By Conor Sweeney Conor Sweeney - Fri Apr 16, 10:19 am ET
MOSCOW (Reuters) - A top Russian official said on Friday he hoped to quickly place an adopted boy into foster care one week after he was sent home alone from the United States, sparking a halt to all U.S. adoptions by Russia.
Artyom Savelyev, who celebrated his eighth birthday on Friday in a Moscow hospital where he is under observation, arrived by airplane with a letter from his U.S. mother asking for his adoption to be annulled on the grounds he was mentally unstable, triggering a furious reaction in Russia.
"Next week Artyom will be discharged from hospital and will go to a foster family in Moscow," said the Russian President's Ombudsman for Children's Rights, Pavel Astakhov, after visiting him in hospital with birthday presents.
While children left without parental care usually face an uncertain future whose fate is not quickly solved, Astakhov said a decision was taken on Friday so everything possible would be done in Savelyev's case, he said on his website rfdeti.ru.
Savelyev was adopted from an orphanage in Russia's Far East in 2009. After six months, his adoptive mother, a single nurse from Tennessee, bought him a one-way ticket to Moscow. In an attached, typed note she described him as mentally unstable and violent.
Within around three weeks Astahkov said he hoped the "most suitable family" would be found for the boy, who has been in hospital since his return from the United States.
Astakhov said Savelyev was in a good mood and smiling on Friday.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev described the affair as a "monstrous deed" and Russian media has followed the case closely, expressing outrage at the boy's experience.
Lawmakers drafted a bill on Friday that would formally suspend adoptions to the United States in line with an earlier Foreign Ministry announcement, Interfax reported.
Russia is the third largest source of foreign adoptions to the United States, with 1,586 children adopted last year, according to the U.S. State Department.
The U.S. embassy in Moscow said on Friday the child was "in good spirits" when a consular officer visited to give him a present. It added that Savelyev holds dual U.S. and Russian citizenship.
(Reporting by Conor Sweeney; Editing by Ralph Boulton)
the stark, harsh reality that (too) many parents DON"T want to raise their imperfect child.
i personally would not want a parent raising a child, that their heart wasn't into.
i've already stated i find it heartbreaking, but i just cannot feel the outrage that others do.
we just don't know the terms of the contract, or even the negotiations.
whether we agree with it or not, if the mom specifically stated she did not want a 'problem' child, then i can see why he was returned (although, very irresponsibly).
and, i maintain, it's a good, darned thing that poor boy WASN'T stuck with her.
i feel strongly about that.
finally, just because i don't feel the outrage, doesn't make me or anyone else, a lesser-feeling parent.
it's unfortunate i even have to justify that?
leslie
I agree with this. While our foster and adoption processes are not perfect, and children are definitely NOT "returnable items," it's usually in the best interest of the child to be taken away from parents who are too overwhelmed to take care of them. The State (big S) takes children away all the time when the parent is deemed unfit. That said, I'm not sure why when a parent deems THEMSELVES unfit, they are crucified for it. Waiting until something really bad happens, i.e. the only time the State can take a child away, is much, much too late.
Also, from what I've read--not here, in the news stories--the place she adopted this child from told her that this kid had no unusual medical/behavioral problems.
However, I still stand by my statement that the mother was whackadoodle in the way she let this child go. In fact, I think it speaks volumes to her state of mind, which provides even more support to the fact that maybe she wasn't fit as a mother to this particular boy.
