. Adoptive mothers, on the other hand, don’t have mother nature forcing their bodies into shape and often find themselves pulling muscles or seriously injuring their backs shortly after placement (especially when they adopt older, and often heavier, kiddos). You can help by scheduling workout dates with one or both parents (don’t expect them to invite you…despite knowing better, this might land low on their priority lists). Yoga, strength training, or outdoor activities like walking around the block are great. Invite the adoptive parent(s) to join you at the gym, especially if you have guest passes (gym memberships might be one of those budget cutbacks). Or, if fitness is your area of expertise, offer regular “classes” or develop a customized health plan for the adoptive parents.


• Indulgences - adoptive families have most likely given up most of life’s little luxuries. Pamper adoptive parent(s) with little treats like lunch/coffee/dessert or even a day at the spa. Or, send small gift cards (for coffee, snacks, movies). It might save their sanity!


• Send a care package or a thoughtful note - A box (of homemade cookies or low-fat snacks!, or a great movie and some candy, or even basic necessities for everyday living, like toothpaste or paper towels) is always welcome. Or, send a note of encouragement for the stressed-out couple. It’s a nice gesture that might just make their day.



• Schedule a date to get together and get their minds off of the adoption. Try to keep the conversation off kids.


• Pray, if you’re so inclined. It’s not all about the money. Pray for a trouble-free and speedy process, safe travels, and healthy children who can be quickly united with their adoptive parents. If you don’t pray, be positive and encouraging to the (potentially stressed and/or discouraged) waiting parents.


• Ask if there is anything you can do (if you’re willing), then do it.
  

THINGS TO HELP WITH TRAVEL

• Donate miles/points/rewards from your frequent flier or frequent stay programs: free hotel stays, plane tickets, or upgrades. (And don’t think that those upgrades are a luxury! Traveling 18 hours on a plane with two tired and terrified children, not to mention tired and terrified parents who don’t fit well in those coach seats, ain’t gonna be easy.) Chances are that the adoptive family is going to incur a huge travel expense, so this is an area where you can make a big impact on their bottom line. (With airfare at $2,000 roundtrip per person on average, we expect our travel costs to add up to $5,000 - $7,000 or more for the low-budget options.) There are several ways to help with miles:
  
  Redeem your own miles for the reward. This option gets the most “bang for the buck” whether you or the adoptive parents pay for the (minimal) service fees.
  
  
  Transfer your own miles to the recipient’s mileage account(s). There is usually a per-mile cost plus a small transfer fee. At United, you can transfer a minimum of 5,000 miles and a maximum of 15,000 miles to each recipient. The cost is $.01 per mile plus a $35 service fee per transfer. This is a good option if you don’t have enough miles to redeem a reward, or if the adoptive parent are short by a several thousand miles.
  
  Purchase miles for the adoptive parent(s). This is a bit more costly and is really most useful only if the adoptive parent is short by a few thousand miles for a reward ticket. If you’re willing to spend this much, you may want to consider giving cash instead.


• Be a “friend” for refer-a-friend programs.The adoptive parents might belong to various incentive programs, such as frequent flyer, frequent stay, and other rewards programs. Often these programs have referral bonuses of free miles or points when friends sign up. Since most programs don’t cost you anything, both parties (you and the adoptive parents) benefit. You can help us by signing up for any of the following programs and giving our referral information:



Mileageplus Visa. Get up to 21,000 bonus miles for United Airlines, free upgrade certificates, no annual fee for the first year, and 1 mile for every $1 you spend. Heck, it’s kind of silly not to sign up. We get 5,000 miles for each referral who gets a card (up to three people). Call 1-877-273-7138 (Chase credit cards). Tell them that a friend referred you (and give them Shannon’s mileageplus number — call us for that first) and that you’d like to apply for a Signature Visa (Mileageplus) credit card. Shannon’s tip: put every purchase, no matter how small, on your Visa. Keep track and pay off the balance each month.


Bank of America. Open a checking account and earn $25. We earn $25 too. (Actually, if you open a savings too, you can earn more, up to $50 total.) New customers only. We love BofA so much that we still bank there even though there are no branches in our state. Ask us for a referral code to sign up online or in your local branch.


My Points. Earn points for shopping or often for just browsing websites. We earn points when you join. This program also has a downloadable “Points Alert.” Points can be redeemed for a variety of gift cards and goodies. We’ve been doing this for years and have regularly “cashed in” points for gift cards to Target, Walmart, Bloomingdales, Starbucks, Chili’s, and Olive Garden. Ask Shannon to email you a Refer-a-Friend link.

• Collect “points” to help the adoptive parents earn free things. We collect MyCokeRewards points and we’re saving for a digital camcorder. Email us with any unused codes or mail us bottlecaps and/or the carton codes (usually in the pull-off section on fridge packs). And it’s not just “coke” but any Coca-cola brand product (Barq’s, Fanta, Dasani are a few, but click here for a complete list). Points needed: 12,871. Points accrued: 93. Points still needed: 12,778. Every point counts!
  


• Send a care package for the parents, the baby, or the orphanage — or all three! Ask adoptive parents what they need. Chances are they’ll have a long list of over-the-counter medicines and baby/travel necessities that will add up fast. Most adoptive families are also asked to bring donations for the orphanage or care center, but there are often specific needs, so ask first. Contribute as much as you can. Those little guys need everything they can get. And it really is the children who benefit from your generosity.


• Give (or loan) good-quality audio-visual equipment, or offer to be a personal photographer during travel. Parents will want to capture the entire experience for their children’s Life Books, but if they don’t already own this equipment or have a volunteer photographer, most likely they won’t be able to afford it once they’re well into the process (and debt). Another alternative is to hire a professional photographer in-country to accompany the adoptive parents while meeting their child/ren for the first time. This might not be as expensive as you think, but do make sure you’re getting what you expect before you shell out any cash.
  

THINGS TO HELP PREPARE FOR BABY

• Help the adoptive parents find good deals - one indispensable read is Baby Bargains by Denise and Alan Fields. While this book can be checked out from most local libraries, it’s worth the small investment (and the authors even offer a money-back guarantee). Note: make sure you get the most recent edition as it is updated frequently.
  


• Help prepare the nursery - set a date to help with painting, wallpaper, furniture assembly or other decorating side-jobs.


• Host a baby shower for the expectant parents (adoptive parents are expecting and should be treated the same as pregnant parents).
  


• Give a gift from their baby registry.


• Send a book. Kiddos of all ages love stories. Here’s our wishlist for kid’s books!


• Donate your hand-me-downs, especially for first-time parents. Don’t hesitate to ask what they need or offer your gently used stuff. It may be double-trouble for some people (like us), who are hoping for twins or siblings. Note: most safety experts shake a stern finger at certain hand-me-downs like cribs and car seats, even from known entities like friends and family. If adoptive parents — especially nervous first-time parents — politely decline these items, understand that they may diligently following suggested advice and you should take no offense.
  


• Offer to run errands - the “O” factor (overwhelm) can drag anyone down. If you don’t mind pitching in, then there’s a lot you could do: interview potential nannies, pick up something at the store, go to the post office…whatever might help the adoptive family. For a more coordinated approach, schedule a time once a (week/month?) to run errands during specific hours. You’ll probably get a list of to-dos!
  

THINGS THAT WILL HELP AFTER BABY ARRIVES

• A stocked fridge. Make arrangements to stuff the adoptive family’s fridge and cabinets full of healthful goodies while they’re traveling. Or, ship a care package to arrive on their doorstep shortly after they arrive home (if you’re not local, order from an online food/grocery store). Prepared or easy-to-prepare meals are especially welcome. Don’t forget soft solids or formula for the little one(s).
  


• Food on the table. Whether new or seasoned parents, they probably won’t have the time or energy to cook after a long return trip. Make arrangements to have someone deliver a meal each day of the first week or two that they’re home. Gift cards to nearby restaurants (especially those with take-out) will be more than welcome.


• A stocked nursery. While you’re stocking the fridge, make sure that there are sufficient diapers, wipes, and basic medicines in the house. Also be sure that the nursery/kids’ room has clean sheets and a set-up crib/bed. There’s a darned good chance, especially for international adoptive parents, that both baby and parents will come back feeling ill — either from food/water bugs, a cold/flu, or just sheer exhaustion from travel. They will all want to collapse and not having to prep anything before they do will be a Godsend.


• A clean house. Coordinate with other friends and family to tidy the house before they get home. If possible, organize a group to descend on the house (with advance warning) a couple of weeks after parents are home. They’ll think you’re the greatest! Or, even the occasional clean-up would save mom’s sanity.
  


• Other help. Parents traveling back from some international destinations may bring back more than their children. Giardia and other types of food- and water-borne illnesses are typical and can result in loss of sleep and nutrition, and ultimately add extra stress. Though it’s a crucial bonding time for parents and children and visitors are often discouraged, if parents are particularly sick, they may need a helping hand to care for their children.

Darfur: Get Educated, Get Agitated

www.enoughproject.org
A Plan B with teeth for darfur
By John Prendergast and Colin Thomas-Jensen


Strategy Paper 2
May 2007

A Joint initiative of the International Crisis Group and the Center for American Progress

If there is a Guinness Book of World Records entry for most threats issued with no follow up, the international community’s response to Darfur is likely setting a new standard.

Barking without biting is the diplomatic equivalent of giving comfort to the enemy. In the case of Darfur, it may be even worse. Each time during the past three years that the Bush administration or the UN Security Council has threatened the Government of Sudan but failed to take action, the Khartoum regime has been emboldened to escalate its destruction and obstruction in Darfur. Its past practices make clear that the regime no longer takes these threats seriously, and will continue to flout international opinion until there are specific and escalating costs to its actions.
In these matters, it is best to rely on empirical evidence.

And the preponderance of evidence shows that during the 18 years it has been in power, the regime in Khartoum has changed its behavior only when faced with concerted international and regional pressure. Three times the regime has reversed its position on a major policy issue, and each of those three times the change resulted from intensive diplomacy backed by serious pressure—two ingredients sadly and shockingly missing from the response to Darfur today. The three cases are the regime’s support for international terrorist organizations during the early to mid 1990s; its support for slave-raiding militias in southwestern Sudan throughout the 1990s; and its prosecution of a war in southern Sudan that took two million Sudanese lives. (See “The Answer to Darfur” on www.enoughproject.org for case histories.)

When the lessons of this regime’s behavior are taken into account, the answers become clear and obvious. Continuing to ignore these historical precedents may condemn hundreds of thousands of Darfurians to death.

The necessary ingredients for the stabilization of Darfur are:

• a peace agreement that addresses the remaining issues of the non-signatory rebels and broader Darfurian society (see the new report on the peace process by the International Crisis Group at www.crisisgroup.org); and

• an effective civilian protection force, the starting
point for which is the “hybrid” AU-UN force mandated by the international community but rejected by Khartoum.

There is ongoing debate about how to secure those two critical peace and protection objectives, the first two “P’s” of what ENOUGH, a joint initiative of the International Crisis Group and the Center for American Progress to abolish genocide and mass atrocities, calls the “3Ps” of crisis response. The third P is punishment: imposing a cost for the commission of mass atrocities and building leverage through these measures for securing the peace and protection objectives.

Setting a firm deadline triggering meaningful and timely action is crucial. Last month, the U.S. accepted UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s appeal to delay U.S. and UN Security Council sanctions in order to give diplomacy more time, and the administration indicated that Khartoum would be given two to four weeks following the Secretary General’s April 2 request. A month has now passed, and, as demonstrated by recent attacks by helicopter gun ships and a build-up of Janjaweed forces in West Darfur, Khartoum continues to pursue a military solution.

Though further delay is abhorrent, there is a silver lining. The Bush administration’s current Plan B—the measures that President Bush was going to announce during his April 18 speech at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum but then delayed in order to give diplomacy more time—is inadequate. In delaying implementation, the administration has given itself time to prepare a real Plan B—a set of punitive measures with teeth. Further, it gives U.S. diplomats time to use the U.S.’ month-long chairmanship of the UN Security Council (May 2007) to move Darfur high on the Council’s agenda and coordinate Plan B efforts with the European Union (which has indicated that its own Plan B sanctions could go into effect as early as June) and other international actors willing to impose a cost on the regime for its actions.

On May 18, one month after the President’s initial speech, the White House should announce a revised set of Plan B measures and allocate sufficient resources to implement them swiftly and effectively. One month is a fair amount of time after President Bush’s speech to see whether the UN Secretary General’s diplomatic efforts will have had effect. If not, then the U.S. should impose Plan B on that date and work with allies to make Plan B as multilateral as possible.

AN INADEQUATE PLAN B—SO FAR

Most of the measures the administration was prepared to announce in April lack clear and decisive plans for implementation, are too unilateral in nature, and are too weak to have a major impact on the calculations of either regime officials in Khartoum or on intransigent rebel leaders. After ten years of dealing with unilateral U.S. sanctions, the Sudanese government and its commercial partners have by now figured out how to circumvent any additional U.S. measures.

The U.S. has been blocking many Sudanese transactions since President Clinton imposed sanctions in 1997, and the Sudanese regime has had ten years to prepare for the next round. A new Sudanese oil industry has grown up around these sanctions, and the oil business is conducted without interference because this new sector is beyond the scope of existing U.S. sanctions. Though the oil industry has grown to dominate Sudan’s economy, the U.S. has little understanding of its operations, and has not committed the resources to collect such information.

Perhaps most damning, because the administration has for five months leaked information to the press about Plan B, the regime has had ample time to develop a plan for working around new, additional sanctions.

The United States cannot realistically impose robust sanctions on Khartoum unless and until it has enough information about how Sudanese business is conducted to prevent Khartoum from hiding its transactions. The U.S. should therefore undertake an “intelligence surge” by the CIA to gather detailed and comprehensive information on Sudanese companies with financial ties to the NCP and on individuals responsible for atrocities that have been or are being committed in Darfur. The U.S. should also undertake an “enforcement surge” and ensure that the Treasury Department devotes additional staff and resources to aggressively act on this new information. (As currently constituted, the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) cannot effectively enforce new sanctions against Khartoum without reducing its focus on other, critical sanctions regimes). Intelligence
and enforcement surges could bring the U.S. up to speed on the critical facts and capacities that are needed to effectively implement any punitive measures. And without a clear strategy of rapidly escalating pressure through a variety of economic and legal measures, then the deadly status quo will no doubt prevail.

Both of these steps require political leadership and long-term vision. Since the fall of 2001, the U.S. has counted on the cooperation of Khartoum in global
Since the fall of 2001, the U.S. has counted on the cooperation of Khartoum
in global counter-terrorism efforts and the administration continues to welcome and work closely with many of the same Sudanese intelligence officials who are responsible for Khartoum’s policies and actions in Darfur.

Members of Congress have begun to question seriously the extent of Sudan’s cooperation with the U.S. on counterterrorism matters, but stepping up the practical pressure on Khartoum may well generate opposition in the intelligence community. Similarly, the expansion of economic sanctions—particularly those that affect Sudan’s oil sector—may complicate an already complex relationship between the United States and China.

The point is not simply to punish for punishment’s sake, even though America’s signature on Genocide Convention does oblige us to punish the perpetrators of what the U.S. government has repeatedly labeled genocide. Punitive measures are necessary to gain Khartoum’s acceptance of a durable peace deal for Darfur and the deployment of an effective international force to protect civilians.

Similar measures should be imposed against leading rebel commanders and political leaders if they are deemed to have committed atrocities or are obstructing real and balanced peace efforts, which so far do not exist.

As important as it is that the U.S. act to implement a Plan B with teeth, our ability to leverage action by Khartoum will be exponentially increased if we act multilaterally. The U.S. government already has unilateral sanctions in place against Sudan that bar U.S. companies from doing business in Sudan (though allowing U.S. businesses to work with the Government of South Sudan), and freeze assets in the U.S. or in the control of U.S. citizens of the Sudanese government and certain government-owned Sudanese companies. Enacted in 1997, these sanctions did affect the calculations of the regime in the past, but they have since run their course as the Sudanese regime circumvents U.S. institutions in its commercial dealings.

Even more important, however, the fact that existing sanctions are unilateral means that Khartoum has the practical advantage of accessing non-American
financial systems and investors, and the political advantage of knowing that the international community is not acting in concert. Punitive measures applied by the international community acting as one will have a much greater impact on the pocketbooks of those responsible for crimes against humanity. Moreover, the Government of Sudan will have a much more difficult time scoring propaganda points when the U.S. is not acting alone. It is therefore critical that the U.S. works with its partners in the UN Security Council and other forums and shares both intelligence and responsibility for enforcement.

A PLAN B WITH TEETH

Financial and Legal Components

The following initiatives could be implemented immediately at little cost, but would require a strong diplomatic effort to rally multilateral support and increases in staffing and resources to ensure aggressive implementation.

• TARGET SUDANESE OFFICIALS MULTILATERALLY: Impose targeted UN Security Council sanctions—including asset freezes and travel bans—against persons responsible for crimes against humanity in Darfur. Such sanctions have been authorized in previous UNSC resolutions, and called for in multiple reports from the UNSC Sanctions Committee Panel of Experts, but they have not actually been imposed on any official of import. The U.S. effort now underway would target only three individuals,
one of whom is a rebel leader, in addition to four individuals designated in 2006, only one of whom is a regime official. The number must be much higher and be widened with each atrocity perpetrated, and reflect the reality of Khartoum’s complicity in genocide. Three senior Sudanese officials in particular must be singled out for sanctions:

Assistant to the President Nafie Ali Nafie; Director of National Intelligence Salah Abdallah Abu Digin (AKA Salah Gosh); and Minster of Defense Abdel Rahim Mohamed Hussein. These three officials maintain a tight grip on Sudan’s labyrinthine security apparatus and continue to drive policy and military operations in Darfur.

