THE EVAN B. DONALDSON ADOPTION INSTITUTE
October 2003 E-NEWSLETTER

IN THIS ISSUE

1. Laws, Policy & Practice

2. Research

3. News

4. About the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute

1. Laws, Policy & Practice

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REPEALS PAID LEAVE FOR NEW PARENTS

The Department of Labor issued a final rule on October 9, 2003, repealing the Birth and Adoption Unemployment Compensation regulation allowing states to provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave for parents who have newly adopted or newborn children. The 2000 regulation, supplementing the Family and Medical Leave Act's unpaid leave, had permitted states to use unemployment insurance to fund paid leave for employees caring for a new child, but will now be ineffective as of November 10, 2003. No state had implemented the policy, though a number of state legislatures have considered bills and a few established task forces to examine the option. To read the rule, go to http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=9285864871+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve.

HOUSE APPROVES INCENTIVE TO INCREASE ADOPTIONS OF OLDER CHILDREN
 The House of Representatives this month approved legislation (HR3182) to reauthorize and amend the Adoption Incentive program, adding a provision to reward states for increased adoptions of children nine or older by granting $4,000 for each additional one over its baseline. The program retains the $4,000 bonus for each adoption from foster care above states’ baselines and modifies the $2,000 special needs (Title IV-E eligible) adoption award by limiting it to children under age nine. The new program will allow states to be eligible for older-child bonuses even if they do not increase overall adoptions. The legislation also resets the baselines to determine increases – for 2003 adoptions the baseline is 2002 and for subsequent years it is the year, from 2002 on, with the highest number of adoptions. The Senate Finance Committee is considering a companion bill (S1686). To read the bills, go to: http://thomas.loc.gov/ and type HR3182 or S1686 in the bill number field.

STATES SPEND LITTLE TITLE IV-B FUNDING ON ADOPTION SERVICES
A September 2003 General Accounting Office (GAO) Child Welfare Report, “Enhanced Oversight of Title IV-B Could Provide States Additional Information to Improve Services,” discovered that in Fiscal Year 2002, states spent less than 3 percent of Title IV-B Subpart 1 and 14 percent of Subpart 2 funding on adoption services. While one of the primary purposes of Title IV-B Subpart 1 funding is adoption assistance, the GAO found that only seven states (of 46 that responded) used the funding for adoption subsidy payments, accounting for less than 2 percent of the funding. Additionally, though adoption promotion and support is one of four major purposes of Subpart 2 (Promoting Safe and Stable Families), just 16 states (of 44 responding states) spent less than 3 percent of that funding on recruitment and training of foster/adoptive parents and 27 states spent 11 percent of it on adoption support and preservation. In total, states spent more than $9 million Title IV-B money on recruitment and training. The GAO analysis of Title IV-B funding by population served showed that 13 states spent 5 percent of Subpart 1 funds on services for children waiting for adoption, adopted children and adoptive parents, while 31 states spent 16 percent of Subpart 2 money on that group. To read the report, go to: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03956.pdf.


GUATEMALAN COURT CONSIDERING INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION SUSPENSION
The Guatemalan Constitutional Court is considering a request from the nation’s Solicitor General of Human Rights (PDH) to order a “provisional suspension of all international adoptions and a suspension of authority for adopted children to leave the country,” according to an October 15, 2003, State Department notice. The posting reported that it is unclear how and when the Court will respond and what the interim status will be. While the State Department said that the Solicitor General’s office (PGN) is processing adoptions through notary publics and is accepting new cases, it warns of delays and states that the “U.S. Embassy has learned that many adoption cases have been pulled from or not sent to PGN while appeals were being filed over the last several months.”  The notice recommends that prospective adoptive parents ask their agencies or attorneys whether their cases are under active consideration. For more information, go to: http://travel.state.gov/guatemala_notice.html.

2. Research

NEW STUDY SHOWS MOST AGENCIES NOW ACCEPT HOMOSEXUALS AS PARENTS
An Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute study released October 29, 2003, found that 60% of all adoption agencies accept applications from lesbian and gay prospective adoptive parents, while 39% of the agencies have placed at least one child with a homosexual adoptive parent. The survey was a systematic, nationwide analysis to determine whether agencies work with lesbian and gay prospective adoptive parents, the extent to which agencies place children with them, and agency staff attitudes regarding adoption by homosexuals. The research found that agencies’ willingness to work with this population was a function of two primary characteristics: the agency’s religious affiliation, or lack thereof, and types of adoption programs offered. Public (83.3%), secular private (55.9%), Jewish- (72.7%) and Lutheran-affiliated agencies (53.3%), and those focusing on special needs (61.5%) and international adoption (51.5%), were the most likely to place children with lesbian and gay prospective adoptive parents. The research findings demonstrate that many agencies are willing to work with this population but are unsure of how to reach out to them, and that it is important for agencies to develop pre-placement and post-placement services for gay- and lesbian-headed families. To read the report, go to: http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/whowe/Gay%20and%20Lesbian%20Adoption1.html.