I have a relative who gave up her two-year old son for adoption when she realized that she was very close to harming him. I met him about ten years ago, and from all accounts, he grew up in a stable home and is now a happy, healthy adult. Thank goodness she gave him up, because I'm not sure how he would have fared otherwise. (Although many in our family decided she was the worst human being in the world to have given him up at 2, rather than at birth.)
and, i maintain, it's a good, darned thing that poor boy wasn't stuck with her.
i feel strongly about that. this is true to some extent.....
finally, just because i don't feel the outrage, doesn't make me or anyone else, a lesser-feeling parent.
it's unfortunate i even have to justify that?
leslie
now, you say that because you don't feel outrage, doesn't make you a lesser parent.....where did you get the idea that you would be a lesser parent if you aren't as outraged as others?
since then, and from doing a brief stint in peds hospice, i have learned such parents exist.
tragically, it just doesn't surprise me anymore.
leslie
Isn't it horrifying? And I think this is such a sad statement that says a lot about humanity....We have become numb and accepting, rather than outraged over violence, apathy, neglect, etc. Once the person sees too much of it, it is too easy to start accepting.....
So if you say " I can't take care of this child please take him away" either makes you a selfless saint or a selfish !@#$#%&* depending on the circumstances. Got it. Makes perfect sense. And what of the mother who sent her adopted daughter back because she felt she wasn't "bonding" with her as she had her biological children ?
So if you say " I can't take care of this child please take him away" either makes you a selfless saint or a selfish !@#$#%&* depending on the circumstances. Got it. Makes perfect sense.
No, it means you're a messed up parent that recognizes your flaws before harm is done to the child. What makes the person a "selfless saint" or a "selfish ***" is in the eyes of others.
I think that it's good that she recognized that she couldn't care for this child and that she didn't abuse him. However, I think she should have given it more time (as others have said). She totally went about it the wrong way. Since he was already over here, why not have him go to foster care here or to someone responsible here, until she could figure things out. I would NEVER send back a child who I adopted (or give up a child I birthed)....To me making a choice to adopt is something that is just like having a child. I look at my beautiful rambunctious 2 year old and feel so sad for this little boy and others out there. They need someone to love them and care for them. FWIW I know of someone who called CPS for help b/c they felt like they could injure there baby, CPS came and be-rated them telling them what an awful mother they were...we do need more assistance for moms (adoptive and new ones). I live in a very rural area so support is limited. I was lucky to have my family. WIC was a good support too but only if you fit into their income brackets. There is a huge distrust with CPS, so that rules them out. First Steps was great, but b/c of funding the program got cut, and again only if you fit in the income bracket. I just think it's so sad what happened. However I feel I don't have the right to judge this woman.
I agree with most of your comments. I simply cannot accept what she did as right. Living in a rural area....That's not only, as you mentioned, difficult to receive services, it is also difficult to maintain any real privacy. The last rural place I lived in, one could not even receive counseling without the information floating about town.
I can't help but wonder if this woman will regret what she has done later down the line. You can almost guarantee she will never be allowed to adopt, again....
it depends on the situation. some children require a higher level of care than some families are able to provide (called therapeutic foster care). if the family and case worker did not realize that a therapeutic setting was necessary, then it is in the child's best interest to be placed somewhere else.
also, foster care is by definition temporary. many foster parents have no intention of adopting the children placed with them, because it is their goal to continue to foster. this type family is very much needed due to the lack of foster families in most areas. those who foster with adoption being the end goal, then do not foster again, are helping one child whereas the ones who continue to foster can help many.
adoption is by definition permanant. if you have never seen one you should. the judge asks the parents if they are willing to take and raise the child as if their natural born child with all the rights of heirship and all the responsibilities of a normal parent. once that oath is taken, it is not meant to be broken. what this woman did was akin to taking her natural born child, putting them on a bus to cps with a note that they did not want them anymore. yes, i would be equally outraged at that.
whether or not the child was misrepresented is irrelevant. no child comes with guarantees of any kind, adopted or biological. making the decision to parent a child means taking responsibility for that child, no matter what.
my last thought...adoption are not processed instantly, especially international ones. i refuse to believe this kid was a perfect angel and then suddenly turned into a violent terror once the adoption decree was issued. we are certainly not getting the entire story here.
I know you weren't talking to me, but I certainly wasn't saying that what she did was right. In the end, it's about the kid, and the kid obviously didn't belong with her. How getting the kid away came about was just one big ole' messed up circumstance.