• TARGET SUDANESE COMPANIES MULTILATERALLY: Impose UN Security Council sanctions against the Sudanese companies already targeted unilaterally by the U.S., and establish a UN Panel of Experts to further investigate which companies are conducting the business necessary to underwrite Sudan’s war machine. If, ultimately the U.S. imposes unilateral sanctions on 29 more companies, this would bring the total number of companies the U.S. has unilaterally sanctioned to 159. Unless these sanctions are multilateral they will largely be meaningless, so the U.S. should lead efforts in the UN Security Council to sanction multilaterally the full panoply of 159 companies.

• PRESS INTERNATIONAL BANKS TO STOP DOING BUSINESS WITH SUDAN: As is the case with Iran, U.S. officials should engage with a number of international banking institutions to strongly encourage them to stop supporting oil transactions with Sudan, with the implication being that if such business continues then all transactions by those banks with U.S. commercial entities (and those of other countries willing to work with us) would eventually be banned. All efforts should be made to shield the Government of Southern Sudan from negative impacts from such an initiative.

This wouldn’t necessarily stop Sudan’s international exchange needs, as money would just be moved through other banking systems over which the U.S. has no access or jurisdiction, but would drive it underground and put another scarlet letter next to Sudan, furthering its isolation
and pariah status.

• REINFORCE DIVESTMENT EFFORTS: President Bush should sign an Executive Order putting into law all of the legally possible elements of existing Congressional bills in support of divestment:

the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 (HR 180) and the Sudan Divestment Authorization Act of 2007 (S.831). The executive branch should be supportive of efforts all over the U.S. to pressure university endowments, state and municipal pension funds, and private mutual funds to sell equity holdings in a targeted list of companies doing business with the Sudanese regime.

The Sudan Divestment Taskforce (www.sudandivestment.org) maintains an updated list of these so-called “worst offender” companies.

• SUPPORT THE ICC INDICTMENT PROCESS: Provide information and declassified intelligence to the International Criminal Court to help accelerate the process of building indictments against senior officials in the regime for their role in orchestrating mass atrocities in Darfur. The U.S. has the most such intelligence and should come to agreement with the ICC about what information to share.

A PLAN B WITH TEETH

Military Components

While the financial and legal aspects of Plan B can be implemented immediately, preparation is also required for the military elements of a Plan B with teeth. If prompt financial and legal measures succeed in altering the calculations of the regime in Khartoum, then there will be no need for these military measures. But as history makes clear, the credible threat of military action will alter the calculations of Khartoum officials. As well, and in the event the regime continues to defy its obligations to its own citizens and the will of the international community, these military actions could help to protect the people of Darfur.

Two coercive military measures require accelerated planning processes, which should commence within the NATO framework, but also seek UN Security Council approval. The aim of these military planning efforts would be to maximize the protection of Darfurian civilians and humanitarian operations if the situation continues to deteriorate.

• No Fly Zone: Absent an enhanced ground component this option is questionable and fraught with potential negative side effects. However, it is important to press ahead with planning an enforcement mechanism for a no-fly zone (NFZ) as the Sudanese regime continues to use aerial bombing as a central component of its military strategy and its civilian displacement objectives. If the mandate of the existing AU force or the planned UN/AU hybrid force would be strengthened and more troops deployed to protect civilians, neutralizing the Sudanese regime’s one tactical advantage will be essential. However, the risk to humanitarian operations posed by an NFZ must be acknowledged and mitigated. It would be irresponsible to move forward with an NFZ in the absence of preparations to deploy ground forces to protect IDP camps and humanitarian operations. Khartoum will perceive an NFZ as an act of war, so planning for a No Fly Zone must also include contingency planning based on possible responses from the Sudanese regime. The consequences could be dire. Posturing
without planning could blow up in the faces of the IDPs, refugees, and humanitarian workers bravely assisting them.

• Non-Consensual Force Deployment: Although few nations are likely to support this and volunteer forces in the present context, if the situation dramatically deteriorates in Darfur (large-scale pullout of humanitarian agencies, increasing attacks on camps or AU forces, etc.), the debate could shift quickly and credible plans need to be in place to move troops into the theater of war quickly with a primary focus on protecting vulnerable civilian populations.

This planning is both a practical necessity, and a means to build and utilize leverage against the regime.

It would be irresponsible to only pursue the implementation of a no-fly zone in the absence of any preparation for use of ground forces to protect displaced camps and humanitarian aid efforts that could be targeted as a result.

CONCLUSION

The U.S. must move away from its current policy of constructive engagement without leverage to a more muscular policy focused on walking softly and carrying—and using—a bigger stick. Unfulfilled threats and appeals should be replaced quickly with punitive measures backing a robust peace and protection initiative. We may not know the names of the victims in Darfur, but we know the names of the orchestrators of the policy that led to their deaths.

There is hope. The growing constituency in the U.S. focused on countering the atrocities in Darfur is expanding by the day. Elected officials who ignore this crescendo of activism—though not usually front page news—do so at their own peril. We will do a great service to all of history’s victims of mass atrocities if we make it politically costly for this administration, or any future one, to stand idly by while Darfur burns.

Your elected officials need to hear from you that the current Plan B proposed by President Bush is inadequate. The United States must work multilaterally
to impose punitive measures—including targeted sanctions and economic pressures—against senior Sudanese National Congress Party officials and the companies they control. By contacting your elected representatives, you will be joining thousands of concerned activists from across the country in “leading their leaders.”
ENOUGH urges activist organizations to issue action alerts urging their members to contact the White House, their Senators, and their members of Congress to press for a Plan B with teeth.

The Genocide Intervention Network operates a toll free number, 1-800-GENOCIDE that will connect you to your elected officials.

Call 1-800-GENOCIDE to contact your Senators and member of Congress and tell them:

• that punitive action against the Government of Sudan will only be effective if it is taken multilaterally;

• to urge President Bush to impose targeted UN Security Council sanctions against persons responsible for crimes against humanity in Darfur and Sudanese companies already sanctioned unilaterally by the U.S.;

• to urge President Bush to engage with a number of international banking institutions to strongly encourage them to stop supporting oil transactions
with Sudan;

• to urge President Bush to sign an Executive Order in support of divestment;

• to urge President Bush to provide information and declassified intelligence to the International Criminal Court; and

• to urge President Bush to put credible plans in place for a no-fly zone and non-consensual force deployment to protect civilians if the situation dramatically deteriorates in Darfur.

Call 1-800-GENOCIDE to contact the White House and tell President Bush:

• that Plan B will only be effective if the U.S. works multilaterally to take punitive actions against the Government of Sudan;

• to impose targeted UN Security Council sanctions against persons responsible for crimes against humanity in Darfur and Sudanese companies already
sanctioned unilaterally by the U.S.;

• to engage with a number of international banking
institutions to strongly encourage them to stop supporting oil transactions with Sudan;

• to sign an Executive Order in support of divestment;

• to provide information and declassified intelligence to the International Criminal Court; and

• to put credible plans in place for a No-Fly Zone and non-consensual force deployment to protect civilians if the situation dramatically deteriorates in Darfur.

John Prendergast is on leave from his International Crisis Group work to help build ENOUGH, which he co-chairs. His bestselling book, Not on Our Watch: The Mission to End Genocide in Darfur and Beyond (www.notonourwatchbook.org), co-authored with actor/activist Don Cheadle, is available at book stores nationwide.

Colin Thomas-Jensen is taking leave from Crisis Group work to serve as Policy Adviser to ENOUGH.

WHAT YOU CAN DO—Lead Your Leaders

The mission of ENOUGH, a joint initiative of the International Crisis Group and the Center for American Progress, is to end crimes against humanity in Darfur, northern Uganda and eastern Congo, and to prevent future mass atrocities wherever they may occur. Each month, Crisis Group’s experts on the ground assess the dynamics in northern Uganda, and eastern Congo and provide ENOUGH with comprehensive field analyses of these crises. then outlines the challenges and obstacles to policy change and offers focused policy recommendations to end these mass atrocities. The monthly updates also support an activist agenda for how concerned citizens can affect policy change. ENOUGH employs a “3P” strategy focused on promoting durable peace efforts; providing protection for the innocent victims of mass atrocities and genocide; and punishing the perpetrators to break the cycle of impunity and will utilize field analysis and policy advocacy to empower a growing activist movement for change. Working with a broad range of activists and experts with extensive experience in the field and with government, multilateral, and non-governmental organizations, ENOUGH will also issue a series of policy proposals focused on what the international community, and particularly the United States, can do now to prevent mass atrocities and genocide in the future.

ENOUGH!
1333 H Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-682-1611 Fax: 202-682-1867
www.enoughproject.org

Find A Local Ethiopian Adoption Group

Not to dis the internet, but my recent little crisis has reminded me how important face-to-face relationships and discussions are - both for families in the process a for the kids, themselves. For all the worry I've had over children feeling comfortable being an Ethiopian adoptee in America, it seems that these meetings, where the look, feelings and experiences of fellow adoptees can be discussed in a natural, unguarded way feels like the best first step in engendering open dialog and positive self-esteem.

I posted before about the inspiring story of Nancy Meyer & her group in Chicago.

Lately, on the Yahoo! boards, some folks have been wondering how to start/join a group in their area.

That's why I'm grateful to Brian (dad of 3), fellow "SoCal Potlucker", mix-master supreme behind the awesome blog ON THE FLY and man of science for compiling pan-American information about local adoption groups (and letting me re-post it):

We went to a potluck with families from our Southern California Ethiopian adoption group last weekend. Being the family that lives the farthest south, we often end up traveling the furthest to the event, but every time we attend one, I'm reminded how important it is to go. It's good for the parents to be able to talk to other families and it's good for the potential parents waiting for a referral so they can ask questions of people who've "been there; done that." Our kids are often the oldest ones there and they're not quite at the point of talking with their peers about adoption issues, but they're building friendships that will be helpful for those issues in the future. And of course its nice to (re)connect with people who's blogs you read on the internet (Blaine, Julie, and Kevin, was there anyone else that didn't out themselves to me?)

So where do you find a local group? Here's a good start:

Connecticut
Rhode Island
Boston
Midatlantic: MD, VA, WVA, D.C., PA, NJ, and DE areaNew York City
loosely-defined northeastern states (New England, NY, NJ, PA etc.)
Illinois
Arizona
Northern California (SF bay area
Southern California

If none of these are near where you live, you can check the Frappr map and see if anyone lives near you (add yourself while you're there) or post a message on the big group asking if others live near you. That's how our group formed with 5 or 6 families.

If I missed any groups, please add them in the comments. If you've got a blog about Ethiopian adoption, feel free to link to and/or post this list to your blog.

Thank's, Brian!

Now, back to our regularly scheduled program

My wife and I are grateful beyond words for the generosity of everyone who posted. Some of you we know, some we know only online, some we don't know at all. Everyone has really helped put us securely back on the path of adoption.

Here's the ingredients of the breakdown:

My parents came to town and gave a very rosey portrait of their relationship with my sister (she was adopted at 13 mos. in a closed adoption in the mid-70's). This is VERY unusual, as there has been discord between my mother and my sister since she was a preteen, which deepened into real open hostility when she was 15 through 27. She moved closer to my folks because she needed financial help, and there's been a restoration of some sort of relationship. Still, they both play massive head games and every conversation I have turns into a "he-said, she-said". So when I heard everything was good, I was hopeful. I have not spoken to my sister at length about our decision to adopt. She happened to call during this visit and I talked to her, only to learn that she has formed a very close relationship with her birth mother and views my parents as not her parents (detailed in last post), good only for financial support. While I am very happy that she's reunited with her birth mother, I am uncomfortable with the way that she is lying to/using/manipulating my parents. I am not absolving my parents, as they did everything wrong, in terms of attempting to make her a "natural" daughter by denying her her history. Add to that the fact that much of the information they DID claim to "know" about her past is being disputed by the birth mother. I personally think EVERYONE involved is lying and trying to make themselves look good. Still, it's been pretty heartbreaking to be in the middle of what should be a happy and hopeful journey towards adoption and yet be in the middle of this ready-for-Jerry Springer drama, in which you are informed that your family was not "real" and was "abusive", and that the birth family is "real".

Only in that moment did I begin to understand what it must be like (on all sides) for an international adoptee to feel that he or she would rather have grown up an orphan in his or her native country than be adopted.

At the same time, my wife's mother, who is, frankly, a really amazing person, had a breakdown in her support. She's afraid of us traveling (we entered into the adoption with the intention of escorting, but have become convinced of the necessity of traveling). This spun out into an expression of many, many doubts and fears -- some legitimate, but many the kind of uneducated fears fostered by the mainstream media's shallow and sensationalistic coverage of adoption in general and international adoption in particular. It's important that I make it clear that none of this was based on race, but rather issues about bonding, corruption, mental illness and health history and the ethics of adoption agencies.

My wife is incredibly close to her mom and, even though my wife could argue against most of her mother's fears, the emotional toll of worrying her was very great. It eroded her confidence in the decision. More importantly, I think it made her feel that by pressing forward, she would be betraying her mom on some level. Add to that the fact that we have very little-to-no family or family support. She's the only person we have locally, and knowing that she's not supportive weighs on us.

The two events tapped into all of the reading we've done about first world "baby buying" and adult adoptee resentment, creating a perfect storm of doubt. We almost emailed our agency and told them that we were done.

So, that's the backstory. Now, thanks to your kindness, we've rediscovered our initial enthusiasm.

Here's what helped:

Brian (dad to 3) said...
Then again, many parent/child relationships are strained and many times it's the parents' fault, so I figure I have quite a bit of control over them not hating me and it's far from "nothing more than a gamble".

A woman from our agency, who's also the mother of many adoptees, some who've reached adulthood, and a few who are Ethiopian, said much the same thing -- that the method of parenting adoptive children has evolved tremendously in the last 30 years. Either through their own selfishness or through the legitimate fact that adoption was treated differently at the time, my parents basically made all the "wrong" choices in parenting my sister... and got a predictable result. You, this adoptive mother and others have pointed out that, while no guarantee, more enlightened, less selfish, more honest parenting can help make adoption seem more normal.

Jon said...

You may have already stumbled upon this, but here's a great blog written by an adoptive mom of two korean born children.

www.thirdmom.blogspot.com


I do read her often. Thank you for pointing out her most recent posts.


-Samantha- said...

Wow, what happened my friend? To tell you the truth, it seems to me that you think way too much. You are overanalizing everything... For all you know, your adopted child will become the one you are most compatible with...who knows.

Certainly, it has not been blood that has fostered my best relationships. To be honest, I am somewhat envious of many of the people in the ET adoption community who blog about their close relationships with family. I have an incredibly perfunctory relationship with my blood relatives. There's every possibility that the same deep connection I have with my best friends could also be forged between me and my daughter -- let's hope so!

Anonymous said...

I have felt very similar to what you wrote about, I have been on the other side of being the adopted child and "hating" my adoptive father at the time, now we have a really good relationship, and he is dear to me.
-Emmelia
www.corban7@wordpress.com

I know that becoming an individual is the point of childhood, and a natural part of that is a pulling away from the parents. I fully expect all my kids to go through a period where they pull away and reject. I think what freaks me out about my sister is that she's in her early thirties and has 3 kids of her own. It's nice to hear that not all rifts are permanent.


Anonymous said...

I've noticed that many of the adult adoptees (domestic) are in closed situations, or come from really abusive families. I feel more readily able to dismiss those situations as being too out of the norm to be relevant background for my situation. However, I think we have a lot to learn from the stories if we can sift through the anger (get ready for a wild ride). We have as much to learn from international adoptess who are coming of age.

So, the bigger question for me is: what can we learn and do differenly based on their experiences. I've got a long way to go on my learning curve, but so far I've decided:

1) I need to do more work integrating culture into my children's lives...more openness and communication will be necessary. It's going to be WORK, lots of work for me. I may have to move to a different neighborhood, go to a different church, find new physicians, and definitely surround my family with people "like" my kids.

2) Adoption reform, especially for domestic adoption, is needed.

3) Socioeconomic reform is desperately needed on a global scale. Read "The End of Povery" if you disagree. Such reform could result in a huge reduction in the availability of children for international adoption. Sucks for me personally, but I would get up on a table and shout 'hallelujah' if I knew that fewer people in the world were dying from lack of access to clean water or basic medication, that more families could afford to raise their children.


All of the above, I feel, is dead on. As most readers know, I've recommended THE END OF POVERTY highly a few times. It was a transformative book for me, paving the way to choosing Ethiopia over other programs -- long before we seriously considered adoption.

I try to incorporate economic justice into this blog as much as possible without having it overwhelm the focus on adoption, itself.

Anonymous continues, saying:

One of the biggest "catch 22" issues for me is that many Ethiopian children are not "orphans" by my standards: they have families, often families they know, who could and would want to raise them if those families had the cash OR in some circumstances if AIDS (b/c of death of one or both parents) wasn't such a social stigma. How do I reconcile that my children have living relatives who love them, but because of a long history of social, economic and political development, CAN'T raise them. So, then I fly halfway around the world to take them out of the only life they know and raise them as my own? And I know this is true because I get the chance to meet these relatives before I leave the country and give them a nifty map of where we'll be (as if they'll ever get to visit) and a generic photo of our "family"?


This weighs on me as well. I think I entered the process thinking of "orphans", and coming to understand that most are relinquished. In my posts about birthmothers, I've discussed how this has thrown me for a loop.

I read once that for some adoptees, the trauma of adoption is distinct from the event of getting a new family. In other words, adoption does not cause relinquishment. The relinquishment and trauma would occur anyway.

It's important, I think, to run a check on the idea that you are "saving" anyone. I feel that having selfish motives -- WANTING a daughter, ENJOYING Ethiopian culture, in my case, actually HELPS motivate me to do the RIGHT THING by my daughter and keep her culture and heritage alive.

As for "orphanage vs. family" and the disruption to culture and language...

Umm 'Skandar said...

What is the greater loss, to lose one's country, language, and culture? Or to have no family? It seems that right way to balance anger adult adoptee question is to seek out adults who lived their whole life in an orphanage. What can they add to this conversation?

I agree -- does anyone know if orphans have ever gone on record??

Carrie said...

My friend, I know exactly were you are in your adoption journey right now. The fear that you feel is real and you have real reasons to be afraid. Adoption, like everything in life, comes with no guarantees. You may adopt a child who has very real issues with being adopted or you may adopt a child who has none. Have you read “In Their Own Voices” by Rita Simmons? I found it to be a very realistic look at how transracially adopted children feel about their adoption and being raised in a white family. Many of these children had to deal with issues stemming from their adoption, but most still felt close to their adoptive parents. The people who had the most issues with their adoptive parents seemed to be the ones where there was “other”
issues with the child/parent relationship besides adoption e.g., abuse, neglect, poor communication.

I have not read this book yet, but was aware of it. I'll have to order it.

This post heartened me because the idea that adoption is a complication in an otherwise dysfunctional parent/child relationship applied to my parents and sister's relationship. Many of their parenting choices didn't have great results for either my sister or me -- but with adoption adding an extra wrinkle, her problems with them are more pronounced than mine. Once again, hopefully more selfless parenting can lead to a more healthy, respectful relationship all around.

Cathy and Abebech said similar things...

cathy said...

You wouldn't be a good parent if you didn't wrestle with these questions.

abebech said...

These are great responses. Please do check out thirdmom's blog, and my own post in response.
I am pro-adoption reform, pro-open records, do believe that children are best served by being raised in healthy families of origin, yet I feel very passionately that we did the right thing by our daughter, and will do so again by another child BECAUSE we've considered all these angles, listened to those very important voices, gave it all serious consideration and decided as we did. I also realize that doesn't mean she'll think we did the right thing when she's old enough to decide. But she'll know we did what we believed was the best thing, with our hearts full of love for her. Isn't that what most parents do?

A surprisingly cogent and effective argument. Also used by our African-American social worker, when I pestered her with questions during our home study. I may actually start believing it!

For those not in the know, Abebech is A NEW FLOWER BLOOMS. I have blogged about her awesomeness before.

jen said...
One thing I have considered, along with a lot of what has already been said here is that our children will grow up in a very different world than the adopted children coming of age. There are gazillions of books for us parents to read, there are studies that show what worked and what didn't, there are many more adoption communities and support groups, there are even more inter-racial relationships (marriages, adoptions, etc.) than twenty years ago. That's not to say that we have come so far that we don't need to work HARD, but it is to say that our children will have a different background than the children who are adult adoptees now.


Julie said...

I think the anger many adult adoptees have is a result of a line of thinking their parents' generation had toward international adoption (and adoption in general). Adoptive parents did not try (for the most part) to include their children's culture and did not address the issue of race. Some adoptees were even made to feel grateful for being "rescued" by their parents. Of course these are all generalizations, but awareness of the importance of one's birth culture and race are things that we as adoptive parents are only now starting to deal with in a healthy and constructive way. My thought (and hope) is the newest generation of adoptees will not be as angry as some of the current adult adoptees.

My wife and I attended a gathering of other adoptive families this past weekend. It was really amazing. It felt so natural, and the families were all really wonderful. I think these resources and the increasing awareness of adoption will help kids feel more "normal".

I must also say that part of my wife and my reason for continuing is all of you. We've met some of the most engaged, open, honest, decent people within this adoption community. People who are engaged in the world, people who are fighting for economic justice and racial equality. People who's relationship with God is about love and community, not division or oppression. People willing to admit to fears, mistakes and insecurities.

It may sound strange, but we figure such people can't be involved in something wrong, or something damaging to kids.

So, we're soldiering on, waiting for our referral. I'll continue to blog about race and culture and adoption, in hopes that such an education can making me a better parent -- and that by being such a parent, I really can tip the scales of fate in my (and my adopted child's) favor.

Mother's Day Gifts That Help UNICEF

Send Hallmark UNICEF bouquets this Mother's Day and Hallmark will donate 5% of the purchase price to help UNICEF immunize children against life threatening diseases. Choose from the "Everyday Miracles" bouquet featuring roses and sunflowers or the "Beautiful Spirit" bouquet featuring light and dark lavender roses.

Pier 1 Imports is offering a gift idea with a rhythmic twist. Gratitude, Life & Love is a compilation CD of inspirational songs paying tribute to the special bond between mother and child. 25% of the purchase price (less tax) will go toward UNICEF's efforts to build a better world for women and children. Available in Pier 1 & Pier 1 Kids stores and pier1.com.

Honor her with a distinctive gift to celebrate Mother's Day. For a contribution of $25 or more in honor of the recipient, you can send a message of love and appreciation and help UNICEF create a world fit for children! Visit unicefusa.org/tribute to learn more.

Confused, Need Help

HEEEEEELLLLLLPPPP!

For people who have OLDER ADOPTED KIDS and for ADULT ADOPTEES... I'm having real problems coming to grips with the idea of adoption -- how does an adopted person integrate her adopted family with her birth family. Does an adopted person ever get over that dissonance of coming from somewhere else -- and in this case another culture (which the child will, on some level, lose) and another race (which the child, on some level, will feel alienated from)and a birth mother a half-a-globe away, more imagined to her than real.

I've gotten so far into the experience of adult adoptees who feel "completed" by their birthfamily (some who are still on good terms with the adopted family, most who are not), that I'm beginning to feel that adoption is nothing more than a gamble.

I have a tremendous capacity to love an adopted child as my own. I have energy to do my best to compensate for not being raised Ethiopian, or even in an African-American family. I have energy to try to help, in my small way, to make Ethiopia better.

What I do not have the capacity for is to have the relationship with an adult child that I see many adult adoptees and their families having. I am so freaked about it that I feel it may be better not to "risk" the "experiment" of adoption at all.

I'm starting to side with the anti-adoption crowd. Their arguements are really starting to make sense. I'm even questioning the desire to have a third child by any means -- my wife and my unwillingness to play genetic roulette by getting pregnant over 35 was a major factor in chosing adoption in the first place.

Am I chicken? Am I having cold feet? Do I have a statistically skewed view of adoption? Or am I just being honest that I don't want to risk endangering my marriage and my bio kids' lives for a potentially bad outcome?

Obama Brings Out the Racists

This is not a political endorsement, but I REALLLLLLY want Obama to get the Democratic nomination, because then we will see, very clearly, EXACTLY how far we've come since the '50's. And I bet it isn't that far.

Racism is less tolerable in polite society, but with the internet there to mask identities, people are free to post their REAL opinions on CBS' comments.

Obama is also requesting Secret Service protection earlier than any other candidate ever. Hmmmm, what's different about him, compared with the nearly 20 other Republican and Democratic nominees?

Get ready to be proud of America, folks:

May 4, 2007

CBSNews.com Turns Off Comments on Obama Stories
Posted by Brian Montopoli

(AP Photo)
Today CBSNews.com informed its staff via email that they should no longer enable comments on stories about presidential candidate Barack Obama. The reason for the new policy, according to the email, is that stories about Obama have been attracting too many racist comments.

"It's very simple," Mike Sims, director of News and Operations for CBSNews.com, told me. "We have our Rules of Engagement. They prohibit personal attacks, especially racist attacks. Stories about Obama have been problematic, and we won't tolerate it."

CBSNews.com does sometimes delete comments on an individual basis, but Sims said that was not sufficient in the case of Obama stories due to "the volume and the persistence" of the objectionable comments.

There has been a fierce debate about how news outlets should handle reader comments. Washingtonpost.com's Jim Brady, whose site, like CBSNews.com, does not have the resources to filter comments in advance, told Howard Kurtz that he'd "rather figure out a way to do it better than not to do it at all."

But Post reporter Darryl Fears told Kurtz that comments should be eliminated if they can't be pre-screened for offensiveness.

"If you're an African American and you read about someone being called a porch monkey, that overrides any positive thing that you would read in the comments," he said.

CBSNews.com has no plans to disable comments on stories about the other presidential candidates, according to Sims. As for comments on Obama stories, he said the site is open to eventually bringing them back.

"We'd like to be able to return to them, and I'm not ruling that out," said Sims. "But at this point it's not possible."

Thanks to Skeptical Brotha for the heads up.

ONE: Feinstein-Hagel Letter Closes with 55 Signatures

Feinstein-Hagel Letter Closes with 55 Signatures

Thanks from me to any and all who participated.

Make Mother's Day Extra Happy

Use your Mother's Day present to help mothers you've never met! The links below will take you to catalogs which allow you to buy gifts that help others, the purchase of which directly help international aid organizations at work in Africa. All the charities listed in this post have gotten an "A" rating from the American Institute of Philanthropy (charitywatch.org), indicating that over 90% of their budget goes to relief work. In addition to supporting charities (or, in the case of ONE, an advocacy campaign), many of these products are FAIR TRADE or the handiwork of impoverished people. By purchasing from most of these sites, you are "giving" two times over: helping individuals directly and supporting a relief organization.

• A Greater Gift


• CARE: Magazine Subscriptions


• CAREWear


• Catholic Relief Services Fair Trade Chocolate Program


• Catholic Relief Services Map of Fair Trade Coffee Roasters


• Co-op America's National Green Pages


• Doctors of the World Gift Catalog


• Equal Exchange, for the benefit of Lutheran World Relief


• Global Exchange


• Medical Teams International Online Store


• Northwest Medical Teams International E-Cards


• Oxfam America Unwrapped


• Save the Children Gift Shop


• Ten Thousand Villages Gift Shop/Mennonite Central Committee


• The Child Health Site Store - $1 SHIPPING


• The ONE Campaign Store


• UNICEF Cards and E-Cards


• World Neighbors Coffee & WOW! Store

If you have a mom (or wife) who says "It's the thought that counts" and MEANS IT, try one of the choices below. These links also take you to places to buy gifts online which support "A"-rated relief organizations. In the cases below, however, the "gift" is really a personalized donation, which allows you to give the intended recipient of your gift a card stating that you bought school supplies for a classroom, or food rations or courses of AIDS drugs in the name of the recipient. Unlike raw donations, the amounts correlate to a specific usage, making the gift more "tangible" and meaningful.

• Church World Service Gift Catalog


• American Friends Service Committee - Gifts with Heart & Hope


• World Concern Global Gift Guide


• Mercy Corp. - Mercy Kits

Happy Mother's Day!

Blogroll Update

Welcome the new members of the Swerl family!

• Adoption Sponsorship


• At Home with Nick, Holly & Maren!


• Do Justly, Love Mercy, Walk Humbly


• Doubly Blessed (domestic)


• Ethiopia to Fargo - Our Adoption Journey


• Ethiopiana


• Half a World Away


• Introducing the Heitritters!


• Katie & Ryan's Adoption Adventure


• Love from Ethiopia


• My Adoption Story


• Our Adoption Story - Blessed


• Our Adoption Journey - Kirk Family


• Our Ethiopian Adoption Journey (nemo-nema)


• Our Life's Journey!!


• Our Journey to Ethiopia


• Our Road to Ethiopia...


• The Babbling of Brooke


• The Bly Family Blog


• The Joys of Asha (domestic)


• The Zitek Family - Megan & Dave


• Waiting for Baby Burton

Get a Free Professional Portrait!

I learned of this from "Tamra" on a Yahoo! board.

There is a group of affiliated photographers, called CELEBRATING ADOPTION. They offer a COMPLIMENTARY SITTING FEE for a professionally-shot portrait of your adoptive family IF YOU'VE ADOPTED IN THE LAST YEAR.

Use their website to find a photographer in your area!

Uganda

Swerl reader, Sonora has TWO globe-trotting photographer brothers, both active in Africa.

Her brother IRA LIPPKE's page has tremendous pictures of UGANDA. Because it's all flash navigation, I can't link you to it. Get past the splash page, then CLICK ON HIS NAME (on the left) and chose "Uganda".

Her other brother, SAMUEL LIPPKE's personal blog,"When does this boat dock?" has fantastic pictures and information about rallies to end the war in Uganda.

His PORTFOLIO also boasts amazing pictures of Uganda, mixed in with others. Click "Menu" and choose "World".

Thanks, Sonora, for sharing!

Africa News Round-Up

Progress on Punishing Those Responsible for the Genocide in Darfur:

(AP)The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for the Sudanese government’s humanitarian affairs minister and a janjaweed militia leader suspected of committing war crimes in Darfur, the court said Wednesday.

Ethiopia and Press Freedom:

(AP)Ethiopia tops a list of 10 countries — including three in sub-Saharan Africa — where press freedom has deteriorated over the past five years, a New York-based media advocacy group said Wednesday.

Three countries on the list — Ethiopia, Gambia and Congo — show that "democracy's foothold in Africa is shallow when it comes to press freedom. These three African nations, as diverse as they are, have won praise at times for their transition to democracy — but they are actually moving in reverse on press issues. Journalists in Ethiopia, Gambia, and DRC (Congo) are being jailed, attacked, and censored, a picture far worse than what we saw only a few years ago."

Ethiopia's Internet Repression

(Reuters) An Internet watchdog on Tuesday accused Ethiopia of blocking scores of anti-government Web sites and millions of Weblogs in one of sub-Saharan Africa's biggest cases of cyber-censorship.

SIGN THIS PETITION TO HELP FORCE AMERICAN COMPANIES TO STAND UP TO REPRESSIVE REGIMES. Google and other American companies allow Ethiopia and China to "block" blogs and webpages, in order to profit in these countries. If we are in the business of spreading democracy (and if Ethiopia is really our ally in the war against the anti-democratic terrorist ideology), we should encourage American companies to show, by example, how integral the "Fourth Estate" is to the democratic system.

Starbucks, Ethiopia, Strike Deal

Starbucks and the Ethiopian government agreed in principle on a licensing, distribution and marketing deal that recognizes the importance and integrity of the nation's specialty coffee names, they said in [a joint] statement.

The parties expect to formalize the details of the agreement and sign it this month.

"Ethiopia is firmly committed to work in partnership with all international specialty coffee companies and distributors of its fine coffees, including Harar, Sidamo and Yirgacheffe," said Getachew Mengistie, director general of the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office.

Aid agency Oxfam, which launched an campaign in October last year urging Starbucks to talk to Ethiopia directly on the issue, welcomed the move.

"This initiative will help create real change for the 15 million Ethiopians dependent on the country's coffee sector," Oxfam America President Raymond Offenheiser said.

Poverty is dire in Ethiopia, where a quarter of its 80 million people rely on coffee. The average Ethiopian's yearly income, in purchasing power parity terms, is around $1,000.


Eight Ethiopian Hostages Free

Eight Ethiopians made a tearful return to Addis Ababa on Thursday, two months after being kidnapped at gunpoint with five Europeans in the country's remote northeastern Afar region.

Honesty

Honesty is the best policy -- especially in adoption. I got another lesson in that this weekend. As I've been reading and mulling over our own adoption, I've been thinking about my sister (an adult adoptee from a closed, domestic adoption in the '70's). My parents happened to visit (a rare occurrance as there's a continent in between us). They were telling me that my sister, after being reunited with her birth mother a few years ago, had stopped contacting her.

It happened that my sister called during the visit. I was interested to talk to her about her feelings on adoption. Before I could even ask a question, I was surprised that she offered that she was in weekly contact with her birthmother, but did not want to tell my parents. My heart sank immediately. The lies and deception (going in both directions) which have defined her relationship with my parents had not gone anywhere. Unwilling to resume my teenage role as the person caught in the middle, I told her that while I supported her connection with her birthmother, I didn't want to keep her secrets.

She continued, telling me that was resentful that our parents didn't welcome the relationship, and that her birthmother had been writing letters (never given to my sister) since my sister was 13. I remember the letters and the chaos they caused. I also remember that my parents did not share the information with my sister and, instead, told the birthmother to respect our family.

While my parents constantly told her she was adopted, they also went to great lengths, mostly motivated by their own ego, to prevent her from discovering or exploring her own biological origins. Since she was constantly told that she is not bio, (which is fine), but NOT allowed to discover her biological family, then, I feel, she was put in a position of always feelling "less than". These are my feelings, not hers.

I was 17 and about to go to college when the first letter came. I thought at the time that the letter was HERS and that it was, at best, a mistake and, at worst, a cruelty not to give it to her.

At the same time, I understand my parents motivation -- to be THE PARENTS. Especially now, I "get" that impulse. However, for the good of the child, that impulse should be fought against, and, as an adoptive parent, you must fight to have your heart open to another family, for the good of the child. My parents are still fundamentally incapable of this, seeing any relationship with the bio family as a betrayal and a sign of disrespect.

Adoption or no, they are big on blind obedience. Tragically, the more they pushed, the more our family deteriorated.

Throughout her childhood and teen years, my sister caused a tremendous amount of havok, each year of her life more disruptive than the one before, locking horns with my parents in a battle of wills that continues to this day, when everyone is definitely old enough to know better.

My sister told me that, although she well remembers her life-book (which did not mention anything prior to her adoption into our family), and knew she was adopted, she didn't "get it" until a science class in Jr. High, in which she learned, "about the x-chromosome and the y-chromosome and all that stuff" (to use her words). "That's when I realized -- I don't have anything to do with these people." These people being my parents.

She never mentioned this at the time, as I recall, but, evidently, this was an element in her pulling away, as she tells it now.

I entered into the conversation with a Pollyanna-ish view that, somehow, I could use the knowledge I've been trying to amass to help "fix" my family's situation. My nascent idea smacked up against reality. For the reasons above and others I choose not to share (having little to do with the adoption), I realize this is not possible, and any attempt will only result in me and my family being dragged into their dysfunctional relationship -- smashing through years of carefully-structured boundaries.

This situation factored into my initial reluctance to adopt. It also entirely motivates this blog. With the help of my wife, I've realized that I cannot undo the past. What I need to do is convince myself that, through more honest and empthathetic parenting, I can AVOID REPEATING THE PAST.

I'm at a bit of a low ebb. I'm hoping this launches a lively discussion between ADOPTEES and ADOPTING FAMILIES. I really look forward to anyone else's experiences and insights.

Don Cheadle on Darfur: "And Now What?"

Darfur is Rwanda in slow motion. Darfur has time that Rwanda did not. America can make the difference. WE can make America make the difference.

That’s the message Don Cheadle and John Prendergast recently imparted at a lecture I attended, adding urgency and up-to-the-minute information to the passion expressed in their book, NOT ON OUR WATCH: THE MISSION TO END GENOCIDE IN DARFUR AND BEYOND

Don Cheadle, fresh from his role in HOTEL RWANDA, had heard about Darfur from Congressman Ed Royce (R-CA). A short time later, he met John Prendergast at a screening of the film, hosted by the New York Holocaust Museum. In 2005, NIGHTLINE captured Mr. Cheadle's journey to the camps in Chad, and the burned 1,500 villages in Darfur. The experience left him humbled, but he also felt it would be the height of hypocrisy to declare the platitudes of "Never Again" during the promotion of HOTEL RWANDA, but not do everything in his power to stop the killing in Darfur.

"If you're a parent, like I am, to see the children that are suffering as a result of what's happening in that region and also, finding yourself in a place where you can't believe you knew so little about, where so much is happening... It just struck a chord in me and touched a nerve that it's hard for me to do anything but ask myself afterward, "And now what? You've seen it, you know it, you've confirmed it, and now what?"

That lingering question led NOT ON OUR WATCH: THE MISSION TO END GENOCIDE IN DARFUR AND BEYOND, a book authored by the actor and Prendergast, a senior advisor to the International Crisis Group, an organizer of Enough! The Project to Abolish Genocide and Mass Atrocities and a former director of African affairs for the National Security Council (1996-99) and a special adviser to the State Department (1999-01). Prendergast has been working to end crises in Africa for 23 years.

Prendergast described Darfur as "Rwanda in slow motion". "In Rwanda, within 100 days, 800,000 lives were extinguished. Those people can't be brought back... Here in Darfur, it's going on NOW. It's a race between the killers in Khartoum and those who would intervene and stop the killing." Prendergast noted, sadly that during the entire 100 days of the Rwandan genocide, the US government didn't receive one letter from an American citizen, urging action. This time, he points out, is different. The crisis is moving slowly enough, and, "for whatever reason", Darfur has captured the imagination of the average citizen in such a way that it IS becoming a political issue. These two factors give Prendergast and others in the human rights community hope.

As Prendergast explains it, after years of brutal political repression from Khartoum, non-Arabs living in the Darfur region of Sudan began a small guerrilla war to fight for political representation. They successfully attacked about 30 Police and Army outposts in the region. Rather than engage with the guerrilla militias, Khartoum "contracted out" to the Janjaweed, a militia Prendergast describes as a Sudanese "Ku Klux Klan" -- a racially motivated, armed "lynch mob", essentially. The Janjaweed practices a slash and burn warfare against villagers, figuring if they kill or displace anyone who can give material support to the rebels, the rebellion will dry up. In the ensuing years, 1,500 villages were razed, 400,000 people were killed and millions were displaced, mostly to NGO-supported refugee camps in neighboring Chad.

"Phase Two" of the Janjaweed assault consists of attacking African Union Peacekeepers and NGOs (charities like Mercy Corp., Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc.), forcing them to pull out of the region, leaving the refugees abandoned and vulnerable. It is in the face of this mounting crisis, this attempted genocide against those who survived the first pogrom that requires stronger international intervention.

So far, the White House has offered a very mixed bag: Bush has rightfully called the crisis in Darfur a "genocide", but then has failed to take the next step, required by the Genocide Convention, signed after WWII, to take swift action to prevent the genocide and punish those responsible. Prendergast explains that while the US has provided funds and material support in the form of humanitarian aid to the refugees, it has refused to impose any real consequences on the Sudanese government.

The reasons are simple. First, Khartoum feels that by hiding behind the extra-governmental actors, the Janjaweed, it has plausible deniability. Second, after spending decades helping Osama Bin Laden, Sudan suddenly switched sides shortly after 9/11, becoming an "ally" on the war on terror. According to Prendergast, Sudan has vast intelligence on the financial structuring of Al Quaeda, and they are withholding that information from the US -- dangling it in front of our noses, as it were -- to provide themselves with an insurance policy against international interference. "Every time the US is about to get tough, Khartoum 'happens' to find another file." Finally, China is the major investor in Sudan and the biggest customer for Sudan's oil. To sanction Sudan would be to confront the Chinese, something few in Bush's inner circle wish to do. Prendergast insists that China is, in essence, "financially supporting genocide".

To answer criticism that the UN is obstructing the US on this issue, Prendergast pointed out that China has never once exercised it's veto power on the Security Council over a human rights issue. While everyone acknowledges that China is no champion of human rights, to put it mildly, they also don't want to be isolated as the only country publicly DEFENDING genocide. It is Prendergast's considered opinion, that with the US and Britain in lockstep, we could back China into a corner, essentially shaming China into going along with sanctions.

How do we move President Bush? This is the most interesting part of the lecture -- and, interestingly, due to it's timeliness, the part not covered in the book:

Don Cheadle exclaimed, "There is a decision being made very quickly. There's a way to make your voice heard while there's something that is pending." Prendergast elaborated: "The President has on his desk, or is about to get on his desk, very soon, something he's asked for. He said, ‘We are not doing enough to end this genocide.’ He's using this word, ‘genocide’, the first time a President has ever called a genocide by it's rightful name while it was ongoing. President Clinton didn't do it in '94 in Rwanda, famously using all kinds of verbal gymnastics, trying to circumvent what was believed to be a legal obligation, then, to act. President Bush, remarkably and courageously, used this term. Everyone thought it implied that he would act [due to the requirements of the Genocide Convention], then [Bush] didn't..."

Now, after mounting political pressure, especially from Christian and Jewish conservatives -- members of his base, Bush has asked for recommendations from National Security Advisor Steve Hadley. Those recommendations either have been or are soon to be delivered. The recommendations could range from instituting an arms embargo, freezing assets or travel bans that would restrict the movement of senior Sudanese officials. Other recommendations could include sending in more African Union Peacekeepers (ironically, including troops from a now peaceful Rwanda) or more UN Peacekeepers. Not even advocates like Prendergast believe it is in anyone's best interest to commit American troops.

This brings us full circle, to Mr. Cheadle's stark, honest question: AND WHAT NOW?

Relying on his own experience in the halls of government, Prendergast shared his plan of action, "Make some noise. Demand from your elected officials that they make this issue a priority and that they press the President of the Unites States to do so, to take the lead in undertaking the kinds of actions necessary within the international system and we can end this genocide very very quickly.

There's no K-Street lobbying firm advocating for genocide and crimes against humanity. It's in our hands. We don't have an opposition -- it's just inertia and indifference and ignorance that are our enemies on this issue.

From the experience I've had, [calling/writing/emailing/demonstrating] DOES make a difference. When a member of Congress or a Senator or the White House gets a slew of letters or emails or phonecalls, demanding action, they will respond. That's the way our system works."

For more great information on how to effectively work to end genocide, buy "Not On Our Watch: The Mission to End Genocide in Darfur and Beyond" by Don Cheadle and John Prendergast. The book includes a thorough history of the Darfur genocide, Northern Uganda, Congo and (as those involved in Ethiopian adoptions are aware) Somalia. The book includes SIX INSPIRING WAYS TO ACT, three ways to stop genocide, a profile of "upstanders" -- normal citizens who are making a difference through creativity, and a HOST of incredibly valuable tips about how to effectively advocate (which would be useful for ANY kind of activism). The book also contains many emotional stories of the crisis and lots of first-person reporting by Don Cheadle as he canvases the globe in hopes that he can make his pledge "Never again" a reality.

SwerlAction:

Call The White House comment line this week, to demand stiff sanctions against the Sudanese government.

Here's the number -- (202) 456-1414

Talking Points (courtesy of www.savedarfur.org):

I'm calling because I am concerned about the violence in Darfur, Sudan.

I urge President Bush to implement "Plan B" without further delay.

Nearly two months have passed since the President's January 1st deadline for the Sudan to cooperate - it's time to act.

While calls are best, you can ALSO email the White House and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, urging them to take stronger action. The message will read:

Every day, the 2.5 million people chased from their homes in Darfur face the threat of starvation, disease, and rape, while the few lucky enough to remain in their homes risk displacement, torture, and murder. Therefore, I call on you to do the following:

1. Push for the immediate deployment of the already-authorized UN peacekeeping force.
2. Strengthen the understaffed African Union force already in Darfur until the UN force can be deployed.
3. Implement a fair and lasting Peace Agreement.
4. Increase humanitarian aid and ensure access for delivery.

Other resources:

SAVE DARFUR/Global Days for Darfur

Enough! The Project to Abolish Genocide and Mass Atrocities
www.sudandivestment.org - if you are part of any kind of mutual fund or pension fund, contact the mutual fund or pension fund manager and request that the fund DIVESTS ITSELF OF ANY SUDANESE INVESTMENTS. This kind of economic boycott helped bring an end to Apartheid.

Making China accountable

Buy HOTEL RWANDA


earth.google.com - Download Google Earth, find and click on Darfur to see an amazing presentation that gives you the reality of the situation through a massive on-line exhibit.

Introducing SwerlAction!

We are a dream constituency. We are, for the most part, pretty well-off, responsible citizens, spread out all over the country, in all different districts, in different faith communities, of all different races and backgrounds. Yet, due to the miracle of adoption, we care about ending extreme poverty on a continent still coping with the legacy of actual imperialism and economic imperialism.

We are all agents for change. There IS NO ONE BETTER THAN US. We aren't neo-hippie college students or professional activists. WE ARE THE AVERAGE FOLK -- except for one fact: how we are expanding our family, and the cultural and political awakening that brings.

I've been increasingly motivated to take my commitment to Africa seriously -- to try to give back as much as I can, in return for what Africa is entrusting to me.

I'm also trying to keep this here blog clean and readable. Sometimes, as new posts get added, important ideas get buried.

I've avoided expandable posts for activism, trying to make sure it all gets read, but it's gumming up the works.

The solution is SwerlAction, a new link list at the upper left-hand side of the blog. Before surfing your friends' blogs, take a moment to peruse.

The rules of SwerlAction are simple: ONLY TIME REQUIREMENTS, NO CASH REQUIREMENTS.

THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY SOLICITATIONS FOR DONATIONS.

No lists of non-profits, no "cause marketing", no "fair trade catalogs".

It will be:

EMAIL CAMPAIGNS
CALLING CAMPAIGNS
ONLINE PETITIONS
ADVOCACY GROUP MEMBERSHIP DRIVES (NO COST, NO CHARITIES)
NO-COST-TO-YOU, "CLICK"-BASED FUNDRAISING.

It will work to end extreme poverty and attendant problems in AFRICA.

This keeps everything nice and clean. I will keep on top of it to try to keep it current.

If you have any ideas that MEET THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS, please EMAIL ME.

Let's be the best darn motley crew of advocates for Africa we can be.

Darfur Days

On Friday, I heard an inspiring lecture by John Prendergast (International Crisis Group/www.enoughproject.org) and actor Don Cheadle on the genocide in Darfur.

I will have a proper post on Monday regarding the lecture, but that will be too late to urge everyone to attend a rally on Sunday (tomorrow). This is a crucial moment. President Bush has declared the crisis a "genocide", but has failed to live up to the International Genocide Convention, signed after WWII. His staff has recommended stiff sanctions against the Sudanese government, but Cheney and other members of his Cabinet are arguing against implimentation for various political reasons, including Sudan's intelligence capabilities against terrorists and maintaining good relations with China.

It could either way. Only popular pressure can encourage Bush to make the moral choice rather than the politically-expediant choice.

Attend a rally tomorrow (Sunday, April 29th). Go to SAVE DARFUR/Global Days for Darfur for information on rallies in your area. You can enter your zip code to pull up that information.

Also, if you cannot attend a rally, call The White House comment line this week, to demand stiff sanctions against the Sudanese government.

Here's the number -- (202) 456-1414

Talking Points (courtesy of www.savedarfur.org):

I'm calling because I am concerned about the violence in Darfur, Sudan.

I urge President Bush to implement "Plan B" without further delay.

Nearly two months have passed since the President's January 1st deadline for the Sudan to cooperate - it's time to act.

While calls are best, you can ALSO email the White House and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, urging them to take stronger action. The message will read:

Every day, the 2.5 million people chased from their homes in Darfur face the threat of starvation, disease, and rape, while the few lucky enough to remain in their homes risk displacement, torture, and murder. Therefore, I call on you to do the following:

1. Push for the immediate deployment of the already-authorized UN peacekeeping force.

2. Strengthen the understaffed African Union force already in Darfur until the UN force can be deployed.

3. Implement a fair and lasting Peace Agreement.

4. Increase humanitarian aid and ensure access for delivery.

Addis Sheraton the New Guantanamo!

Is anyone worried that our government has turned a downtown hotel in Addis Ababa into a potential target for a terrorist attack?!?!? Seriously, ANYONE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS? (full article here)

More than 200 FBI and CIA agents have set up camp in the Sheraton Hotel here in Ethiopia's capital and have been interrogating dozens of detainees -- including a U.S. citizen -- picked up in Somalia and held without charge and without attorneys in a secret prison somewhere in this city, according to Ethiopian and U.S. officials who say the interrogations are lawful.

U.S. and Ethiopian officials say they have netted valuable information from some of the 41 detainees, who are being brought before a court whose proceedings are closed to the public.

Others have been quietly released, however, and human rights groups are criticizing the joint operation as a kind of "decentralized Guantanamo" in the Horn of Africa.

Welcome to the SWERL Family

Welcome the following folks to the SWERL family:


Ethiopian Adoption Blogs:

• A New Flower Blooms


• All Marrd Up KitKat


• Bringing Home Babylicious and Other Adventures (One Woman's Journey)


• Carpenter's Children



• Church of Christ: Adoption Stories from Ethiopia


• Church of Christ: Adoption Blog - Ethiopia


• Growing a Family


• Hale Clan


• On the Road to Emmaus


• Homeward Bound - Our Ethiopian Adoption Journey & Life


• Life is Hard But God is Good


• The Sering's Trip to Ethiopia

Other African Adoption Blogs:

• Adventures from Brown City Rd


• Help for Mama

Parent(s) Who've Adopted Transracially:

• Life in Fitzville

EVEN NEWER ADDITIONS:

• Cathytalks


• Elias Brown


• Named After Mexico


• Our Family Expansion


• Ramiah


• The Rowan Family Tree


• Westhaven Kids (Previously Miriam Desta)

Pamela Kruger Weighs In

I've had the good fortune of hearing directly from contributor/editor of A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER, PAMELA KRUGER. She opens up about her own adoption and discusses the question "How open should your adoption be?", in response to Jenna Hattfield's contribution:

I stumbled across your blog and was delighted to see your thoughtful discussion of the essays in our book.

As a parent of a bio child too, I really related to your point about Bonnie's essay.
But I have to respond to the comments someone made to your other post about searching for birthparents and openness. I actually did quite a bit of research on this topic (before writing my essay for the book and before deciding whether to open up adoption).

The adoption literature clearly shows that the secrecy and shame of past generations was hurtful and damaging to adoptees; but it's not clear what impact openness--and all its variations--will have on kids. Open adoption is still an experiment, a work in progress.

The major longitudinal study on the subject--following children in open adoptions, and comparing them to a group in closed adoptions--has found that a lot of the fears about open adoption were unwarranted. But so far, it hasn't found that kids in open adoptions are better off emotionally. It seems that there are other factors at play.

As Dan (Savage's) essay shows, having an open adoption presents unique challenges. I've opened an adoption myself, so I'm clearly not opposed. But my feeling is that too often this discussion is filled with "shoulds." Adoptive parents should do this or should not do that.

