Here's the updated story as of Anne's visit in late July.

The story keeps changing, both because events keep moving forward (albeit slowly) and the details change when we're down there and asking questions.

People

K – Our adoption facilitator in Guatemala, runs agency started by her mother
R – K’s brother, attorney and notary
V and H– foster parents
Nancy Velasquez Velasquez– birth name of the baby, whom we’ll call Maria Anne back in the US
M Velasquez – birth mother, 15 when Nancy was born
D – M’s father
T - M's mother
T1 - M's older sister

Story

This might be simliar to the story below, but as we said, the details keep changing, so this is what we know right now. Of course, the next time we talk to the lawyers or visit we're sure the details will change again!

M and her Father D went to PGN. M's mother T did not go because she was giving birth to M's sister. This raised a red flag for PGN. In addition, M gave answers to questions about where the baby was born and that the facilitator had given her some money for the birth. We believe that M was scared and that she does not speak Spanish well.

However, because of the red flags, PGN ordered an investigation which took place September 2006. The investigator says that M and her mother stated that M is not the mother of Nancy, but that her elder sister is. According to the investigator, the family said that the sister had some paperwork inconsistencies on her birth documents (the ones we describe below) --her Uncle is listed as her father because her father was too young to have an identity card when the sister was born. By the time M was born the father had an identity card and is listed as the true father. It is impossible to know whether this actually happened or not, but we don't think that PGN's investigations are accurate. P, the Uncle, has testified in Court that the baby is M's baby and of course there is the DNA match.


If the maternity of the baby is not certain, than it would be difficult to ascertain who should relinquish rights to the baby. In addition, the family left the village after the investigation because of shame or harrassment, so that they aren't available.

Whether PGN has legitimate concerns here or whether this paperwork issue was fabricated as a rouse is impossible to know. Outsiders say that the agency has turned into an agency that limits adoptions, for political, nationalistic and job security reasons. PGN has been objecting to this adoption, interviewing the birth family multiple times and claiming that M said she was being coerced to give the baby up by our lawyers, and accusing our Guatemala adoption agency of paying the birth family for the baby.

After the last hearing, the Judge ordered PGN to submit their file and interviews. When Anne and Dick were in Guatemala, Dick was able to copy the PGN file so we were able to know what's in it. Our lawyers believe that the PGN file vindicates them (and us). They paid some birth expenses (which is typical in Guatemala so that the baby will be born in a hospital and not someone's home), but did not coerce M. In fact, in January when we heard that M could possibly want the baby, we and our lawyers offered the baby back. The grandfather, D, did not want the baby and has always maintained that they cannot afford to raise the baby of the minor daughter. He and his wife are still bearing children. The Uncle P has also testified that the family is too poor to raise another baby and that they want to give her up for adoption. No member of the family has seen the baby since she was 2 days old.

We now hear that the Judge is asking for PGN to support their petition to put the baby in a State-owned orphanage -- i.e to show proof that this would be better for the baby then going for an international adoption. We are hoping that the Judge will have compassion that a loving family, even if it is in America, is better for her than an orphanage.

It is our understanding that if the Judge rules in our favor, then he will issue a certificate of Abandonment (COA) in three weeks after he rules. With the COA, we start the adoption process over both with the American Embassy and the PGN. This time, the interviews in PGN would be with V. V wants the baby to come to us and has testified in Court that she thinks that the baby coming to us would be the best for the baby and how much we love the baby. Our lawyers think that our process could take 4 to 6 months after the COA is issued, so we still have a long road ahead of us.

Photos from Anne's visit on July 24, 2007

Yes, this has been going on so long that I need to add the year that we go down!
We'll be back later to post some of the story, and what a story it is!
Links to more photos!

ADA STORY ON GUATEMALA ADOPTION SITUATION

Here's a story from the ADA Website that does a good job providing some background to the situation in Guatemala:

ADA
June 11, 2007
THE ROLE OF THE PGN IN THE ADOPTION PROCESS IN GUATEMALA

The adoption process in Guatemala is rather simple. Over the years, the Social Workers for the Family Courts and the Procuraduria General de la Nacion (PGN) which is the equivalent of the State Attorney, have introduced new requirements that have been added to the process. According to the law that rules the notarial process of adoption, the requirements are: the birth certificate of the child, the marriage certificate of the adoptive parents if the child is being adopted by a couple, two witnesses of the moral and financial capacity of the adoptive parents, and a home study with a favorable opinion of a Social Worker, appointed by a Family Court.

The PGN has three days to give an opinion about the adoption. We all know that the PGN is taking months to give an opinion and to return the file to the notary, most of the times with objections for any number of reasons. Some of those objections are valid. Most of them are not. The rate of approval of cases by the PGN this year is twenty four per cent of the cases submitted. Last year it was ninety six per cent. The law is still the same and the adoption lawyers have not suffered of collective amnesia, therefore, the reason for all those rejections must be found elsewhere.

When Josefina Arellano became the director of the section of the PGN that deals with abandoned children, she realized that nobody cares for that kind of children. That the spotlight is on the adopted children. Ambitious and eager to promote her image as someone who has in her hands the destiny of the children, Arellano has been doing whatever it takes to control the process of adoption. Since she declared herself as the chief of the adoptions office and the international press has been quoting her, Arellanoa’s power has been growing enormously. She is in the newspapers, in the TV news, in the radio interviews, stating as a fact that all children who are being adopted were made for that purpose, and that Guatemala has become a children factory, ignoring the poverty of the people who cannot support their children and choose to relinquish them instead of letting them die as many others, for lack of proper nutrition or medical care.

The truth is that Josefina Arellano has nothing to do with adoptions and that she should be doing what her job really is: helping the abandoned children to solve their legal situation as fast as possible, to be able to find a permanent family before they are too old to be adopted.

To dispel any doubts about the origin of the child, the positive result of a DNA test was included among the documents presented for PGN approval of the adoption. As the anti adoption forces have tried and failed to pass a law that would make adoptions impossible, the requirements of the PGN have been increasing. Every month there is a new one. Among them, there are: the declaration of heterosexuality of single parents, the appointment of a legal guardian in case something happens to the adoptive parents, documents to state the identity of the director of the hogar or the foster mothers who are taking care of the children being adopted, birth certificates in photocopy, not literal transcriptions, birth certificates of the birthmothers and of their document of identity, updated medical certificates of the children being adopted, and many others.

When the PGN does not approve the adoption, the law states that the process must be presented to the Family Court, so the judge decides whether or not to approve the adoption. The decision of the judge can be appealed before the Court of Appeals of Family jurisdiction. The judges do not like to be burdened with adoptions, considering that the child support and alimony cases take priority and that adoptions are something that should be dealt by the lawyers with the PGN.

In order to explain to the seven Family Judges of the Family Court the situation of the adoptions and the PGN, the ADA President and Vice President had meetings with each of the judges to explain to them the situation of adoption processes that have been rejected by the PGN for reasons that have no legal grounds. Another of those reasons of rejection is that the PGN did not interview the underage birth mother of the child being adopted. The PGN, following the instructions of Josefina Arellano, refuses to give an approval on such cases. The judges have been approving those cases, ruling that the interview of the birth mother is not a legal requirement.

Some of the judges have understood the need of their intervention on those cases. Others have opposed having to rule on adoptions. But eventually, all of them will have to understand that the role of the judge is to rule on the cases of adoptions, when the demands of the PGN have no legal grounds or are unreasonable.

