The Republic of T.

This is perhaps one of the most ridiculous things I’ve heard in ages. A Maryland company authorized by the state to place children with foster families has refused a foster license to a Muslim woman, because she doesn’t allow pork products in her home.

Almost two decades ago, Tashima Crudup left her grandmother’s home and entered the city’s foster care system, where she learned firsthand what makes a good mother.

As she shuffled from family to family beginning at age 8, Crudup encountered some attentive and loving foster parents, while others were unsupportive and constraining.

“I always wanted to be a foster parent,” said the 26-year-old mother of five.

In July, Crudup — a practicing Muslim — contacted Contemporary Family Services, a private company authorized by the state to place foster children with families. She cleared an initial screening process and completed 50 hours of training classes for prospective parents. But after a home visit, her application was denied.

The main reason: She doesn’t allow pork in her house.

Are you kidding me?
(more…)

Update: It appears that these children really were rescued — by the people who stopped them from being taken out of the country.

It’s being reported now that the 10 missionaries have been charged with child kidnapping and criminal association. And it sounds like the criminal they’re associating with is group leader Laura Silsby, based on her background:

But CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker reports there are serious questions tonight about Silsby’s motives. The 40-year-old business woman, who convinced members of Idaho’s Central Valley Baptist Church to follow her dream of an orphanage in Haiti, has a troubling financial history.

She’s been the subject of eight civil lawsuits, 14 for unpaid wages, Whitaker reports. Her Meridian, Idaho house is in foreclosure. She’s had at least nine traffic citations in the last 12 years including four for failing to register or insure her car.

The children taken from the group, ranging in age from 2 to 12, were being cared for at the Austrian-run SOS Children’s Village in Port-au-Prince on Wednesday.

…Coq said that nine of the 10 knew nothing about the alleged scheme, or that paperwork for the children was not in order.

“I’m going to do everything I can to get the nine out,” Coq said. That would still leave mission leader Laura Silsby facing charges.

And AlterNet reports:

Several of the parents claimed that the group told them their kids would be attending school in the Dominican Republic, and would be free to return to Haiti to visit their parents. In fact, the group planned to transport the kids to an orphanage in the neighboring country, where they would be in line for adoption.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weighed in on the case, saying “”It was unfortunate that, whatever the motivation, that this group of Americans took matters into their own hands.” The group had not previously run an orphanage and was not registered as an adoption agency or a non-profit.

It remains to be seen whether Silsby will be found guilty of trafficking, but the accounts so far suggest she was operating exactly the way traffickers in Haiti operate.

Let’s get something straight. Kidnapping is a crime. Taking a child across state or national borders, without the full knowledge and informed consent of the parents or surviving relatives is kidnapping. Taking a child across state or national borders without following the required legal procedures, and obtaining the necessary documents is kidnapping.

kid⋅nap
–verb (used with object), -napped or -naped, -nap⋅ping or -nap⋅ing. to steal, carry off, or abduct by force or fraud, esp. for use as a hostage or to extract ransom.

(more…)

It’s a question I get every other time I describe to people the process we had to go through in order to adopt. Actually, it was no different from the process any other couple would have to go through in order to adopt a child. (Note: Our process may not be identical to others. The adoption process is different in each state.)

But people who haven’t gone through it or known anyone who’s gone through it are amazed at the flaming hoops (as I call them) adoptive families jump through: getting a complete physical, background checks, getting fingerprinted and having those fingerprints checked against the FBI’s or some other law enforcement agency’s criminal database, producing our police records or official letters stating that we don’t have police records, and getting letters of support or “character references” from friends.

Finally, there’s several “home study” visits with a social worker (both pre- and post-placement), and getting someone who knows our family to be interviewed by the social worker. This last part, I’m guessing, is the final phase of a process intended to determine to determine our psychological, physical, and fiscal readiness to become parents.

Oh. And then you wait.

(more…)

I realize I should probably let it go. After all, there are some people you’re just never gonna reach.

Let me explain it this way. When I first came to D.C. to work in politics, and to work specifically on gay rights issues, I was told and came to understand that people fall into three categories when you’re working for social change:

1. The people who are on your side.

2. The people who aren’t on your side, but could be if they’re persuaded.

3. The people who are not on your side and never will be.

The first group you need to talk to in order to keep them informed and motivated. The second group you need to talk to in order to make your case and move them to your side. Talking to the third group is a waste of time and energy better spent shoring up support in the first group and winning support in the second group.

Some people are unreachable. The problem is they say things that must not go unchallenged.

(more…)

We didn’t know it yet, but a year ago Dylan came into the world. It would be just a couple of days before he joined our family. It was a sweet surprise.

We’d come back home after a long, heartbreaking September. We were all hurting, and we took Octover November to huddle and heal as a family. The hubby and I talked it over and decided that we would give adoption one more try. But just one. If it didn’t work out the next time, we wouldn’t try again, and we’d remain a happy family of three.

(more…)

It’s been while since I’ve posted another installment in this series, but there seems no better time, given the ongoing controversy over same-sex marriage and the verdict on the Florida gay adoption ban. At the time I wrote:

Like I said, make no mistake about it. They’re coming after our families next. If they can’t break apart the families we’ve created, they’ll do their best to keep more of us from building families.

Well, if you ask me, they’re already laying the groundwork to not only keep us from building families, but to break up our families if they can. The point it, they’re not going away and they’re not leaving our families alone.

(more…)

In the wake of the news that Florida’s gay adoption ban was ruled unconstitutional, I made this observation about the right and adoption.

I can tell you, though, after marriage the right will come after our families next. What some people don’t know is that there’s an undercurrent of anti-adoption sentiment in the movement against marriage equality.

It comes right out of their bizarre reductionism in “defense” of heterosexual marriage.

It may be a little bit of a stretch to say that opponents of marriage equality are also anti-adoption, but it’s not too far-fetched when you consider their arguments, which have gotten more extreme following the California ruling. It starts with the “marriage is for making babies” argument that formed the bases of earlier court decisions. From there it’s a short jump to defining “real marriage” based on a penis going into a vagina. It’s a slightly longer jump, but not much, to determining the right to marry based on the ability to produce unadulterated gametes, with which to make a baby.

Well, it turns gays aren’t the only ones the right would ban from adopting. They have some heterosexuals in their sights as well.

(more…)

I’ve been in meeting most of the afternoon, so I haven’t had a chance to read anything, let alone post anything. But it was nice that the first thing I read when I get back to my desk was that Florida’s anti-gay adoption law has been overturned.

Today a Florida circuit court today struck down a state law that bars lesbians and gay men from adopting (see yesterday’s blog post for more about the case). The court granted adoptions to our client Martin Gill, a North Miami resident who, along with his partner, has been raising two foster children since 2004.

The court ruled that the ban violated the equal protection guarantees of the state constitution because it singles out gay people and children raised by gay people for different treatment for no rational reason. The court also found that the ban denies children the right to permanency provided by federal and state law under the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997.

The court’s decision comes after a four-day trial in October where the court heard from experts on children’s health and development and the justifications offered by the state for the ban. In reaching its decision, the court rejected the false assumptions and stereotypes about gay people that the state offered to justify the ban, holding that many “reports and studies find that there are no differences in the parenting of homosexuals or the adjustment of their children. These conclusions have been accepted, adopted and ratified by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatry Association, the American Pediatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Welfare League of America and the National Association of Social Workers. As a result, based on the robust nature of the evidence available in the field, this Court is satisfied that the issue is so far beyond dispute that it would be irrational to hold otherwise; the best interests of children are not preserved by prohibiting homosexual adoption.”

There’s also a video about the family involved in the suit, talking about how the ban affected their sons.

(more…)

It’s official! We finalized Dylan’s adoption today, in front of the judge and everything! So, I can finally post a picture. And just for good measure.

(more…)

Ever since I wrote a post about adoption and African American children back in 2004, I get occasional emails from people considering adoption — considering cross-racial adoption, especially — asking for information and advice. I’m not an expert, by any stretch of the imagination, but I try to answer them. The interesting thing is that I still get those emails even though I haven’t posted much on the subject since then.

But that post came to mind recently, when I read a New York Times article about race and adoption.

(more…)

I’ve hinted at it a few times, but hesitated to say anything about it until. Given what happened last time, I’m somewhat reluctant to say much about it even now. But there’s a limit to how long one can keep quiet about major life events.

Over the past month, my blogging has noticeably slowed down. Granted, December is a pretty slow month for blogging in general. There’s the holidays. And then there’s family. In my case balancing family, work, and blogging in the past month has meant that blogging took a lower priority and family took a higher priority. That’s because a month ago today, our family was growing, and we didn’t even know it yet.