What I wanted to show with this book--my essay, Dan's, and others--is that the situation is infinitely more complex.

Thanks.

Pam

www.pamelakruger.com

A Love Like No Other: Transformations

Here's the last review post about the book of essays, A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER. These focus on how adoption has transformed the life and world-view of their adopted families.

RELUCTANT NO MORE (NOT THAT I EVER WAS) by Joe Treen is a personal favorite. Ladies, if anyone ever needs to peer into the mind of the "RELUCTANT SPOUSE" (or need help in PRODDING a "reluctant spouse", these few pages are the keys to the Kingdom. Joe hits on all the concerns that quickly jumped into men's minds: anxiety about providing for a family, loss of autonomy, threat to career path -- it's all there. What Joe also explores is the huge, unexpected reservoir of emotion that children pull to the surface. Ultimately, as is usually the case, love easily trumps all nagging doubts.

AND THEN EVERYTHING CHANGED by Adam Pertman describes how an adoptive father/journalist slowly transforms into an adoption advocate, working at the Evan B. Donaldson's Adoption Institute. I admire Adam's desire to look for the "big picture" and his passion to ensure, to the best of his ability, that his personal choice for his family's expansion is something that his family can view with pride -- by ensuring that EVERY adoptive family feels pride.

ACROSS TWO CULTURES by Emily Prager portrays Emily as a forerunner in ensuring that her adopted child feels connected to her country of origin. Emily puts her daughter, "LuLu" into a private school for Chinese immigrant kids, so she could learn Chinese and about Chinese culture, history, customs, etc. As the only non-Chinese parent, she stuck out like a sore thumb, but in time, her hard work to connect LuLu to her country of origin pays dividends. I really admire Emily's approach. Her dedication is remarkable, and it's amazing to see how poised LuLu is, how accepting she is of her adoption, because of all of Emily's hard work. This one is inspiring.

THE ORPHAN MYTH by Doug Hood reads like Sebastian Junger -- a doctor traveling the world with Healing the Children ends up becoming an adopted father, taking his new daughter along with him as he travels from orphanage to orphanage. The writing is evocative and intense, a great read.

SPECIAL NEEDS by Jenifer Levin tells the touching story of a woman who, as a girl, felt like an outcast. Along with her girlfriend, she adopted two "special needs" boys from Vietnam. She tries to shelter and protect the boys, struggling to make sure they thrive. In the end, however, when a "routine" operation nearly kills her, it is the boys who come to HER emotional rescue.

A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER spans a tremendous number of stories and situations. The writing, largely, draws the reader in, encouraging the reader to live and breath in the essayist's situation. With so many different stories and different personalities of writers in the offing, the book succeeds in provoking thought in potential
adoptive parents.

Urban Outfitters Still Selling Shirt in Stores

It's been confirmed that Urban Outfitters STILL HAS THE SHIRT IN STORES. They think they can combat an internet campaign by taking it off the site, but leaving the shirt in stores -- without admitting a mistake in judgment.

TELL Richard A. Hayne, Chairman of the Board of Directors and President of Urban Outfitters that it needs to be PULLED FROM STORES.

EMAIL: richard.hayne@urbanout.com

TEL: 215-564-2313; FAX: 215-568-1549

SNAIL:

Urban Outfitters, Inc.
1809 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

Urban Outfitters Follow-up

My letter to Richard Hayne/who else is blogging about this:

My letter:

Dear Mr. Hayne:

My wife and I are adopting a girl from Ethiopia. My sister was also adopted into my family via a closed domestic adoption in 1976. I grew up in Lancaster, PA and have been a customer of Urban Outfitters in Pennsylvania, New York and Los Angeles.

I've recently seen what I consider to be a demeaning and offensive T-shirt, sold at Urban Outfitters, which reads: "Adopting is the New Black". Obviously a reference to Angelina Jolie and Madonna, it nevertheless trivializes adoption, adoptees, the motives of adoptive parents and diminishes the bond they share. All of this adds up to re-enforcing a cultural prejudice that adopted kids are somehow "less than" children, in comparison to biological children. This is certainly not how my parents felt, and certainly not how I feel (I am also the father to two "bio" sons).

I am very active on the online adoption community, running a blog that gets a thousand visitors per week and links to approximately 150 other adoptive family/adoptee blogs, which receive similar traffic.

I assure you, those of us who seek to help our families and improve the lives of children here or abroad, will not patronize a store that seeks to belittle our children in pursuit of a misguided attempt at cultural commentary.

I strongly urge you to consider the impact this shirt will have on the very real day-to-day lives of adopted children. I hope that you will be moved to take action and remove this shirt from your store.

Other thoughtful posts on this issue:

A NEW FLOWER BLOOMS

LIFE IN FITZVILLE

OUR JOURNEY TO "LITTLE MAPLE" AND BACK

THIRD MOM

THE VOYAGE

CHSFS ETHIOPIA FORUM

4 LITTLE BIRDIES

Urban Outfitters' "New Black" Eye

Adopted children are not trendy accessories. Not fashion items. Not fads.

They are our hearts.

To URBAN OUTFITTERS, they are the butt of a cruel joke:

ADOPTING IS THE NEW BLACK

Ha ha. Sadly, most people don't hang with Angelina and Madonna, so they won't get the joke. Who will "experience" this fine foray into humor are adopted kids and their parents. They will be the ones who get the "pleasure" of being demeaned, of having their bond trivialized. Adopted kids are already prone to feeling like they don't really "belong". Imagine the "fun" of having their peers wearing these shirts which suggest that their parents acted not out of love but out of a desire to be "trendy" or "hip". How "cool" to have your existence equated to a Birkin bag, a Louis Vuitton or Ugg boots! And for adoptive parents, how "irreverent" to suggest that your child is a commodity, obtained thoughtlessly, for the purpose of self-aggrandizement and status.

What makes this all the more disgusting is that the founder, Chairman and President of the company, Richard A. Hayne, is a staunch supporter of a "family values" politician, Rick Santorum. I would love to know how the above T-shirt fits with Santorum's Christian beliefs and "pro-family" stance.

Evidently, Richard Hayne's idea of valuable customers don't extend to adoptees or adoptive families. Other customers Haynes decided not to value include those of Mexican descent, Jewish people and African-Americans. The store has featured shirts with the slogans "New Mexico, Cleaner Than Regular Mexico" and "Everybody Love a Jewish Girl" (the slogan was surrounded by dollar signs, showing that Shylock is alive and well in this century) and the board game GHETTOPOLY , which, I'm sure, had a very realistic portrayal of black, urban life.

Oddly, given his politics, he also decided it was cool to sell a magnet set in which one could play "dress up" with an image of a crucified Jesus... put him in a nice hat and a dress, for example.

I think we need to inform Richard Hayne that our children are not accessories.

Please join me in calling, writing and emailing Mr. Hayne to communicate our feelings on the way he chooses to make money:

Richard A. Hayne
Chairman of the Board of Directors and President

Urban Outfitters, Inc.
1809 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

richard.hayne@urbanout.com

Tel: 215-564-2313

Fax: 215-568-1549

PLEASE PASS THIS POST ALONG TO EVERYONE AND ANYONE YOU KNOW WHO CAN HELP TAKE ACTION!

American Idol

I'm sure most of you watched and were as moved as I. What made me very happy was how many people I spoke to on the phone tonight -- family and friends -- who were moved for the FIRST TIME by the show. Personally, I felt they did a great job, even though they touched on key points very lightly. It is amazing to me the power of a few seconds of oblique television coverage. I could do this blog for a thousand years and not reach the number of people American Idol did with a few minutes of "coverage".

Like many, it was Jeffrey Sach's inspiring call to arms, THE END OF POVERTY that originally stoked my passion to help end global poverty. I'd read a review and bought the hardback when it came out. It managed to be rational, spiritual, realistic and hopeful all at the same time, moral in the deepest sense. I think it would be impossible to read it and not be moved.

So, even before the adoption process, global poverty has been on the radar. What amazes me is how many really "felt" it for the first time tonight - even people who've been aware of our adoption. It makes me feel great that perhaps, because of this special episode of an otherwise banal show, I may be saved from having to explain the kind of conditions that lead to children being relinquished in African countries. More importantly, maybe this will represent a turn of a corner for this issue in the mind of public.

I'd love to know what reactions you've heard to the show. Were people surprised? Did people seem to have a new awareness? Will any of them carry forth, allowing their emotions to stoke long-term action?

Please share!

Oh, and to keep the momentum going:

What can you do to support Idol Gives Back:

Make a donation here.
Read more at www.cpefund.org.
Tell your friends about Idol Gives Back.
Get all the kids you know to go to Scholastic.com/idolgivesback
If you want to learn more about how you can help to make poverty history go to www.one.org.
If you would prefer to donate offline, please send checks, made payable to:

Idol Gives Back
c/o Citizens Bank
PO Box 4365
Woburn, MA 01888-4365

ONE: Senatometer At 42

Since last Monday, ONE members have been writing and calling their senators asking them to sign on to the "Feinstein-Hagel" Dear Colleague letter asking for $39.8 billion for the international affairs budget (IAB). We want 60 signers by Friday, and right now we're at 42.

VIEW THE LIST OF SENATORS, BUG YOURS IF HE OR SHE IS NOT ON THE LIST!

Birthmothers

You know what a broken heart looks like? Like a sobbing teenager in a hospital bed giving a two-day-old infant she knows she can't take care of to a couple she hopes can.

Orphans. The word is thrown around alot in cases of International Adoption. On those long walks in the summer with my family when all this first came up, I was comfortable with orphans. Who couldn't appreciate giving an orphan a home?

Then, while on the boards, people kept making references to "traveling south", once in Ethiopia, to meet the "family" - overtaxed aunts and uncles?

No, the poster made clear that she was in contact with the birthmother. Initially, I rebelled (in my mind) -- "Wait! Whoa, hold the phone, nobody said anything about birthmothers!"

Since that moment, I have worked on educating myself about open adoption, trying to visualize explaining it to a child, weaving it into our lives.

Much of my fear comes from the fallout from my sister's closed adoption, her birthmother's return and then her birthmother abandoning the relationship. In our case, the birthmother was a destabilizing influence, to say the least.

That's why Dan Savage's essay, LIVING WITH A VERY OPEN ADOPTION really spoke to me.

It provoked me to visualize a moment I intellectually comprehend happens, but on which I dared not dwell:

I was thirty-three years old when we adopted DJ, and I thought I knew what a broken heart was, how it felt, what it looked like. I didn't know anything. You know what a broken heart looks like? Like a sobbing teenager in a hospital bed giving a two-day-old infant she knows she can't take care of to a couple she hopes can.

I won't be there for that part. We will get a referral picture. Maybe, if she shows up, we will meet the mother months later. That doesn't mean that a moment such as the one described above didn't happen. It's just uncomfortable (or, maybe, emotionally crippling) to think about.

Dan continues:

Ask a couple hoping to tadopt what they want most in the world and they'll tell you there's only one thing on earth they want: a baby, a healthy baby. But many couples want something more: They want their child's biologincal parents to disappear. THey want their child's viological mothe rand father to be forever absent so there will never be any question about who their child's "real" parents are.

In my darker, less proud moments, I admit to this. I was shocked that Dan Savage put it in an essay in an actual book. (He goes on to explain that he never felt this way and wanted an open adoption).

Then, in other moments, I would find myself agreeing with the anti-adoption folks, that maybe the whole idea of adoption is wrong on the face of it -- cruel and confusing to the kid, robbing them of a sense of culture and history and family. Better to stay in Ethiopia.

I guess, at some point, I grew up. After long talks, my wife and I started discussing about ways to keep the birthmother "in the family". My wife would talk about feeling a connection "as a mother" to this woman -- knowing what it feels like to be pregnant and experience birth...

Um, no, I didn't get it. Intellectually, I was all about discussing it, but emotionally -- nada. My "heart" wasn't guiding me. My heart was shrunk back in my chest cavity hiding from the whole thing.

Then, I wrote that review for Bob Shacochis' essay, KEEPING IT ALL IN THE FAMILY. As I recall, my review reflected my initial feeling: "basically useless to me".

Well, yesterday, I found myself ruminating on it, for no particular reason, when, suddenly, my heart spoke up: "What if, for whatever reason, you were tapped to take care of your niece, like Bob was? How would that be? More importantly, how would you treat your sister in such an instance?"

Suddenly, it came to me, a gloss on the "Golden Rule" that made sense to me intellectually AND emotionally: The birthmother will become family. TREAT HER THE WAY YOU'D TREAT YOUR SISTER. TREAT YOUR ADOPTED CHILD THE WAY YOU WOULD TREAT YOUR NIECE, IF YOU HAD LEGAL CUSTODY. Instantly, everything became clear. I would never not "parent" her. I'd be the parental role model. I'd teach right from wrong, exert my "parental authority", or whatever, but I'd never try to create a fantasy that my sister didn't exist. I wouldn't fail to acknowledge her role in my neice's life, or try to quell the unique bond they would share. I would never try to deny her importance to my child's identity in a misguided attempt to make her feel "normal", "the same as the bio kids", "part of the family" or "ours". She WILL be "ours"... and she won't be. She will also be the daughter of a man and woman in Ethiopia... and that makes THEM part of our family, too -- to be treated with the same respect and decency as a sister or brother.

Blair warns West will suffer if it fails Africa

"The more I look at what is happening in Africa, in some of the worst trouble spots, in Sudan and Somalia and so on, the more I am convinced that if we do not take a responsible and long-term view of Africa and its need to develop and make progress then we will end up ultimately with our own self-interest back in countries like Germany and the UK being damaged as a result of the poverty, the conflict, the mass migration and the spread of terrorism," he told journalists.

by Guy Jackson Tue Apr 24, 3:54 PM ET

BERLIN (AFP) - Prime Minister
Tony Blair warned here on Tuesday that wealthy Western countries would ultimately suffer if they failed to fulfill their pledges to help the development of Africa.

Blair, former UN chief Kofi Annan and German Chancellor Angela Merkel met in the German capital to discuss the work of the Africa Progress Panel. Chaired by by Annan, it was set up last June to monitor the progress of rich countries in meeting their commitments to Africa.

Leaders of the Group of Eight most industrialised nations pledged at the British-hosted Gleneagles summit two years ago to grant substantial debt relief and double aid to Africa by 2010.

While the debt relief goals have largely been met, most G8 countries are well behind on the aid targets.

Merkel has promised that Africa will be also one of the key themes at this year's G8 summit hosted by Germany.

Blair said debt relief to Africa had totalled around 38 billion dollars (28 billion euros) in recent years and there had been "significant, though not enough, increases in the aid money that has been given."

He said the consequences of failing to help Africa could be dire.

"The more I look at what is happening in Africa, in some of the worst trouble spots, in Sudan and Somalia and so on, the more I am convinced that if we do not take a responsible and long-term view of Africa and its need to develop and make progress then we will end up ultimately with our own self-interest back in countries like Germany and the UK being damaged as a result of the poverty, the conflict, the mass migration and the spread of terrorism," he told journalists.

Blair said it had been shown that "where the help is given it does make a difference.

"There are health service systems and education systems being transformed and changed as a result of the help and commitment that has been given by the international community," he added.

Merkel and Annan said the Africa Progress Panel was seeking to ensure that existing debt targets were met.

"We are not asking for new promises, we are asking for the implementation of what has been promised and I am encouraged by the meeting we've had and by the support we've received from both leaders," Annan said.

The former UN Secretary General said African leaders were increasingly aware that "they have to solve these political conflicts to be able to focus on the economic and social issues."

He pointed to conflicts resolved in Angola, Sierre Leone, Liberia, Burundi, and Eritrea and Ethiopia as proof that Africa could get its own house in order.

Annan said earlier he would be delighted if Blair were to join the panel after he left office this year. Blair is yet to reveal his future plans.

Merkel said it was time for wealthy countries to meet their pledges.

"We don't need more meetings to set targets, we already have the targets. Now we need to make a certain amount of progress.

"The German presidency (of the G8) will take over the impulse of Gleneagles," she said.

The G8 summit takes place on June 6-8 in Heiligendamm and will be attended by the leaders of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States.

David Halberstam: The Children

David Halberstam died today in a car crash in Menlo Park, California.

He'll be eulogized for many things. For me, though, he's the person who made the Civil Rights movement REAL. In his inspired work, THE CHILDREN, Halberstam brings depth and emotional resonance to the story of the young, non-violent protesters who formed the nucleus of SNCC, CORE and the Freedom Riders. It's a bottom-up view of all the familiar scenes -- Birmingham, the march to Selma, etc. While most books about the Civil Rights movement concentrate on Dr. King, this book focuses on the kids he inspired. The dramatic shift in focus is disarming, recasting the entire story in a fresh way.

Here's the secret -- Halberstam captures the FEAR. By focusing on King, knowing he is a martyr for the cause, many books portray King (and other leaders) as righteously resigned.

THE CHILDREN begins with college students, just being introduced to the concept of non-violence in little workshops. Some don't take to it very well. Some don't take to it at all. The book goes into deep detail about what a person feels like, who, on the basis of convictions and a few hours of training is going to sit there and allow themselves to be beaten and abused. It's terrifying!

Halberstam rips away the inevitability of history, which also affects books on this topic. In THE CHILDREN, none of the participants can "see the mountain". They have NO IDEA if their struggle will mean anything. Since slave rebellions on, very few African-American uprisings amounted to more than violent retribution and worsening oppression. Again, this unique points of view lends urgency, suspense and horror to these familiar places and times. For me, the book allowed me, for the first time, to really feel TRANSPORTED to that MOMENT when the firehoses were being turned on.