The US DOS (Department of State) has expressed their concern because the Guatemalan adoptions do not have enough state oversight. Bringing the adoption processes to the Family Judges supplies the oversight that the DOS deems necessary and prevents the PGN from abusing their power by demanding the fulfillment of requirements that they make up, and are not based on law.
Some weeks ago, criminal charges were brought against the PGN officers, Arellano among them. The judge has ordered the District Attorney to investigate the charges, admitting the accusation. We are confident that justice will prevail because to prevent a child from joining a loving forever family for groundless reasons, should be treated with the same severity as kidnapping, because the pain inflicted on the waiting family and the harm done to the child are as severe as those caused by such a coward felony.

Here's the story as of early July.

There are a few things you have to remember:

We're not getting any information in any consistent way. Sometimes we ask the same question three different times, and we get four different answers.

The Guatemala Court system isn't like ours. I don't know Guatemala Law (and if you do, please contact me asap), so I don't know what's allowed, what's not, what parties can compel others to what actions, etc.

All that said ...

Organizations

PGN – Guatemala “Attorney General” Agency –oversees adoptions in Guatemala
Minor’s Division – Division of PGN, Created in 2006 to oversee cases where the birth mother is a minor
Court of Minor’s – court system in Guatemala where the cases involve minors

People

K – Our adoption facilitator in Guatemala, runs agency started by her mother
R – K’s brother, attorney and notary
V and H– foster parents
Nancy Velasquez Velasquez– birth name of the baby, whom we’ll call Maria Anne back in the US
M Velasquez – birth mother, 15 when Nancy was born
D – M’s father

Background

M had always meant to give up her baby for adoption. Although she was living near Chichicastenango, in the state of Quiche, she traveled to Guatemala City to give birth. She then turned Nancy over to K, and V and H have been taking care of Nancy since she was 2 days old.

M signed foster papers. Later, M took a DNA test (a necessary part of an international adoption). The test results were 99.9% positive (there is no 100%), proving that Nancy was her baby.

When M was born, her father, D, did not have an identity card. So D’s brother signed M’s birth certificate. M is the eldest of 9 children, and after her birth D got an identity card. However when M submitted her adoption paperwork to PGN she had a choice. She could submit a birth certificate of hers, with her uncle listed as her father. Or she could submit her sister’s birth certificate, with her father listed as the actual father. She chose the latter.

This was caught by PGN, and it raised a red flag. PGN is supposed to be charged with protecting the adoption process in Guatemala, babies and their parents (see accompanying document) but they have turned into an agency that limits adoptions, for political, nationalistic and job security reasons. PGN started objecting to this adoption, interviewing the birth family multiple times, and accusing our Guatemala adoption agency of paying the birth family for the baby.

Our agency realized that these claims were baseless, but they could get no traction inside of PGN. About this time (January 2007) all the psychologists inside of PGN were fired, allegedly for corruption and soliciting bribes. Our agency petitioned the Court of Minor’s to instruct PGN to perform their mandated duties.

PGN in turn petitioned the Court of Minor’s, at first, to stop the adoption process (which would remove Nancy from the foster parents and put her in an orphanage), then to deny an international adoption and only allow domestic adoptions. PGN also claimed that our agency was paying for this baby and coercing the mother into putting her up for adoption. This claim was rebutted by the mother’s testimony to PGN, which they did not file with the judge (our lawyer’s did get a court order to get that information in front of the judge).

Culturally, Guatemala does not have a lot of respect for adoptions. There are not many domestic adoptions, people who are adopted don’t talk about it, people who work in adoptions don’t talk about it, and foster parents don’t typically say that they are caring for prospective adoptive babies.

To his credit, the judge at the Court of Minor’s allowed Nancy to stay with the foster parents. There have been a number of hearings on this (3-5), the last of which was July 5, 2007. The judge is supposed to render a verdict within 15 business days of that date, but that didn’t happen.

The judge could rule to deny the international adoption, which our attorney’s would appeal. Or he could rule to direct PGN to allow the international adoption, which would mean that our case would go back to PGN as an abandonment (where the birth mother/family would not be involved).