(more…)

So, Saturday was Parker’s fifth birthday, which — appropriately enough — was also National Adoption Day. And tomorrow is the fifth anniversary of the day we found out his birth mother was considering us to be his adoptive parents. And Wednesday will be the fifth anniversary of the day we found out she’d chosen us to be his adoptive parents. And Thursday — which, appropriately enough, is Thanksgiving — is the fifth anniversary of the first day we laid eyes on our son and walked out of the hospital together, a family.

Five years. I look at Parker now — the active, healthy, curious, silly, playful, empathic little boy who screams “Daddy!” and runs to greet me when I come home — and I can still see the baby who was waiting five years ago for us to arrive, hold him in our arms, and take him home with us. Now, he’s such an amazing kid that at times I look at him with nothing but wonder, incredibly thankful that we are part of each others lives, and daring to hope that I’ve played, will yet get to play some role in helping him become whatever his talents and his passions make possible for him to become.

I remember someone told me once that being a parent is like having your heart walking around outside your body. It is, and I embrace it, with all the joy and worry that comes with it, because I know what happens to him also happens to my heart, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. I wouldn’t exchange the job for any other, and I know I’d sign up for it again and again. No question. And then I’m thankful again.

And I know I always will be — beyond being “proud father,” which I am, I will always be a deeply, deeply grateful one. Always.

Happy Birthday Parker,

Love Daddy.

I haven’t had a chance to address the news that Arkansas will have an anti-gay adoption initiative on the ballot if the Arkansas Family Council has it’s way, now that it has the go ahead to start gathering the necessary signatures. (And, no slight to any Arkansans reading this, but my guess is that they won’t have much trouble getting enough signatures.)

Attorney General Dustin McDaniel certified the Family Council’s proposed initiated act, clearing the way for the conservative organization to begin collecting signatures. If enough have been gathered by summer, the proposal will qualify for the ballot in the Nov. 4, 2008, election.

…The measure is the Family Council’s latest response to the 2006 Arkansas Supreme Court ruling that declared unconstitutional the state’s administrative ban on homosexuals serving as foster parents.

After failing to get the Legislature to prohibit gays or unmarried couples from adopting and fostering children, the organization came forward with the proposed initiated act.

It would go farther than the foster parenting ban, also applying to adoption, but the current proposal doesn’t mention homosexuals.

The proposal would ban unmarried sexual partners who live together — same-sex or opposite-sex — from adopting or becoming foster parents. Cox said it wouldn’t apply to single people, whether gay or straight.

He said he’s been told that gay couples in Arkansas are adopting children.

“The door is wide open for that to occur,” Cox said. “What we want to do is close that door.”

And close it quick, because you don’t want any of those kids ending up in safe, loving, supportive, homes with two same-sex parents. After all, if only people who can make babies are fit to be married, only people who can make babies are fit to be parents. Right?
(more…)

(Ed. Notes: Comments are closed, but you can send emails via the contact page.)

This is without a doubt the hardest thing I’ve ever had to write. We are finally home. We arrived late Thursday night. But we have come home without Lauren. (Which is what we called her.)

We lost her.

At 10:00 a.m. Thursday morning, we received a call from our adoption agency.
(more…)

When I wrote the previous post, I hadn’t thought about the possibility of it becoming a series. But since posting it, I’ve received a few stories via email and come across more in the news that I thought worth highlighting. Why? Because, there’s still some life — and legislative consequences — left in the assumption that heterosexuals are better candidates for parenthood than LGBT people, simply by virtue of being heterosexual. Case in point, Dana pointed out that Oklahoma’s anti-gay adoption bill — which I’ve blogged about before, here and here— is still churning through the courts.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a state law preventing gay couples from getting birth certificates for children adopted in other states is unconstitutional.

The appeals court upheld a previous ruling by U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthorn.

”We hold that final adoption orders by a state court of competent jurisdiction are judgments that must be given full faith and credit under the Constitution by every other state in the nation,” the court says in its Friday ruling.

I’ll leave it lawyers and other legal minds to figure out the implications re: the Full Faith and Credit clause. The defeat of anti-gay adoption bills in several states, and the passage of the Colorado bill are encouraging. But as long as some people with media bullhorns call gay parenting abusive and selfish, it’s worth seeing how we measure up against some inherently better candidates — because they’re heterosexual — for parenthood .

Technorati Tags: adoption, children, culture, current events, family, gay rights, parenting, politics

(more…)

There’s a lot of encouraging news out about young people right now. And I’m not talking about the high school seniors who took Bush to task on torture. (I think that’s great, BTW). It’s the New York Times article about a a recent poll that underscores some trends I’ve blogged about before that are very encouraging for LGBT Americans and our families.