The perspective also shows was a modest movement it was at the beginning -- everyone knew each other, and everyone had opinions as to how it should be run. In some ways, it felt like a contentious student government meeting, or a weird frat or a strange extracurricular activity. At that moment, the movement seemed fragile and fractious - ready to dissolve into nothingness, from causes within and without.

Amazingly enough, the backlash and the headlines galvanized the movement, crystallizing the concept of non-violence: if the cause is just and the oppression is unjust, the barbarism of the oppressor will be self-evident, even to the most jaundiced eye.

It's also amazing to see how more conventional interpersonal dynamics played out: We see the SNCC kids view King as sort of going Hollywood, as it were, and he becomes less approachable. We see that, even in the fight for racial justice, homophobia, sexism and colorism were not left behind -- one of the original group is a closeted gay man, and a shining light of the book, DIANE NASH, benefits from colorism, but suffers from sexism, as her boyfriend in the movement comes to overshadow her.

The most gripping passages are the Freedom Rides, executed like military campaigns, with all the edge-of-your-seat moments as any spy thriller. They are deep behind "enemy" lines, and there is no room for error. One secret revealed is that the riders almost turned back!

Halberstam was there as a cub reporter at 25, then, later conducted extensive interviews with his principals, giving the entire work a real, commanding feeling of verisimilitude. You feel the voices of his subjects, not his authorial voice. In this instance, it's just what the doctor ordered.

If you only read one book about the Civil Rights movmement, consider this one. It's amazing.

Rest in Peace, David Halberstam, and thanks for all the great books!

A Love Like No Other: Variations

Much of my "Are We Guilty?" posts made oblique references to Jacquelyn Mitchard's WHICH ONES ARE YOURS?, in which she fields a question in such an aggressive way, she admits she categorized, by her interviewer as a "Tiger-Lady-Crabby-Oversensitive-Diva". My question in this essay is, "what's the point of that?" Why be so aggressive, that, even if you are RIGHT, you are still written off?

Much of my previous discussion came from questioning this stance. Still, the essay is not without it's merits. She does a marvelous job of heading off any attempts by her kids (bio or adopted) of making an issue of adoption during moments of discord. Her DAT (that would be "Dumb Adoption Talk", in the parlance of her kids) eschews the chestnut, "You're not my real mom!" in favor of, "I don't hate you because I'm an adolescent who's trying to adjust to the fact that he was adopted. I hate you personally." While obviously funny, I think it's a good point. How amazing that they've digested the adoption process so thoroughly that they know not to bring it into arguments -- that the bio kids don't use the adopted kids' "primal wound" to do just that. More amazing, is that the adopted kids have the presence of mind not to use their story as a way to inflict damage on their adopted parents. What can be a quick, devastating way to win an argument (or deflect punishment for a curfew violation) can lead to long-term harm in the relationship, a fact sometimes not considered by the adolescent adopted kid.

THE DAY THAT HALLMARK FORGOT by Jesse Green focuses on the intrigue surrounding Mother's Day in a family with two dads. Managing to be both irreverent and touching, it ends on a note that is applicable to all of us: the benefits of being able to "express unconventional truth in conventional terms".

STANDING OUT AND STANDING UP IN THE CROWD by Marcelle Clements is an ode to her unsinkable, adopted son, Luc. Within her celebration, she goes to lengths to refute the psuedo-science of "Adopted Child Syndrome". "...[C]reated by psychologist David Kirschner and first used as a defense in the 1984 trial of an adolescent adoptee accused of setting fire to his home and murdering his parents... the "adopted child syndrome" has been cited as scientific evidence that adopted adolescents are at high risk of becoming liars, thieves and serial killers..." She mentions that this notion has been soundly refuted and that even Kirschner renounced his theory. Still, it seems that in prime-time news magazine shows and other popular "news" media, the "adopted child syndrome" looms large.

DIVORCE, ADOPTION-STYLE by Antionette Martin is a powerful bit of personal testimony -- what happens to children, adopted out to stable, two-parent homes, when those homes lose stability -- and a parent? I can only imagine it would be a life-line for anyone attempting to ensure familial support for adopted children through a stressful divorce. Antionette and her ex, Ted, seem to do as good a job as anybody, in separating without separating from the kids. I hope never to need it!

KEEPING IT ALL IN THE FAMILY by Bob Shacochis tells the rather sad story of an infertile couple on the verge of adopting, when Bob's sister-in-law reveals that she is dying of breast cancer, leaving in her wake a teen daughter and a dysfunctional ex-husband. Bob and his wife, "C", become guardians to the girl, but find her nearly uncontrollable. Her bio-dad creates numerous problems, preventing them from adopting, but also failing in his role as a father. The essay ends with the nature of the relationship unclear -- Bob is both more than and less than an uncle and certainly not a father, although he treasures the one Father's Day card he did receive, as a token of his best attempt at fatherhood. Frankly, this essay did not provide me with much to take away, except, perhaps, that even in the most troubled adoptive parent/adoptee relationship, there is still a memory, a trace of what could have been, to be cherished.

Is rap to blame?

Well, after the events of this week, I doubt anybody much cares about rap vs. Imus, but I wrote it, so I'm posting it. However, know that our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of the Virginia Tech shootings.


Young black men fight against social and economic oppression through rap lyrics -- a testosterone-fueled idealization of adolescent male power fantasies. Rap lyrics reflect the rest of society, in that male value is judged by three things: physical prowess, conspicuous consumption and attractiveness to women.

I'll leave the first two alone. The opposite sex, however, is a center of fascination for most every adolescent male -- the source of desire and fear. Since inkwells and pigtails, boys seem to react to girls with hostility. Whether it's the "I don't need you", reject them before they reject you school, or simply a way of proving how cool you are that you can be cruel to girls that everyone else is clamoring to please, misogyny seems to be a step in male evolution.

I think rap picked up the torch for the "hair metal" of the 80's, which was just young male power fantasies for white kids. Motley Crue, Aerosmith, etc., all had the same objectifying attitude. Granted, Motley didn't discuss pimping girls, they merely led listeners through an audio-led guided tour of LA strip clubs. Anybody who thinks women had it better in rock is fooling themselves.

Still, I'm hardly willing to be an apologist for misogyny. So, how do you end it?

Keeping with the rock theme for a minute, I think the PMRC/Government hearings idea is a non-starter. First, I hate censorship of art. It brings into play very subjective (and, I feel, un-American) ideas of "community standards" -- who's community? Who's standards?

Even if you don't share that view, there's another great reason to keep the Government out of it. Rap, as an expression of adolescent male power fantasy, is an oppositional art form. It thrives on conflict with authority. In other words, the more parents it pisses off, the more "cred" it has with it's listenership. The stronger the bond with the audience, the stronger it becomes as an art form. The PMRC made Heavy Metal.

Protests and boycotts won't work for similar reasons. The people protesting are enemies of hip-hop already -- this includes protesters within the black community. These people represent the parents of fan base. As for boycotts -- how can you boycott that which you don't buy, anyway??? Oh, no, hip hop's going to lose the 25+ audience? Who cares??

In some limited cases, if a major label which is part of a larger conglomerate is pushing one particularly offensive act, a mass boycott on all the company's other products could work, but it would need to be a large, coordinated effort.

I think the only way to stem misogyny in rap lyrics is to raise the consciousness of the rappers themselves. The only people who have the moral authority and credibility are young black women. I feel that if young women of color made it known -- with some force and consistency, that such lyrics aren't appreciated, most rappers would come around. Certainly, putting a human face on the women Don Imus objectified and ridiculed brought gravitas to that story. If women in the industry stopped singing hooks or dancing in the videos of offensive rappers, they'd notice. If choreographers stopped working with artists, they'd notice. If young women, who are in the regular habit of buying hip-hop records, suddenly stop buying those cds, they'd definitely notice.

The best part of such an "education" would be that instead of trying to stifle artists, young women involved in hip hop would stand up for themselves and encourage already popular artists to make an important stand.

There is a kind of black feminism, pioneered by Alice Walker, called "womanism", which deals with the unique oppression that comes from the combined marginalizing forces of racism, sexism and classism. It stresses positivity and universalism (unlike the "us" vs. "them" of first wave feminism). Most importantly, by recognizing racism, it takes pains not to lift black women up at the expense of black men. If the older generation worked harder at inculcating this philosophy into young women, and they, in turn, demanded it of the artists they support, we'd be much farther along than if we focus our efforts on suppressing, ostracizing and marginalizing young black men, who, let's face it, are already pretty suppressed, ostracized and marginalized in the first place.

Imus and Free Speech

Yesterday and today, the big story on talk radio has been the backlash against Imus' firing, including hate mail being sent to the VICTIMS of his "joke". Radio is abuzz with angry, pro-Imus callers, asking: Is "political correctness" killing freedom in America? Why is there a double-standard, in which there are words which are “verboten” only for white people? Where's Imus' right to free speech?

There IS no “free speech” issue in the Imus story. Imus isn’t arrested. His property isn’t seized. Despite many complaints, the new “tougher” FCC, which arose as a result of the Janet Jackson dust-up, didn’t even level any fines. The State is not suppressing anything.

Imus was dismissed by GE and Viacom, giant, sprawling corporations that viewed supporting him to be a liability for their shareholders and their other employees. It’s ironic to me that many of the same people who most fervently praise the free market and supply-side economics are the first to call “foul”, when this decision is so obviously the product of supply-side economics.

Imus made a ton of money, bringing in millions of dollars for CBS Radio, while costing them only his salary, staff and studio. He spoke to affluent white men, a desirable market for advertisers. If CBS Radio was a SOLITARY company, a “radio only” company, chances are, Imus would not have been fired. “Blacks are offended? Who cares! They don’t listen, anyway!” Imus could go on a rant about political correctness run amuck, and emerge a hero to his key “demo” of affluent white men.

But, in the wake of media de-regulation and consolidation, radio is not Viacom’s only business. And CNBC is a troublesome speck on the blotter of the giant GE. Do you think GE wants to lose market share in lightbulbs and appliances over Don Imus? What do you think the money he generates – enough to keep a decent-sized company in the black – means to GE, who makes – in profit -- around 1.5 billion a QUARTER? It’s NOTHING.

Imus is an employee, on a contract. I have the freedom of speech (which I’m exercising right now) – but I’m not doing it on company time or with a company computer. Workplaces can limit all kinds of “liberties”. It’s apples and oranges.

Two giant corporations with massive media holdings, Viacom and GE, decided that racism and sexism are bad for business – whether that is measured in loss of ad revenue, fear of a worsening P.R. disaster or merely in terms of internal strife, racism and sexism was viewed as a LIABILITY.

All of the corporations that decided to pull ads from Imus’ show decided that racism and sexism were a liability.

And that’s the story. Racism and sexism, at least in this case, were rejected as being bad for the bottom line. That’s how America changes: when values are reflected in the marketplace. When Bill Cosby proves that white people will watch a show about a black family, the market responds. When Eddie Murphy proves that a blockbuster can star an African-American comedian, the market responds. When Shania Twain proves that a woman can outsell established, male country music artists, tons of women flood the market.

Imus’ dismissal is not the erosion of free speech, but proof of a growing sensitivity to diverse “markets” – groups of people, black, brown, female, non-racist whites – on the part of Fortune 500 companies. That’s something to be celebrated.

If you agree with me, thank these companies for not supporting sexism and racism:

General Motors

Sprint Nextel

Bigelow Tea

Staples

Proctor & Gamble

PetMed Express

GlaxoSmithKline

American Express (Ron Stovall/SVP Investor Relations)

Rappers vs. Imus

Obviously, the US has been in the middle of a cultural firestorm over Don Imus's comments. Many commentators, black and white, including Maya Angelou, have laid part of the responsibility at the feet of black rappers.

Below, rapper Snoop Dogg dismisses comparisons between sexist hip hop lyrics and the recent sexist/racially charged remarks made by Don Imus -

"It's a completely different scenario. (Rappers) are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about hoes that's in the 'hood that ain't doing sh*t, that's trying to get a n***a for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-a** white men that sit up on MSNBC going hard on black girls. We are rappers that have these songs coming from our minds and our souls that are relevant to what we feel. I will not let them m****f****s say we are in the same league as him. Kick him off the air forever."

Are We Guilty? - The Sequel

My sincerest appreciation to everyone who commented on ARE WE GUILTY? This has been the most-commented-upon post in Swerl's short, modest history. Thanks!

Your comments have spurred me to further refine my own thoughts, and I am excited to share what I hope will be a more reasoned distillation of my point-of-view:

Everyone seemed to react to the idea of "educating people". I think that's important, but it is only a BY-PRODUCT. As a parent (obviously) the well-being of your kids is really your ONLY priority. So, when I say that I will be very open to questions, even potentially intrusive questions, I say that ONLY for it's benefits to my child.

MODELING:

Kids model their behavior. If we're lucky (and if we deserve it), they model themselves after us. They may model themselves after peers. They may model themselves after karate-proficient mutant turtles.

Every encounter, in the presence of your child, in which your child's story becomes a topic -- with strangers, with work associates, with neighbors, with folks at church, with family -- will be a time in which your attitude towards your child's story (and your child's different way of coming to your family) will be viewed and internalized by your child. It WILL BE. Someone asks, you talk, child hears, child MODELS his or her opinion about his or her own story. This will influence his or her self-esteem. It will create an emotion, long before the child can make his or her own decisions.

Because of modeling, I feel the idea of "allowing the child to choose how to tell his or her own story" is a canard. The child's been watching US make that choice for years before we ask it of them, and in this scenario, our choice has been to REFUSE TO DISCUSS IT.

Chances are, they will internalize this, model this, and their choice, too, will be to refuse to discuss it. This is the idea of "shame" to which I had previously referred.

Not making a choice is also a choice.

THE ADOPTION LITERATURE

In a few essays, articles, blogs and forum reports, I see an exchange crafted in the following manner:

QUESTIONER: Where did the child come from? How did you get him/her? Does he/she have parents? (or some variation)

ADOPTIVE PARENT: That's private information, that's my child's story to tell, when he so chooses.

Now, the kid may be sucking on a pacifier. So that's a total dodge. That's a "I'm not answering your questions".

I've read some other accounts where the adoptive parent counters: "What sexual position did you use to get pregnant?" (obviously snarky) or a terse "It's not your business."

To me, "None of your business" implies shame.

TEACHING A YOUNGER CHILD TO OWN A STORY

Since we're on the list for a girl under twelve months, and since the kids we have now are 5 and under, the following is written from the perspective of a parent with kids who can't completely speak for themselves. It is, I think, an effort to parent in such a way that when the child is older, she WOULD feel comfortable speaking for herself.

I agree with Brian that I would never tell anyone more than I would tell her, and that when she feels comfortable talking to adults, she can explain her own story. This is really about how to handle questions from people -- including friends, family, co-workers, etc., prior to that time.

To me, how to model these encounters in such a way to ensure that your child does not associate shame with his or her origins (no matter how horrible) is to make sure that EVERY ENCOUNTER IN WHICH THAT CHILD'S ORIGINS ARE MENTIONED ENDS TRANQUILLY AND POSITIVELY FOR ALL INVOLVED.

That way, the kid learns that his or her origins, no matter how painful, are not a source of shame. The story can be discussed in "polite company". The story is to be OWNED.

People talk all the time about "owning" their stories: Christians discuss "owning" their faith. If Christians don't feel comfortable, in themselves, express their faith openly, do they have it? Strangely analogously, in the early days of the AIDS crisis in America, the rallying call was not for a cure, but "SILENCE=DEATH" Alcoholics always talk about how the first step in recovery is to admit the reality of their situation. In WWI, they learned that the only cure for "shell shock" was "the talking cure", a precursor to all post-traumatic stress therapies (and if being either relinquished or orphaned isn't a cause for post-traumatic stress...)

To own a story is to discuss it without shame.

Now, within that, certainly there are a million ways TO talk about stories, a million ways to direct the conversation, details to be added or glossed over.

I think this is where some of the comments and my post my suffer from a semantical conflict. I'm not advocating volunteering every bit of information. What I am advocating is handling questions in a non-confrontational manner, in the spirit of openness, so the kid and the questioner do not see the parent being defensive or guarded.

One of the essays I read features a woman who would not tell which of her children was adopted. For most of us, that's not a question that needs to be asked. The questions will be variations on "why are you parenting a black kid?" These questions will come from EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE. Some will be more carefully crafted than others. I have black nieces, and when my wife and I have taken them shopping or whatever, we always get questioned -- from black people and white people and Latinos and Asians and old and young, whatever.

Based on those life experiences, I imagine I will handle questions this way:

Is she yours?

She was born in Ethiopia, but, now, she's our child -- one of the gang!

Is she adopted?

She's adopted. We adopted her from Ethiopia. Ethiopia is an amazing country. Did you know it's the only area of Sub-Saharan Africa never to be colonized? It's a great culture...

Is she an orphan/where are her parents?

IF SHE'S AN ORPHAN:

Sadly, her birth family died. Ethiopia has had a rough time of it, and the United States hasn't done enough to help. As a culture, Ethiopia values children tremendously and are going to amazing lengths to ensure that every kid in Ethiopia has a loving family, no matter what's going on.

IF HER BIRTH MOM IS ALIVE:

She has her first family in Ethiopia, but because of conditions over there right now, her parents loved her enough to relinquish her to be raised by us, but we're doing everything we can to make sure she knows her family there and knows her culture.

IF SHE'S NOT AND WE DON'T KNOW THE BIRTH MOM:

She has her first family in Ethiopia, but because of tragic conditions there, her parents loved her enough to relinquish her to be raised by us. We're trying to honor them by doing everything we can to connect with, and, within our power, help all the other kids in Ethiopia.

I think politics is important. I think it's important for kids to feel empowered in our great democratic society. I feel that politics can be part of the explanation. I also know people hate hearing folks with causes, so it seems like a great way to conclude a line of unwanted questioning without conflict or discord. Any questions about why the child was given up can be countered with the real facts on the ground -- the number of orphans, the toll of diseases that we find manageable, the fact that the Clinton administration helped support drug company patents over human life, the fact that the Bush administration made a number of showy promises towards meeting Millennium Development Goals which have gone unfunded, etc. Heck, maybe I'll just carry ONE bracelets around and pass them out if someone is so interested. That would at least model engagement and empowerment to my child. Also, it's suitably boring to enough people that they'll probably disengage politely at that point -- without having my child see me refuse to talk about her entry into our family.

AIDS

Amy asked a provocative (good) question about HIV status. We are not adopting an HIV+ child at this time, so none of my imaginary projects dealt with that reality. After a lot of mulling, I think there's a way to address that honestly in front of your child as well. Again, it mixes the personal and the political. I think you can say that your child is HIV+, but, thankfully, the viral count is low and she will live a long, healthy productive life. Furthermore, she's no danger to anyone else.

From there, I'd say that it's tragic that a dollar a day could prevent this. That life in Ethiopia is just as valuable as in the USA, but while we've almost eliminated mother-to-child infections and have allowed this disease to become a manageable, chronic condition, in Ethiopia and much of the less developed world, there is still a lot of needless infections and a high mortality. I'd talk about the Lazarus effect these drugs have (a great picture in THERE IS NO ME WITHOUT YOU), and the fact that the "cocktail" has been refined into a twice-daily pill.

If the child is around a group consistently, say in church or school, explain it to everyone at once, maybe.

BIG CAVEAT: RACISM

All of the above is said with the understanding that the questioner is not racist. If the questioner IS racist, then that person needs to be corrected firmly, and then the conversation must end. Part of modeling is also teaching how to stand up to racism.

WHERE IT COMES FROM

I'm a joker with a blog. I don't know anything. I know I'm in the minority, here. But I've had the experiences of being in public with my nieces. For the HIV thing, I've known people who've died of AIDS and I also know, as a close friend of our family, a man who has lived for 15 years with it, who went from full-blown AIDS, with dementia and the whole bit, to now being back to working a demanding job and being the dad to four kids. I also have a sister who's adopted, who has struggled with issues of identity her whole life.

From my sister, I've learned that a close bond and a happy childhood does not guarantee a happy adolescence or young adulthood. My parents are in primary education. My dad has a Masters and was on the verge of getting his Doctorate in childhood development. They did everything "right" -- as of the 70's and 80's. The two things they didn't do were to embrace the fact that she was half-Puerto Rican, and they did not help her own her story prior to being adopted. (She was adopted as a newborn). It was a closed adoption, but she did reunite with her birth mother(with sadly disappointing results). She, too, was allowed to tell her own story, to judge what she wanted to say... and she never wanted to talk about it. My parents thought that was proof of her attachment and proof of their good parenting, until she hit 16 and the world came crashing in. She's 30 now, and she has kids of her own, but I think she could've had a happier 16-27 if she didn't feel that there was a social stigma being a "drug baby". To our family, empowerment would've been teaching her from the first, not just that she was loved and wanted and "meant" for our family and "chosen", but that her mother was a junkie -- and that does not define her. That last bit, that her "story" doesn't define her, that, although it is a fact, it is only one of a million, and will not be her summing up -- that was never modeled for her. She was the guardian of her "story" and it quietly tore her apart under all of our noses.

For these reasons, I feel the child's story should NOT be arbitrarily held back, and then dumped on a 10 year old (or whatever the age), passing the buck of the responsibility, the weight of that story to the child.

The child should grow up knowing that difficult truths can be de-fanged, made commonplace, to the point where the situation of their birth and adoption are normalized -- not a "story" placed in their lap like a gift or a curse, but just common facts -- with their TRUE "life story" -- the story of how their lives turn out -- yet to be written.

I'd love everyone's input on this. Once again, I'm just trying to sort all this out, myself. I greatly appreciate everyone who stops by and I welcome a very healthy discourse!

Are We Guilty?

Anyone who's read recent posts here knows that I'm struggling with the "politics of the public". My "adoption journey" has pretty much followed a pattern: have an idea about something. Read something that butts up hard against said idea. Think-think-think (like Winnie-the-Pooh). Strongly reverse original opinion. In a sheerly Orwellian move, deny I ever held the first opinion, especially to my wife.

So, I ran across this Oprah article. It coincided with some posts on some boards and with a few of the essays in A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER. It smacked me for a loop, as it had never occurred to me that a child's story was "private". Brit can't even keep her junk private. What's private anymore?

I pretty much fully envisioned blabbing my child's entire rich, compelling story, whatever it will be (still waitin' on that referral), to every Joe Wal-Mart and Bettie Target who crosses my path.

This is the path of the unjust. This will get me banished from Oprah-ville (testosterone will also cause banishment, but I digress).

So, mostly out of fear of spending the rest of my miserable life shivering for want of Oprah's beatific grace, I pondered. I asked the smartest birthmother I cyber-know. I almost convinced myself that there's something to this PRIVACY thing.

Then, I ran across the following, from Amy's utterly charming blog, ETHIOPIA OR BUST. They currently have an endearing slideshow of the moment they got their referral.

It was kinda late, and, after I read it, I rambled in her comment section. I found myself having an actual OPINION. It came from the heart and it came all the more freely for the fact that it was just some rambling comment, to be passed over, on someone else's blog, rather than taking front and center on my own.

So, here's a chunk of Amy's post, addressing the "O" magazine article:

Guilty.

I was reading an article today in the April addition of Oprahs magazine. The article is called 8 Things NEVER to Say to an Adopted Child. The article is written by Elizabeth Cuthrell. Her and her husband are white and have adopted two girls from China. After reading the article I am guilty of doing many things wrong when I see interracial families. She states that she used to stare at interracial adoptive families and kind of follow them with her eyes, not because she was judging them or disapproving, but because she was approving and thought it was neat. She said that familes would catch her staring and she would "smile warmly in an effort to convey her support."(Guilty) She said she now realizes that those families do not need her support and that what they do need is for people to not notice, or at least not make a big deal of noticing. She said that she "Now understands that frequently interracially adopted kids and their families long for privacy; just to be treated like any other human being whose history the public does not assume it knows or assume it has the right to know." She went onto share some stories of people approaching her when she is with the girls and asking very bold, inappropriate questions regarding the girls backgrounds. For example:
Where did you get them?
How much did they cost you?
Is their father Chinese?
Do they speak English?

So, I am guilty. Just last week we were at dinner with Josh's parents. This white couple with a cute biracial baby boy walked by. I smiled at the parents, nudged Josh, the whole bit. The mother stopped because she thought I had said something....I had not said anything, but then told her that her son was beautiful. I said, where is he from? (Yes, I am an idiot) She said, he's biracial. She smiled and walked away. She was very sweet and kind. The only reason I asked where he was from was because I was so hoping he was from Ethiopia. Now I know she was secretly hating me and my nosiness. I now realize that clearly where he is from is none of my business. I don't go walking up to cute white babies asking where they are from.

Elizabeth Cuthrell went on to write:
"Someday I hope we will live in a world where racial or familial differences don't matter because well have achieved the understanding that one kind, or one way, is not necessarily better than anothers. As for now, I fear we routinely call unneeded attention to these differences. For example, why are Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise's kids described as their "adopted kids?" Why aren't they just identified as "their kids?" Or why did the press write that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were expecting their first child when they already have a son and a daughter? We don't refer to how biological children become a part of their families, so why do we point out adoption?"

I sort of can feel this a bit. We have been asked about when we are going to try again to have biological children. It sometimes feels like others value biological children more. Right now, at this moment, today.....I don't know if I ever want to have "biological children." My heart is bursting with love for Silas. That is really all I can think about now.

The following is my comment:

I'm struggling with something similar on my blog, in which various experts have recommended that a child's story of origin is theirs and theirs alone, and, if asked if the kid still has a first family or not, or what the child's story is, you are supposed to basically tell people it's none of their business.

I find the Oprah author and the author to which I was responding both, frankly, full of it. That's my gut, but I'm open to being proven wrong.

I think that the world is not going to be particularly easy on our kids, and the more they see their situation being treated with honor and honesty and respect -- as DIFFERENT, but still GREAT -- can only embolden them to "own" their story.

To make it "private" to me is tantamount to shame. Or, worse yet, acting like they AREN'T different, when, in fact, they ARE. The problem comes when different equates with "less than". I think that, for a multi-cultural country, we are all pretty slow to realize that "different" means "a unique perspective" and "fresh insight", and that getting to know "different" people is a great way to broaden your horizons. So, I can't imagine, (unless someone is out-and-out racist) ever being "put off" by any questions, no matter how ignorant, because it's an opportunity to share our reality and experience with someone else. If we all do that, all the time, "different" won't be something to fear or "keep private" anymore.

So, will I be the worst adoptive father ever? Weigh in!

AP: Ethiopia Acknowledges Detaining Suspects

The Ethiopian government acknowledged detaining 41 suspected international terrorists from 17 countries and said foreign investigators were given permission to question them...

The government was critical of human rights groups and the media who have followed the detentions.

READ THE AP ARTICLE

Welcome Crazy Days!

I've added WELCOME TO OUR CRAZY DAYS! to the blogroll.

Thanks for your welcome, Tarah!

I've also added a new section for Adoption Doctors, for all those who'd like to have their referrals checked out by a doctor before accepting the referral.

Also new, a list of resources and articles for Transracial Parenting.

Unexpected: A Love Like No Other

Part Two of A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER focuses on "Encounters With the Unexpected", containing a variety of essays in which parents were caught off-guard by the reality of adoption.

Melissa Fay Greene's "Post-Adoption Panic" is as surprising as to WHO wrote it as what she wrote. Melissa Fay Greene (as her bio at the end of the book attests) wrote a book "about a foster mother to AIDS orphans in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. That book is practically the Bible of Ethiopian adoption. That book is, in whole or in part, responsible for many people considering Ethiopian adoption. That book is recommended highly on this website. Don't have it? BUY IT. READ IT. There's a handy link, go-go-go, we'll wait.

Good. Everyone owns THERE IS NO ME WITHOUT YOU. Now, buy THIS book (A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER) and read how a mother of 4 "bio" kids struggles to bond with their first adopted child, a boy named Jesse, from Bulgaria. This is prior to their children adopted from Ethiopia. This is the story of a mother who bristles at having this "interloper" in family pictures, who loses her patience easily, who finally makes an appointment with a psychiatrist, because she just can't seem to LOVE this adopted, older, Bulgarian child. It is a question that few parents ask honestly. While there is endless work put into trying to coax adopted children into loving their "a-parents", no one asks -- not out loud -- if they are REALLY capable of loving an adopted child like their own. And for some, it is a hard adjustment. Greene's honest portrayal will help anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation.

Sheila Stainback's "Baby on Board—But Not Everyone Else" will be massively identifiable to many of us. What happens when we think the sun and moon revolves around our kid/s -- but our extended family refuse to welcome him or her/them into the fold? This essay describes the slow thaw that occurs when the "other" becomes "family".

Amy Rackear's "The Second Time Around" revolves around a fertility-challenged couple who adopt successfully, but struggle with the decision of expanding their family through adoption a second time.

Jill Smolowe's "Color Her Becky" recounts a family with a daughter adopted from China (the titular "Becky"), fail to see the importance of discussing race with their daughter, until she has to grapple with a school bully who delight in taunting her with the brilliant put-down, "Cut the cheese, you're Chinese."

Reading this essay was like having a conversation with the person I was a year ago. At that time, at the beginning of our process, I would've said that emphasizing race is unnecessary. Play it as it lays, right? I now feel, after a year of reading books and blogs and forums, asking friends, etc., that it's irresponsible to leave a child unprepared for this kind of unpleasant experience. Judging from much of the tranracially-adopted adult adoptee community on the internet, it is those who grew up identifying as "white" until adulthood that had the biggest trouble when the world failed to see them as they saw themselves. It may be counter-intuitive at first, but the more race is discussed, the less of an "issue" it may be later in the child's life.

Jana Wolff's "The First Thirteen" makes some starling admissions about her thirteen-year-old, transracially-adopted son: the more he excels in that which she does not, the more she realizes he is not "of" her. Likewise, the more he fails at (or fails to care about) things she finds important, the more she grows to understand the truth of adoption -- we are loving another's child like our own. ANOTHER'S child, with a different set of genetics, different predispositions, different medical histories, different issues. She tells of how her son said, in a moment of anger, "Adoption sucks, you end up with the worst parents". She quietly agreed, not for his reasons, but her own... that, "like many adoptive parents, [we] persist in our fantasies about our children -- saping them if not in our image, than in our image of them." And if they don't live up? "Many of our kins turn out to be only average. There's nothign wrong with average, expect that it doesn't give moms and dads the vindication that above-average does."

From this point, questions as to nature vs. nurture are parsed, eventually leading to increased interaction with the child's birthmother.

My own opinion of the piece is that the writer came off as having unrealistic expectations for her son, and that, in any number of ways, her ego was getting the better of her parenting. I think one of the greatest challenges to good adoptive parenting is the almost zen-like discipline it takes to get your own ego out of the way of your child.

Bonnie Miller Rubin's "The Fallout from a Less-than-Perfect Beginning" is the adoption horror story. A "Gerber baby... in a pink crocheted dress", adopted from Chile, develops a profound (but undiagnosed) emotional disorder, consisting of rage-filled meltdowns. The essay explores how desperate, how powerless, this loving adoptive mother feels in the face of "a bunch of neurotransmitters."

Personally, I feel much of this has little to do with adoption, per se, (unless there are studies of which I'm unaware), and everything to do with the decision to add a child to the family. Before we had our second bio-kid, we had months of discussions, that all boiled down to one unanswerable question: "what if it's a BAD one?" You can't answer that question. Ultimately, you go on faith, because there's no crystal ball. Like Rubin, no matter how much you try to hedge by good, informed, enlightened parenting, there may be problems outside your ability to control -- with ANY kid.

My wife and I have the disquieting habit of watching that show, INTERVENTION. It's like a horror movie for parents. What if that was one of our kids, running the streets, cooking up smack in the bottom of 7-11 cans? What if our kid is schizophrenic?

Scary? Yes. But what if you get hit by a bus? So much of life is out of your actual, physical control, that to live your life in avoidance of pain or risk is to live a gray, empty life.

We want the noise and the energy and the challenge that will come with another child. Our child will be a different gender from those we have now, a different color, a different nationality. She will be loved unconditionally, whether she wants to be or not. Her problems will be our problems. Could it all go sideways? Sure. But to think we WANTED to take this step, but let FEAR win the day? I couldn't imagine anything scarier than that.

Make "Child Heath Site" Your Homepage

Okay, I never said I was smart. It's taken me a few days for the creaky gears in my noggin' to figure this out. A family friend pointed out this site to us. It plays into our situation in two ways: 1. we care about improving health in Africa (since before the adoption) and 2. we're pretty strapped.

So, this cool network of charity sites basically figures, "hey, we'll generate ad income based on traffic, like any commercial website, and pass the cash on to responsible charities! We'll also get eyeballs on fair trade products and the like." Brilliant. All they need is motivated, idealistic-yet-strapped folks to click on their little buttons to prove their traffic-flow. Easy!

Except I didn't do it. Occasionally, but not every day. I may actually have worked out more than I pressed that button (and I HATE working out). And it takes 2 seconds. And it's free. And it does what I wish I could do if I had all the money in the world. But I am such a lazy, First World bast**d, that I didn't do it. I have a PERMANENT LINK on my OWN WEBSITE and I didn't do it.

Well, maybe it was the Easter chocolate, but something got my mind turning. An epiphany:

MAKE THE CHILD HEALTH SITE YOUR HOMEPAGE

That's what the voice inside my head told me, as I tore into Peter Rabbit's ears. That way, EVERY TIME I LOG ON, I'll take two seconds to do good, and then I can surf for minutiae with peace of mind. I also now click over to the HUNGER site, as they benefit Africa as well. Boom! Done! Good, free charity work, now seamlessly integrated into my daily routine.

I am now slightly less hypocritical when I urge you to take similar measures to support this innovative cash-generator for worthy charities.

Here's the original post, in case you have no idea what I'm blathering about:


How You Can Help Save Children In Mere Seconds — Every Day - FOR FREE!!

The Child Health Site provides a feel-good way to help promote awareness as well as prevent and treat devastating childhood illness every day -- through easy and quick online activities.

With a simple, daily click of the blue "Fund Healthcare for Children" button at The Child Health Site, visitors help children. Visitors pay nothing. The treatments and preventative services described above are paid for by our site sponsors and accomplished through our charitable partners, who currently include Mercy Corps, the Prosthetics Outreach Foundation, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation and Helen Keller International.

