Questions

Even 6 months later, so many questions still remain for me about some of the deplorable things said and done to us by the people we worked with in this process.

Before I get to the ones I have, maybe I'll head off one of yours first. Why don't I just let it go? Primarily because I fear it still goes on to a great degree, and will continue should adoptions resume. Also, and perhaps just as importantly, due to the severity of it, and what the actions told me about those involved. You see, we didn't just have a long process, with lots of bumps. That is true, but many of the bumps could have been anticipated if the agency had just even communicated with each other. The worst things though, were the two specific threats, made not by the stateside agency personnel, but by the missionary directors of the hogar itself. The first threat was 16 months post-referral and in response to a very non-threatening, friendly and pleading e-mail sent by someone in our family other than us without our prior knowledge. The response to this plea for help was that if we were upset, then perhaps they'd need to send us to anger management before they could place our son with us. That's right, because someone else asked for help on our behalf, they suggested keeping our son from us. Keep in mind we had extremely limited direct contact with them, and had no problems whatsoever with our local and actual placing agency who did our homestudy and had at least weekly contact with us over most stretches.

The second and most severe blow in the whole process came at what should have been the happiest time short of actually being in Guatemala, receiving our pink appointment. Throughout our process, we were told on at least 4 specific and documented occasions certain fees wouldn't be owed due to the nature of some of our delays (including the attorney's extreme slowness). In the end these fees were charged anyway, and when we paid all fees but those, (again with our local agency's agreement), instead of our travel arrangement being made, the director of the home sent a letter which stated (after we already had an appointment date): "I advise you not to make travel arrangements", and again later "We need to get that taken care of before you travel.".

After 21 months of waiting post referral and our legally completed adoption, they essentially advised us they would hold our son from us until we paid them fees that their agency had advised wouldn't be owed.

Sure, judge me if you will as that's your right, but be careful if you didn't walk our road, and walk it for the length of time we did. You don't know the number of times we were lied to through the process itself, and the months we spent not waiting on the government, but just waiting on our own agency and attorney to take simple actions. (We spent more time out of PGN than in.) You don't know how unprepared they were to advise us about our case. However, if you're wondering before you judge, yes we did pay the money, because above all we wanted our son home with as little more pain as possible (for him and us), and that seemed to be the only way at the time. I still fully believe it contradicted everything we were told, and that it was an utterly awful way for people claiming to be who they are to handle the matter. It is not as if they did not have our entire life history and complete identity at their disposal to discuss the matter or pursue the money by any number of other means without placing our son directly in the middle of it. It did (and does) feel very much at times like a ransom or extortion.


However, I'm not trying to attack. I offer as evidence of that I've still chosen not to use names at this time. Like I said, I just still have so many questions, not just about how we were treated, but also about so many other things, and how others were treated.


Truth is, most families that have ever contacted us lived in extreme fear of these people and what they might do, just because they were contacting someone else for support, for answers, or just for a simple chat. Is that the way we should have to feel working with professing Christians?


Why is it that the agency and hogar directors were always so adamantly opposed to families having as much information as possible, and/or contacting Guatemala?


Why is it that with all the many requests made for support over the past 2-2.5 years, that the hogar directors have both a new house stateside and a new one built on campus in Guatemala?


What about the sports complex built there, and the new fences, porches, workshops, sewing rooms? The new chapel just started this year?

It's not that these aren't good things, but I just can't make it make sense when they repeatedly keep saying there's no more money left for formula for the children, especially if the ones who are matched with a family are being supported by the families themselves. Where are the priorities?


As to their own talk about shutting down if adoptions stop, is it therefore really a children's home/orphanage for any child in need, or just a nice place for only adoptable or possibly adoptable children? Won't there be that much more need when adoptions do stop?


Why do they stop giving formula at 6 months switching to milk, when that's against almost any pediatricians' recommendations, and quite possibly unsafe? Again, aren't most of the children being directly supported by a family? Again, were the buildings that much higher priority?


Why were parents recently told the chicken pox vaccine was given, but it seems it may not have been?


Why can no one still seem to give me a clear and thorough answer regarding who Belia is and what exactly her title is, or her specific role (and compensation) in the adoptions are?


Why would they ever use any attorney they themselves knew lied often?


Why is the agency for-profit?


Why is the children's home also still not listed as tax-exempt non-profit? They've been reportedly working on it since 2006. What is the hold-up? I don't think it can all be blamed on the IRS can it?


Why are the hogar directors also employees of the agency itself ? (With that being the case, why isn't the communication any better?)


With all family employed at the agency (except perhaps at best one), what oversight is there by an outside the family source?


Why are some people who visit (whether families or work teams) scolded for trying to keep other families informed or providing extra pics, or forbidden up front from doing so?


What about their Hague accredidation? Is there any status yet on that, or explanation on why they still aren't approved as of the last list released.


Why has it seemed lately the missionary directors spend at least as much or more time stateside than in Guatemala?


Why would they ever think it was okay to refer some children to two different families? Is there ever a reason that could be okay if one family wasn't definitely 100% out of the picture?


Why aren't the children more regularly seen and examined by a doctor? Why aren't better records kept for the visits that do take place? Why does there so often seem to be some confusion about the medications and doses the children should get?


This was a very very long post I know, but it was a long road, and as you can see, there were and are lots of questions.