Young Americans are more likely than the general public to favor a government-run universal health care insurance system, an open-door policy on immigration and the legalization of gay marriage, according to a New York Times/CBS News/MTV poll. The poll also found that they are more likely to say the war in Iraq is heading to a successful conclusion.

… Forty-four percent said they believed that same-sex couples should be permitted to get married, compared with 28 percent of the public at large. They are more likely than their elders to support the legalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana.

The findings on gay marriage were reminiscent of an exit poll on Election Day 2004: 41 percent of 18-to-29-year-old voters said gay couples should be permitted to legally marry, according to the exit poll.

Technorati Tags: current events, family, gay marriage, gay rights, marriage, parenting, politics, adoption

(more…)

Around this time last year I posted about reports that Adoption.Com discriminated against gays seeking to adopt, and a lawsuit filed by one couple. Well, it looks like the discrimination suit against Adoption.com is moving forward.

More than three years after an Internet adoption site refused to allow a gay couple to post their profile, a federal judge allowed the pair’s discrimination lawsuit to go to trial.

U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton rejected arguments that Adoption.com had free speech rights to exclude same-sex couples from its paid listings, which are designed to match birth mothers with qualified parents.

“Plaintiffs are not seeking to place any restrictions on what defendants are permitted to say or to compel them to say anything,” Hamilton wrote in an 81-page ruling issued March 30. “It is the discriminatory conduct that is at issue here — defendants’ refusal to do business with the plaintiffs.”

In allowing the lawsuit to go to trial in June, Hamilton also dismissed the company’s claim that California anti-bias policies did not apply because Adoption.com is based in Tempe, Ariz., where state laws don’t bar discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status.

Around the same time last year, the ACLU issued a report on just how restrictions against gay adoptions harm children

(more…)

It’s one of those things most families probably take for granted but that gay families deal with on a regular basis; the kind of thing you do without thinking in the course of going about your life an doing things like making plans for a vacation or a move to a new city. You need a hotel room, so you pick up the phone and make a reservation. The only real requirement is that you’re able to pay for the room. All you really need is a credit card.

Unless you’re gay and in South Carolina.

(more…)

I’ve never readSuze Orman’s books, and I’ve only seen part of one of her television appearances. I got as far as writing down my “money fears,” as she called them, but no further. Talking finances alternately confuses me, frustrates me, and — on occasion — depresses me. But I listened to Orman and watched her enough to get a “vibe” from her; one that made me wonder if she had secrets that weren’t just financial.

Turns out, my “gaydar” doesn’t just work with men. Albeit somewhat reluctantly, Orman came out recently about her seven year relationship with another woman, and some “money fears” of her own.

(more…)

It will be interesting to see what, if any, reaction people have to news that a lesbian couple in New Jersey won the right to both be listed as parents on their child’s birth certificate. And on the day before the kid was born.

Two women will be listed as parents on the birth certificate of a baby born this week in New Jersey, one of the first implications of a state Supreme Court ruling that gives same-sex couples access to the same rights as married couples.

The state and the women agreed in a closed family court proceeding Monday, the day before the child was born, that both women should be listed in light of the landmark high court ruling.

A judge agreed with the state and the women, lawyers said.

In New Jersey, birth certificates are typically mailed to parents.

Assistant Attorney General Patrick DeAlmeida said the women are the first he knows of to take advantage of new rights granted by the Oct. 25 ruling.

It’s something that’s come up for discussion here before. And since Dana reminded me that it’s National Adoption Month, and National Adoption Day is actually the day after Parker’s birthday (and the day of his birthday party; yes, there will be pictures), this seems like a good time to talk about how this issue particularly affects gay families. Because some of us have been refused reissued birth certificates for our kids before. And it throws our families into legal limbo

I suspect the birth certificate question will be an issue for some people, but the article is right about the importance of a birth certificate in everything from health insurance to custody. Should we ever be required to prove our parental relationship to our son (setting aside for now what a nightmare that would be), the birth certificate is an important document to have, because the reality our families face is that at the worst possible moments we may be required to “prove” our relationships to one another, and wonder if they’ll be recognized even with documentation.

That’s true not just for same-sex couples, but for our kids too. Imagine being kept from your child at a moment when they’re probably scared and vulnerable. Now imagine being a child kept from your parents when you’re scared and vulnerable.

(more…)