And at this point, I am now bowing out of this gracefully. I've said my opinion (too many times, I think ).
It feels as if I continue responding, I will simply be beating a dead horse, so to speak! I have enjoyed conversing and debating upon this subject with all of you, immensely!
edited because I always seem to forget at least one word or make at least one spelling mistake, etc!
Isn't it horrifying? And I think this is such a sad statement that says a lot about humanity....We have become numb and accepting, rather than outraged over violence, apathy, neglect, etc. Once the person sees too much of it, it is too easy to start accepting.....
you know greenfire, i almost responded with a knee-jerk reaction...about it being too easy to start accepting.
but you're right...not that it's "easy", but it just isn't surprising anymore.
i had to leave peds hospice, because of the atrocities i saw.
i have a feeling that you and i share similar passions about children in gen'l...
but my defiance is such, that i do not want anyone parenting a child, when it doesn't feel instinctive.
one's heartfelt desire to parent, should supercede one's responsibility to parent...
i refuse to believe this kid was a perfect angel and then suddenly turned into a violent terror once the adoption decree was issued. we are certainly not getting the entire story here.
you can believe it or not but i have cared for a few easy going children that i barely recognize based on the report i was given. they are able to "hold it together" for as long as a week during hospitalization and yet at some point something happens and it is clear that they are extremely violent so i have no doubt in my mind that the average person could be sucked in by the fairy tail and puppy dog eyes and not get a clear picture of the actual level of care and committment required.
You know, I can recall a story I read several years ago about eastern European adoptions, where the prospective adoptive parents had very limited time with the child they were adopting before everything was finalized. I have no idea if the situation has changed now, but I wonder if perhaps this woman went through a similar process.
That said, I find her methods deplorable and I don't think it was fair to the child for her to give up after six months. I understand that when parents are truly afraid of hurting a child or genuinely cannot care for one, they should have non-judgmental options for turning the child over to the state for care. Terrible situations arise when parents cannot control themselves; I imagine we've all been exposed in one way or another to the end results of such situations. I agree with greenfiremajick that six months hardly seems like a fair trial period. OTOH, if the "mother" in this instance was uncaring enough to send a violent child who must have felt utterly abandoned by every person in the world unattended on a lengthy international flight with no specific destination or people designated to meet him, it doesn't appear that staying with her would have been in his best interests.
The worst thing about all of this is that now that child may be lost forever. I can't imagine the level of despair, rage, fear, and pain he must be experiencing deep within himself. I think of my safe, happy, quick-tempered, bright little four-year-old asleep upstairs and my heart just aches for that poor child with no one to trust or really care about him.
And what of the mother who sent her adopted daughter back because she felt she wasn't "bonding" with her as she had her biological children ?
:yeah:
).
dudette10, MSN, RN
3,530 Posts
I agree with this. While our foster and adoption processes are not perfect, and children are definitely NOT "returnable items," it's usually in the best interest of the child to be taken away from parents who are too overwhelmed to take care of them. The State (big S) takes children away all the time when the parent is deemed unfit. That said, I'm not sure why when a parent deems THEMSELVES unfit, they are crucified for it. Waiting until something really bad happens, i.e. the only time the State can take a child away, is much, much too late.
Also, from what I've read--not here, in the news stories--the place she adopted this child from told her that this kid had no unusual medical/behavioral problems.
However, I still stand by my statement that the mother was whackadoodle in the way she let this child go. In fact, I think it speaks volumes to her state of mind, which provides even more support to the fact that maybe she wasn't fit as a mother to this particular boy.
I have a relative who gave up her two-year old son for adoption when she realized that she was very close to harming him. I met him about ten years ago, and from all accounts, he grew up in a stable home and is now a happy, healthy adult. Thank goodness she gave him up, because I'm not sure how he would have fared otherwise. (Although many in our family decided she was the worst human being in the world to have given him up at 2, rather than at birth.)