PARENTS’ EXPECTATIONS FOUND KEY TO RELATIONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN 
Survey results from 249 Nevada adoptive families, with a total of 373 special-needs children, showed that realistic parental expectations had the greatest influence on the quality of parents’ relationships with their children and impact on family and marriage, whereas children’s behavior problems had the most impact on parental satisfaction. More than three-quarters (77%) of parents responding to the mail survey in 2000 said the “quality of their relationship with their child was good to excellent” and two-thirds (66%) said the “overall impact of the adoption on their family was positive.” Significantly, the Reilly and Platz research, “Characteristics and Challenges of Families Who Adopt Children with Special Needs: An Empirical Study,” did not find differences between foster parents who adopted and new adoptive parents in terms of their assessment of adoption outcomes like satisfaction and quality of relationship. The research, published in Children and Youth Services Review 25 No. 10, 2003, also found that more time in the adoptive home was associated with an increase in the number of children’s behavior problems and disabilities “reinforc[ing] the notion that many problems of special needs children manifest themselves many years after placement.” and children adopted in sibling groups had more behavior problems than those adopted individually. The average age of the children at placement was about 3 years and, at the time of the survey, was 9.67 years old. A majority of families (58%) responded that they did not receive enough information on the child and more than a third (37%) said the child’s problems were more serious than the state agency originally told them. To order the article, go to: http://www.childwelfare.com/kids/cysr.htm.


CHILDREN FROM EASTERN EUROPEAN ORPHANAGES REPORTED TO PROGRESS QUICKLY
Interviews with families who adopted a total of 124 children from Eastern European orphanages show that children experienced “considerable catch-up” from the developmental delays caused by early deprivation, especially those adopted before the age of 24 months. According to Judge’s “Developmental Recovery and Deficit in Children Adopted from Eastern European Orphanages,” parents reported 61% of children were delayed in three or four areas at their first meeting, while six months later only 8% remained delayed in as many respects. The sample consisted of children adopted February 1999-January 2000 who were 3- to 57-months-old at the time and had spent an average of 17.9 months in an institution. When the parents were interviewed, their children had been living with them for an average of slightly over 6 months, and the children’s mean age was a little over two years old. The research, published in Child Psychiatry and Human Development 34, No. 1, Fall 2003, discovered that the degree of developmental delay at adoption, the amount of time in the adoptive home and age at placement were associated with recovery. To order the article, go to http://www.kluweronline.com/issn/0009-398X/contents.


CENSUS FINDS NEARLY 2.5 MILLION GRANDPARENTS ARE PRIMARY CAREGIVERS
A Census 2000 Brief, “Grandparents Living With Grandchildren: 2000,” reports that 42% of grandparents living with grandchildren are primary caregivers (2.4 million of 5.8 million). The brief said that the likelihood of grandparents being primary caregivers was associated with race and Hispanic origin and the grandparents’ age. Hispanics were less likely (34.7%) than Whites (42.6%), Blacks (51.7%) or American Indians and Alaskan Natives (56.1%) to be the primary caregivers, whereas Asians (20%) were the least likely to be responsible for their grandchildren with whom they lived. Co-resident grandparents under 60 years of age were more likely to be the primary caregiver of their grandchildren (50%) than those 60 and over (31%). Less than two-thirds of grandparent primary caregivers were female (62.7%). In total, 39% of grandparents were the primary caregivers to their grandchildren for more than 5 years. To read the brief, go to: http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-31.pdf.


3. News


NEW JERSEY ABUSE CASE PROMPTS DEBATE ON ADOPTION INCENTIVES
Citing the recent case in which a New Jersey couple is accused of starving their four adopted sons, an October 29, 2003, New York Times article raises questions about federal financial rewards to states for increasing foster care adoptions. “Cash Incentives for Adoptions Seen as Risk to Some Children,” by Leslie Kaufman, asserts that the policy goal of placing children in permanent homes as quickly as possible is undermined by insufficient numbers of interested prospective parents. The push to increase adoptions may also have the negative consequence of limiting the amount of time states can spend to assess families and select appropriate placements for children, says the article. Data on abuse of recently adopted children is not yet available, though records of New Jersey foster homes indicate significant monitoring problems. An October 30, 2003, commentary by Adoption Institute Executive Director Adam Pertman in the Los Angeles Times responds to recent coverage of the case by asserting that a lack of perspective about foster care adoption threatens to decrease waiting children’s chances for permanent and loving families. On November 6, 2003, the House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means will hold a hearing on child safety. To read the New York Times article, go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/29/nyregion/29ADOP.html?hp; to read the commentary in Los Angeles Times, go to: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-pertman30oct30,1,2349391,print.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions; for more information on the hearing, go to: http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=view&id=929.