Please remember to click every day to help children get and stay healthy, and to give hope to future generations. Every click counts in the life and health of a child.

TV Alert!

Tonight, NIGHTLINE (11:35 on ABC) will feature the reporting of Bill Weir in Zambia.

BLACK GOLD, the renowned documentary about Ethiopia's struggle to establish fair trade and trademarks on their most prominent growing areas is being aired on PBS, via their documentary series, INDEPENDENT LENS.

You can read more about BLACK GOLD and check your local airtimes HERE.

Welcome, Friends!

Welcome the following families to the ETHIOPIAN ADOPTION BLOGROLL:

Show 'em some love!

April and Zach's Adoption Site

Augusta's Blog

Baby Ash's Adventure

Bringing Baby Home Blog

Ethiopia Mama

Fairy Good Baby

The Adoption of Nicholas

The Brocker Family Journal

The Earley Journey

The Schmidt Family Journey to Rebekkah and Joseph

ROOTS - Easter Sunday

Watch ROOTS, beginning on Easter Sunday at 8:00 PM, Eastern Time, on TV ONE.

Meet Your (Racist) Neighbors

It will happen.

At some point, somebody is going to say something...not stupid, not out of bounds, just plain racist. They will think you're a "good white person" and, therefore, won't be minding their "manners" as they would have in "mixed company".

You have not spent your life building a thick skin about such matters. And this is your CHILD being dehumanized. Yes, a child, and you are a parent, therefore, jail is not an option. So what do you do?

I recently stumbled across a wonderfully written blog, the personal blog of "Aaryn", a professional columnist and adopted parent of an adorable African-American girl known as "Ruby" (pictured).

She graciously allowed me to share the experience with everyone here. The following serves as an illustration of what kind of situation we may face and, I feel, a pretty nifty response on Aaryn's part:

How A Man Becomes Ugly And Ruins My Sunday

Sam and I both knew when we chose to adopt an African-American child, that we would forever be on the frontlines of racism in America. And we were okay with this. We're both outspoken in our own way and neither one of us are the kind of people to back down when faced with bigoted comments. Still. No amount of pre-adoption coursework or reading could prepare us for the new dimension of pain racism would cause us because thanks to adoption, we see the world very differently than we did almost 18 months ago. Racism has always been abhorrent to me but now it's personal, too. The blinders are off. Amen.

Yesterday morning at the park, I had a conversation with a neighbor I hadn't met before. We were discussing the fact that our community, built around a college, isn't always safe and that women in particular need to be aware that there are sexual predators in the area. Which is when, as Ruby toddled away from me to the water fountain with her father, this young and relatively attractive guy offered me the following little gem:

"And you know that it's because these African-Americans are rolling up in the neighborhood."

"What's that supposed to mean?" I asked him directly, making mental note of his wild effort to be politically correct with his racist views. Clearly he'd seen me playing with Ruby and would at the very least have enough sense to keep it to himself. But no. He obviously assumed that I played for his team, some sort of twisted camaraderie based on the shared color of our skin. He simply continued unfiltered from his place of inherent superiority as a white twenty-something male.

"Well, the rapists and stuff..."

"What about them? There are plenty of white rapists and sexual deviants. Are you saying that only black men commit these crimes?"

He just stood there looking at his feet, saying nothing. His wife sat next to me on the park bench, mouth closed, petting her 3-month old Yorkie. The quiet air was thickening between all of us. So I went ahead and whipped out my cleaver to cut through the bullsh**:

"You know, whether someone is a sexual predator has nothing to do with the color of their skin."

"Yeah...well...yeah." He mumbled this last part while kicking at a rock, his black lab making nervous figure eights around his legs (the irony that he owned a black dog was not lost on me). His voice weakly trailed off.

"Well, you're speaking to the mother of a black daughter," I pointed toward Ruby as she climbed expertly onto the step of the water fountain, Ella pacing at her heels with the tennis ball in her mouth. "So you're talking to the wrong person about the blacks rolling into the neighborhood."

"Yeah...I guess I'm not gonna get into it." He said this last bit as if he actually had more to say. As if he had some really persuasive argument to offer but had already seen my fangs.

"I think that's a really good idea."

Then he just stood there for I don't know how long. Too long, really. My hackles were up and inside I was screaming. I fought the urge to call across the park to Sam, to let him know it was time to leave. I was so uncomfortable and just wanted to go home but this was our park and we'd just gotten there and we'd had such a lovely morning and F*** this guy. So I just stayed put, my elbow only centimeters from that of his wife who still said nothing, complicit in her silence. Finally this guy, who had in seconds morphed into the most vile person I'd ever seen, began to skulk away to the furthest corners of the park. I watched him go, privately hoping I'd sufficiently shamed him, and while I waited anxiously for Sam and Ruby and Ella to wander back to me, I passed the time trying to act normal as I engaged in the most pathetic small talk with the racist dude's wife.

As we walked home, I was unable to speak for a few minutes because I was so close to tears. When I did recount the conversation for my husband he was equally distraught by the whole thing. While we discussed how we were feeling, Ruby babbled away in her stroller, pointing at airplanes in the blue morning sky, aping the crows on the powerlines overhead, completely innocent and oblivious to what had just transpired. It was the first time I'd been confronted by such blatant, unedited and direct racism since we've had our girl and my heart was broken into ten thousand tiny shards. My child has done nothing except to have beautiful dark brown skin and I know what lies ahead for her. I want to shelter her from it, to keep her from becoming hardened by the hurtful stupidity of ignorant people but understand that this is not possible. I felt helpless, filled up with sorrow and worse than anything, overcome with a rageful hate.

Once we got home, Sam sat down on the couch and began to cry, something I've witnessed only twice before in our 9-year relationship. We were both devastated. As an interracial family we regularly intercept ridiculous comments as they pertain to both adoption and race; sometimes we handle them better than others but even with ongoing practice, we still haven't completely acclimated to being such public property. This particular interaction, however, was the kind of direct hit we'd read about, knew was inevitable and for which there is no preparation as it pertains to emotional injury. Not internalizing it is a challenge.

I know I've got to find a place of compassion in my heart for this man and for others like him. This is necessary for survival of my belief system. Hating is only going to make me a bitter person and aid me in raising a bitter daughter, neither of which I want. It's so hard to find the forgiveness that's imperative for healing; I'm closer today than I was yesterday and hopefully tomorrow that goal will be even more within my reach. But I'm still feeling very raw over the whole exchange and wondering how I can possibly face similar situations over and over again without it breaking me in half.

Many generations of black people have survived it and I can't help but wonder how.

Aaryn's blog, "Ruby Soho" joins the blogroll, under "Parent(s) Who've Adopted Transracially". Her blog mixes in liberal politics with her slice-of-life commentary, so, if you have a violent reaction against such points of view, be forewarned. I find all of her writing to come from a place of profound compassion, and she writes with considerable wit.

SWERLFOLK, PLEASE COMMENT WITH YOUR OWN BRUSHES WITH CASUALLY RACIST REMARKS -- ESPECIALLY IF THE PERSON SPEAKING DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU WERE A TRANSRACIAL PARENT.

Give Without Giving

How You Can Help Save Children In Mere Seconds — Every Day - FOR FREE!!

The Child Health Site provides a feel-good way to help promote awareness as well as prevent and treat devastating childhood illness every day -- through easy and quick online activities.

With a simple, daily click of the blue "Fund Healthcare for Children" button at The Child Health Site, visitors help children. Visitors pay nothing. The treatments and preventative services described above are paid for by our site sponsors and accomplished through our charitable partners, who currently include Mercy Corps, the Prosthetics Outreach Foundation, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation and Helen Keller International.

Please remember to click every day to help children get and stay healthy, and to give hope to future generations. Every click counts in the life and health of a child.

Profile: Nancy Meyer & Illinois Ethiopian Kids Community

Adoption can be a lonely business in the most ordinary circumstances. Some of us Gen-Xers may still have friends without even a pet, who’s idea of “responsibility” constitutes “finding a designated driver”. Add to that the fact that, by adopting from Ethiopia, we are becoming parents to children of a different cultural heritage and, often, of a different race, well, it’s easy to feel a little isolated.

One suggestion in all those pamphlets we get from the adoption agencies is to “meet with other families like yourselves”. Point out the tree where those families grow and I’ll shake it.

Nancy Meyer couldn’t find that tree either… so she took things into her own hands. I think she’s a profound inspiration to all of us. I asked her to share her incredible journey with us, so that, at minimum, she can help her organization thrive. More importantly, I’d love for her to serve as a model for all of us, so that we can emulate her entrepreneurial spirit… er, rip off her idea and do it in our own towns.

Nancy has formed the Illinois Ethiopian Kids Community (IEKC), an adoption community that aims to provide cultural and social connections for our children/families through activities and events and to create authentic relationships/friendships with the local Ethiopian community.

Nancy built and maintains the organization’s website: www.ethiopiankids.net. You owe it to yourself to check it out, even if you can’t spell Illinois (no shame in that, it’s sort of counter-intuitive). The site is chock full’a great links, product reviews and information of value to anyone in our community. Don’t believe me? They have one of the best hair resource pages I’ve seen. The links are so valid, because each comes with a nice little explanatory profile as to why it’s relevant. That makes for some smart surfing!

If you ARE in or near Chicago, Illinois, you can take advantage of the cultural events and meetings Nancy organizes. On August 4th, 2007, IEKC is hosting the Mesgana Dancers, in Evanston, IL. Tickets will be on sale, on-line.

My hunger for connections with other families is what led my motivation to form a community, Nancy explains. I arranged an informal gathering of some local families last year that I knew had adopted from Ethiopia. We met at a local Ethiopian restaurant. Most of the families in attendance were families "in-process" and needed support from others who had walked the path.

The organization is growing quickly. From that initial gathering of seven families, the local organization now boasts a roster of fifty families. I am working to create unity, which is a long, steady process. Still, she feels an even stronger sense of community is warranted. I have found that families are very interested up until the point they bring their child(ren) home. Then the need for connection begins to wane. It seems like it should be the opposite really. I think people get busy in their lives and perhaps lose sight of the bigger picture...that our children will one day ask "who am I" and "where do I belong"?

As our children grow up, they will be caught between black and white, Ethiopia and America, first family and second family. A group like this seems to provide two indispensable functions: providing a lifeline to others JUST LIKE THEM (or at least in the same situation) and expose them and us to authentic Ethiopian-American culture. Ideally, this cross-communication with the local Ethiopian community will provide mentors and opportunities to explore and express themselves in the context of their native culture.

Right now the hardest part is laying the groundwork by making contacts and starting relationships. Nancy opened a dialog with the sizable Ethiopian community in Chicago, reaching out to the Ethiopian Community Association of Chicago, as well as the local Ethiopian Orthodox and Ethiopian Evangelical churches.

She stresses that the relationship between the Ethipian-American community can be mutually beneficial, believing that her partnership with these organization will, in her words, not only bring social and cultural connections for our adopted children, but will encourage greater patronage for Ethiopian businesses. Many of the families here are immigrants trying to find their way and make a life for themselves. They support themselves by opening restaurants, driving taxis and some have enough education to get professional positions, though very few. It is my hope that our community can in turn support their businesses and create opportunities for them to offer their skills (i.e Ethiopian cooking classes, Amharic classes for the children, having ET nannies/babysitters, etc.). Through this partnership it is my hope that there will be greater visibility for the ET community here in Chicago. They have a lot to offer.

Nancy’s connection to Ethiopia deepened significantly… and unexpectantly, when Nancy traveled to receive her daughter. She was picked up at the airport by an Ethiopian man named Tesfaye, an employee at the adoption agency’s care center. I happened to be the only one there at the time. It was love at first sight for him and for me, I knew he was really special but couldn't imagine a marriage relationship would result from our meeting.

They maintained a long-distance relationship after Nancy returned to America with her new daughter. Soon, they realized that they were ready to commit to each other forever. He is an amazing man and I believe we were both ready to accept the level of love we had for each other and create a partnership. It is an amazing story and one that has blessed our lives enormously.

Tesfaye only arrived in the beginning of February, and, per our government, the couple has only three months to wed. Tesfaye is currently perfecting his English, learning the ropes of being in America, experiencing his first Chicago winter and discovering that Ethiopian food just doesn’t taste the same outside of Ethiopia… enter, nachos!

Nancy and her unique family have great hopes for the future of IEKC. My vision is much broader. I aim to make it a non-profit organization that will either adopt or build a service project that will benefit the people of Ethiopia. I hope to make this a full-circle organization.

Ethiopia has quickly emerged as one of the main programs for international adoption. In cities and towns across the country, there is an ever-growing number of American families with Ethiopian children. There are also pockets of the Ethiopian Diaspora in those same cities. Grassroots community organizations such as Nancy’s create “win-win-win” scenarios for all involved, by capitalizing on the unique relationship between International Adoptees from Ethiopia (many adopted transracially), the Ethiopian-American community and native Ethiopian society, still strong, proud and independent, despite the challenges of poverty and disease. All of these benefits – the support for us, the economic enfranchisement of the Ethiopian-American community and the aid to Ethiopia, herself, will ultimately pay dividends for the most important people in all of our lives – our children.

Life Stories: Special Guest, Jenna Hatfield

I invited Jenna Hatfield, of adoption.com's Birth/First Parent Blog and her involving personal blog, Family Living; Hatfield Style, to give a first-mom perspective on all of the questions I asked in "A Love Like No Other: Life Stories". She graciously took the time to help enlighten us. I'd like to thank her for adding to the discussion.

Take it away, Jenna...

Is it presumptuous to search for your child?

I don't know if you're referring to the adoptive family searching for the child's first family or the first family searching for the child. Either way, each family is unique and has to understand the consequences of those actions and accept any fall-out.

What part of your child's story is okay to share with family, friends or the general public, and what part should be reserved for them?

Very personal information, such as how the child was conceived, should be reserved for only those who "need" to know. Others are on a case by case basis.

How much information about or interaction with the first family is crucial to fostering a positive self-image?

This will vary. Some families find it extremely crucial. Others think that the first family is useless. A happy medium can create a well-rounded child.

What is the research on this issue?

The Evan B Donaldson Adoption Institute just did a report on birth parents rights that shows that most parents who voluntarily place their children for adoption are positive role models. Another report by another agency was just released showing that most adolescent adoptees want more interaction with their birth families.

How do adoptees cope with the "what could've been?" questions about their first family?

Hopefully they have a supportive adoptive family and a supportive birth family that can help them field those questions without worry of offending one side or the other.

How adoptive families cope with being the "second" family, as a child's curiosity about their first family increases?

You have to be secure in your role as a parent. It's that simple.

No matter how much you know, how are first families handled in lifebooks?

Again, I've seen it vary. Some families know absolutely nothing and include absolutely nothing. Some know everything and include everything. Some know everything and include what they find pertinent. It's a personal choice but all information should be at least kept for the child to view at a later date.

New Families on the Blogroll

Welcome,
Ethiopia 2007
Mager Family Adoption Story
Our Big Crazy Family
The Long Road Home,
to THE ETHIOPIAN FAMILY BLOGROLL and SWERLFEEDS.

A Love Like No Other: Life Stories

A LOVE LIKE NO OTHER, STORIES FROM ADOPTIVE PARENTS is a collection of first-person essays, all penned by professional writers who are also adoptive parents, edited by Pamela Kruger and Jill Smolowe. It is a delicate but powerful blend… different flavors that come together to create a memorable portrait of modern adoption. Admirable in it’s diversity -- adoptive father, mothers, gay couples, lesbian couples, single mothers and divorced couples all weigh in -- and lack of sentimentality, the hardest truths prove to be the most captivating.

The book is divided up into themed chapters. I thought I'd take each theme as a jumping off point for a post.

In the first section, "Reflections on Birth Parents" offers the following essays:

SHE IS AMONG US by Christina Frank is a meditation on a birthmother from Vietnam, who, due to laws and customs, will never be known.

TO SEARCH OR NOT TO SEARCH by Pamela Kruger (one of the book's editors) details her decision and process of finding the first family of her child, adopted from Kazakhstan. The interesting thing about this essay is it ends with Pamela having found out the information, but refuses to tell her reader, insisting, "The rest of the story is for Annie, and only Annie, to know, when she is ready."

LIVING WITH A VERY OPEN ADOPTION by Dan Savage, was a favorite. It details a couple doing everything in their power to encourage an open adoption, but find the inclusion of the "first family", an alcoholic woman who is homeless by choice, increasingly troubling and painful. In an age of open adoptions and a feeling of responsibility to the child's sense of identity, it shows the lengths we may be asked to go to honor those commitments, in clear-eyed fashion. The other thing I love about it is that it is about a gay couple... but isn't about the fact that they are a gay couple.


TWO DAUGHTERS, TWO DESTINIES by Laura Shaine Cunningham portrays a mother of two girls… a daughter from Kazakhstan and a daughter from China facing a difficult crisis in developing "their stories". She laments the inequality between her daughters’ histories. She knows her daughter from Kazakhstan’s first family, while for her daughter from China, all she can offer is a street where she was found. Ironically, neither seem at all interested in their heritage. She is so worried about how they may feel about their cultural identity later in life that she practically forces a trip to their birth countries down their throat (when both are clearly more interested in going to the mall).

These essays, along with a confluence of other events, including posting on message boards and our own family discussion, has lead to a discussion of first families and what role they will play in our life and our child's life.

• Is it presumptuous to search for your child?
  
• What part of your