FLORIDA RELAXES POLICY, BUT STILL FAVORS ADOPTION BY MARRIED COUPLES
An October 12, 2003 Sun-Sentinel article reports that Florida changed its policy regarding how it evaluates prospective adoptive parents’ applications to adopt children from foster care. The new rule, amended in August 2003, no longer states a preference for married couples over single persons and does not include a prohibition on joint adoption by “sexually cohabitating” unmarried couples. In addition, the rules no longer assert that both mothers and fathers are “considered important” for a child’s growth and development. Advocates challenging Florida’s ban on gay adoption cite the rule changes as support for their case. According to Maya Bell’s article, “Florida Revamps Rules for Adoption,” however, the state’s Department of Children and Families has stated that the rules were changed to bring it into compliance with federal law, but that Florida will continue to favor married couples. To order the article, go to: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sun_sentinel/. To read the regulations, go to: www.fac.dos.state.fl.us, Chapter 65C-16.005.

UN PANEL CRITICIZES CANADIAN PROVINCES FOR LIMITING ACCESS TO RECORDS
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child reports that it is “concerned by the fact that certain provinces do not recognize the right of an adopted child to know, as far as possible, her/his biological parents.” The Committee found that a number of provinces have limited access to adoption records and have failed to adequately implement the Hague Convention’s standards on records. To read the article, go to: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1066042941843

U.S. AGENCY READY TO OFFER “EMBRYO ADOPTIONS” IN BRITAIN
By year’s end, the first “embryo adoption” service will open in Great Britain, reports Mark Prigg in “Now British Couples Can Adopt an Embryo.” According to the October 2, 2003 article, the service will be offered by Snowflakes, an adoption agency based in Los Angeles that already provides the same service in the United States. To read the article, go to: http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/7000761?source=Evening%20Standard

4. About The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute

Since its establishment in 1996, the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute has been a pre-eminent, independent voice for improving adoption for everyone it touches - particularly children - through innovative programs, educational initiatives, research and analysis, and advocacy for better practices, policies and laws.

Our award-winning web site, www.adoptioninstitute.org, is a popular and reliable source for accurate adoption information. Read past e-Newsletters at http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/whowe/nl_archives.html.

SUPPORT OUR WORK
The Adoption Institute was established in 1996 with a one-time grant. To continue our work, we depend on new and renewable sources of funding. We need the financial support of people like you whose lives have been touched by adoption and who care about the future of vulnerable children everywhere. Please send a generous contribution to the Adoption Institute’s annual fund today. To donate, please call 212-269-5080 x10 or go online to https://www.networkforgood.org/makeDonation.go

Or you can fill out this form, http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/development/form.doc, and fax it with your credit card information to 212-269-1962, or mail it with your check or credit card information to:


The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
120 Wall Street, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10005

SHARE THE ADOPTION INSTITUTE E-NEWSLETTER
Forward this e-Newsletter to a friend or colleague. Sign up for the Adoption Institute e-Newsletter. http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/mail.html

DISCLAIMER
The Adoption Institute e-Newsletter highlights laws, policy, practice, news, research, and public opinion to educate readers about emerging issues and new information that may impact adoption. The Adoption Institute does not make any representations about the accuracy or reliability of the information reported in the newsletter, and inclusion of items in the newsletter does not signify Adoption Institute support of author perspectives or positions.

COMMENTS?
We welcome your thoughts about the e-Newsletter. Please let us know how we can make it better. Comments, questions and news tips may be directed to info@adoptioninstitute.org.

YOUR PRIVACY
The Adoption Institute will never trade or sell your e-mail address. Privacy Policy. http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/mail.html

All contents © by The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a
501(c)3 non-profit organization
120 Wall Street, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10005

READ PAST ISSUES
Read past Adoption Institute Newsletters at http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/whowe/newsletter_archives.html.

HOME PAGE | SITE MAP
WHO WE ARE | RESEARCH RESOURCES |
POLICY AND PRACTICE | PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION |
Benchmark Survey on Adoption Attitudes | Guide to Adoption Research | Adoption and Prenatal Alcohol and Drug Exposure |

© 2002 The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute