Haitian orphan rant ...

[vespergirl]

I have very mixed feelings about the missionaries who tried to get the orphans out of Haiti. First of all, let me say that I think that human trafficing should be illegal, and these people should have followed the rules before trying to take these kids out of the country.

However ...

Let''s not pretend that the people of Haiti were doing a stellar job of taking care of it''s child citizens before the earthquake. Honestly, if I think that one good thing could come out of the earthquake, it''s getting as many children out of Haiti as possible.

Before the earthquake, Haiti had a population of nearly 10 million - 400K of which were orphans. Most of these children weren''t true orphans, just children that their parents gave away because they had more children than they were able or willing to take care of - just like the ones in the current "abduction" case. The luckiest of these children made it to orphanages run by Americans, Canadians, and various foreign church groups. The less lucky ones were left to live on the streets and eat mud to survive. The very worst off were the "restaveks" children that were sold into slave labor (and often sexual slavery) by their own parents. Kind of ironic from a country that was founded by wanting to be rid of slavery. I guess Haitians really don''t have a problem with slavery, as long as it''s only the kids that have to do the dirty work.

There were no Haitians that were trying to help or care for these poor children - their own government (and families) failed them time and again. Since their revolution, Haitians have been dependent on developed Western countries for everything (in fact, many Haitians are currently begging the US to come in and take over their country). The US has been giving them over $100 million in foreign aid every year, yet the children in that country were still working as slaves and eating mud. So I don''t have a lot of faith in the Haitian government to resolve the problem, and apparently, neither did the parents of the children who willingly gave their children away to the American missionaries and asked them to take them out of Haiti.

It''s unbelievable to me that with everything else that the Haitian government is supposed to be taking care of right now (even though the US govt. is actually doing everything) they are focusing their attention on a handful of good Samaritans who are trying to rescue a couple of kids and give them a fighting chance at life. Yes, the missionaries were stupid to break the rules, but I think it''s totally hypocritical of the Haitian govt. to pretend to give a crap about it''s orphans now.

OK, I will get off my soapbox now ...

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

Vesper, do you perhaps have a link? I''m not familiar with this particular issue, but I''d love to read up a bit so I understand where you''re coming from better.

 

[vespergirl]

Sorry HH, here''s a link about the American missionaries who are being held in prison ... again, I don''t condone what they did at all, trafficing is trafficing, but I do believe that since the parents of these children gave them to the Americans and begged them to get them out of Haiti, it''s not a totally black & white issue ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35235514/ns/world_news-haiti_earthquake/

 

[vespergirl]

Here''s some info on restavecs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restavec

 

[kenny]

I'm sure they meant well but regardless of how appalling the conditions are, rules and proper procedures must be followed.

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

Date: 2/4/2010 7:24:07 PM
Author: kenny
I''m sure they meant well but regardless of how appalling the conditions rules and proper procedures must be followed.

Exactly!

Thanks for posting Vesper.

 

[Burberrygirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 7:29:27 PM
Author: Hudson_Hawk

Date: 2/4/2010 7:24:07 PM
Author: kenny
I''m sure they meant well but regardless of how appalling the conditions rules and proper procedures must be followed.

Exactly!

Thanks for posting Vesper.

Yep, I agree.

 

[winternight]

Part of the reason that government want rules and procedures to be followed is to try to prevent trafficking in children, so while these particular people might have meant well I shudder to think of the types of people that might take advantage without rules and procedures in place.

I also think the tone of your post towards Haitians is neither kind, nor fair. Especially the part about them as a group being ok with slavery. I''ve grew up knowning many people from Haiti and frankly I''ve found them to be among the nicest people I''ve met. I''m sure you didn''t mean to be so harsh but consider the effect your words could have on someone.

 

[yssie]

Ditto this - laws are laws, and they''re there for a reason - it''s not up to independents to decide which of those laws they want to follow at any given time, no matter what the intentions.


It''s also incredibly unfair, rude and bigoted to stereotype an entire nation of people as "uncaring and unconcerned with their children''s welfare" because of the actions of a few. Acknowledge that there is a problem, denounce the truly appalling choices of that few, but don''t try to generalize that "Haitians really don''t have a problem with slavery, as long as it''s only the kids that have to do the dirty work"

 

[swingirl]

Here is another article called How to Buy a Child in 10 Hours about child slavery in Haiti.

 

[swimmer]

I agree that protocol must be followed with the orphans, do-gooders who leap into action and think later frequently cause great harm.

Regarding the comments about Haiti's origination Vesper, it is good to remember that Haiti is the poorest country in the western hemisphere because of European imperialism, not because of anything the current Haitians have done.


" The appalling state of the country is a direct result of having offended a quite different celestial authority -- the French. France gained the western third of the island of Hispaniola -- the territory that is now Haiti -- in 1697. It planted sugar and coffee, supported by an unprecedented increase in the importation of African slaves. Economically, the result was a success, but life as a slave was intolerable. Living conditions were squalid, disease was rife, and beatings and abuses were universal. The slaves’ life expectancy was 21 years. After a dramatic slave uprising that shook the western world, and 12 years of war, Haiti finally defeated Napoleon’s forces in 1804 and declared independence. But France demanded reparations: 150m francs, in gold.

For Haiti, this debt did not signify the beginning of freedom, but the end of hope. Even after it was reduced to 60m francs in the 1830s, it was still far more than the war-ravaged country could afford. Haiti was the only country in which the ex-slaves themselves were expected to pay a foreign government for their liberty. By 1900, it was spending 80% of its national budget on repayments. In order to manage the original reparations, further loans were taken out -- mostly from the United States, Germany and France. Instead of developing its potential, this deformed state produced a parade of nefarious leaders, most of whom gave up the insurmountable task of trying to fix the country and looted it instead. In 1947, Haiti finally paid off the original reparations, plus interest. Doing so left it destitute, corrupt, disastrously lacking in investment and politically volatile. Haiti was trapped in a downward spiral, from which it is still impossible to escape. It remains hopelessly in debt to this day."


Times Link Indeed, it is Malthusian catastrophe personified.

 

[meresal]

These missionaries are why people don''t like Americans, for being arrogant... and to be honest, I think they made us look worse as a nation.

Just a reminder that there are Americans that actually BELIEVE that just because they think "we know better" and have the funds, that we can travel to another country and do whatever we want. Not cool.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 7:34:02 PM
Author: winternight
Part of the reason that government want rules and procedures to be followed is to try to prevent trafficking in children, so while these particular people might have meant well I shudder to think of the types of people that might take advantage without rules and procedures in place.

I also think the tone of your post towards Haitians is neither kind, nor fair. Especially the part about them as a group being ok with slavery. I''ve grew up knowning many people from Haiti and frankly I''ve found them to be among the nicest people I''ve met. I''m sure you didn''t mean to be so harsh but consider the effect your words could have on someone.

It''s because I care about the Haitian kids that I''m so appalled by the restavec culture in Haiti. I agree that most Haitian people as individuals are warm and good - I grew up in NYC, knew many Haitians who were very nice people, and was actually classmates with a girl whose mother had been a restavec. She had been physically and sexually abused as a child, and that is par for the course for the culture. Since there are around 250,000 child restavecs in Haiti, that does show me that the culture embraces child slavery, which I find appalling.

I just think it''s really hypocritical for the Haitian govt. to suddenly be all concerned about child welfare, and "worried" about foreigners taking advantage of Haitian children, when the WORST abuse and exploitation of Haitian children occurs in Haiti, and is an accepted part of a poor child''s life in Haiti. I''m not OK with a government that allows child slavery in it''s own country, but assumes that Americans are stealing kids to exploit them. We don''t have slavery in this country, unlike in Haiti, so I think that should be the least of their concerns right now.

 

[Burberrygirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 8:00:48 PM
Author: swingirl
Here is another article called How to Buy a Child in 10 Hours about child slavery in Haiti.

I read this book, A Crime So Monstrous: Face-to-Face with Modern-Day Slavery a few years ago in my Lit Appreciation class. One story really stuck out, it described a 1999 case in Florida about a Haitian girl who was kept as a slave and molested, link to SP Times article. In the book E. Benjamin Skinner gives various examples of modern-day slavery, it''s extremely sad but very informative.

 

[Burberrygirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 8:08:47 PM
Author: swimmer
I agree that protocol must be followed with the orphans, do-gooders who leap into action and think later frequently cause great harm.

Regarding the comments about Haiti's origination Vesper, it is good to remember that Haiti is the poorest country in the western hemisphere because of European imperialism, not because of anything the current Haitians have done.


' The appalling state of the country is a direct result of having offended a quite different celestial authority -- the French. France gained the western third of the island of Hispaniola -- the territory that is now Haiti -- in 1697. It planted sugar and coffee, supported by an unprecedented increase in the importation of African slaves. Economically, the result was a success, but life as a slave was intolerable. Living conditions were squalid, disease was rife, and beatings and abuses were universal. The slaves’ life expectancy was 21 years. After a dramatic slave uprising that shook the western world, and 12 years of war, Haiti finally defeated Napoleon’s forces in 1804 and declared independence. But France demanded reparations: 150m francs, in gold.

For Haiti, this debt did not signify the beginning of freedom, but the end of hope. Even after it was reduced to 60m francs in the 1830s, it was still far more than the war-ravaged country could afford. Haiti was the only country in which the ex-slaves themselves were expected to pay a foreign government for their liberty. By 1900, it was spending 80% of its national budget on repayments. In order to manage the original reparations, further loans were taken out -- mostly from the United States, Germany and France. Instead of developing its potential, this deformed state produced a parade of nefarious leaders, most of whom gave up the insurmountable task of trying to fix the country and looted it instead. In 1947, Haiti finally paid off the original reparations, plus interest. Doing so left it destitute, corrupt, disastrously lacking in investment and politically volatile. Haiti was trapped in a downward spiral, from which it is still impossible to escape. It remains hopelessly in debt to this day.'


Times Link Indeed, it is Malthusian catastrophe personified.

Swimmer, I'm glad you posted this information. Right now I'm learning about the effects of European imperialism in one of my history classes.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 8:08:47 PM
Author: swimmer
I agree that protocol must be followed with the orphans, do-gooders who leap into action and think later frequently cause great harm.

Regarding the comments about Haiti''s origination Vesper, it is good to remember that Haiti is the poorest country in the western hemisphere because of European imperialism, not because of anything the current Haitians have done.


'' The appalling state of the country is a direct result of having offended a quite different celestial authority -- the French. France gained the western third of the island of Hispaniola -- the territory that is now Haiti -- in 1697. It planted sugar and coffee, supported by an unprecedented increase in the importation of African slaves. Economically, the result was a success, but life as a slave was intolerable. Living conditions were squalid, disease was rife, and beatings and abuses were universal. The slaves’ life expectancy was 21 years. After a dramatic slave uprising that shook the western world, and 12 years of war, Haiti finally defeated Napoleon’s forces in 1804 and declared independence. But France demanded reparations: 150m francs, in gold.

For Haiti, this debt did not signify the beginning of freedom, but the end of hope. Even after it was reduced to 60m francs in the 1830s, it was still far more than the war-ravaged country could afford. Haiti was the only country in which the ex-slaves themselves were expected to pay a foreign government for their liberty. By 1900, it was spending 80% of its national budget on repayments. In order to manage the original reparations, further loans were taken out -- mostly from the United States, Germany and France. Instead of developing its potential, this deformed state produced a parade of nefarious leaders, most of whom gave up the insurmountable task of trying to fix the country and looted it instead. In 1947, Haiti finally paid off the original reparations, plus interest. Doing so left it destitute, corrupt, disastrously lacking in investment and politically volatile. Haiti was trapped in a downward spiral, from which it is still impossible to escape. It remains hopelessly in debt to this day.''


Times Link Indeed, it is Malthusian catastrophe personified.

Swimmer, I am familiar with Haiti''s history, and it''s debt issues.

However, since 1973, the United States has been the world’s largest foreign aid donor to Haiti, which ranks among the world’s poorest countries. From 1990 to 2005, the U.S. sent $1.46 billion to Haiti in aid from development assistance and children''s health, through the Economic Support Fund, the U.S. food program, Peace Corps, and foreign military training (although that was only $4.6 million, with $3 million coming in 1995.) More recently, "In May 2008, the Bush administration announced that it would send an additional $25 million in emergency food aid to Haiti, bringing its total emergency contribution to $45 million... Congress provided $100 million for hurricane relief and reconstruction assistance for Haiti and other Caribbean countries in the FY 2009 continuing appropriations resolution, signed September 2008. Haiti received an estimated $287 million in regular appropriations for FY 2009."" (NRO)

During the 1990s, the U.S. government spent $100 million trying to improve Haiti''s police and justice systems, and had little to show for it.
After a decade of such aid, the nation''s law enforcement and courts remained corrupt and ineffectual, a 2000 Government Accountability Office report said.

From 2005 to 2007, the USA tried again, paying a contractor nearly $4 million to improve Haiti''s judicial system. There was "no measurable improvement," a government audit found.

Those programs were a small part of the river of foreign aid that has flowed into Haiti in recent decades, even as it has descended further into the depths of poverty and dysfunction.

After receiving $8.3 billion in foreign aid since 1969, Haiti is 25% poorer than it was in 1945, according to statistics compiled by Nicholas Eberstadt, an economist with the American Enterprise Institute. Even before the Jan. 12 earthquake that killed at least 100,000 people, three-quarters of Haiti''s 9 million people lived on less than $2 a day, the United Nations says.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-02-02-haiti-future_N.htm

The problem is that the Haitian government is so corrupt that the politicians line their pockets while the children starve in the streets. But now all of a sudden they are pretending to care about orphans.

 

[swimmer]

Vesper, we totally agree on the inefficacy of the Haitian govt. I'm glad that your tone was directed to the govt. alone and not to the disenfranchised populace. Your original post sort of jumped between Haitians in general and the govt. when it seems you meant only to condemn the govt. Sorry I missed that.

 

[purrfectpear]

Sorry, but the Americans were wrong. Period.

There are abused children in many, many countries (even here in America). Where is the line drawn if good intentions justify illegal actions? Should I smuggle starving Indian toddlers living in the streets of Calcutta? Should I take a family out of the hills of Appalachia because they are going to bed hungry and I know I can provide better nutrition and private schooling? What about underage prostitutes in the Philippines - should I rescue them without the benefit of a visa? Since I have money and the destitute do not, I should just decide my country is a better place to live, no?

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 9:26:05 PM
Author: swimmer
Vesper, we totally agree on the inefficacy of the Haitian govt. I''m glad that your tone was directed to the govt. alone and not to the disenfranchised populace. Your original post sort of jumped between Haitians in general and the govt. when it seems you meant only to condemn the govt. Sorry I missed that.

Sorry if I came off harsh on the Haitian people - I feel really bad for them, but I do have a problem with a culture that views kids as being so dispensable. I know that it''s not most Haitians, but it seems that the govt. and even many citizens seem indifferent to children''s welfare in that country, and are OK with exploiting children as free slave labor - either by keeping restavecs, or selling their own children into the system.

Regarding the orphans in question, the ones that were being smuggled into the DR, I saw several interviews with their parents on TV, where the parents said that they had no means to take care of the kids, and willingly handed their children over to the missionaries so that they could go to the orphanage in the DR. In fact, many parents said that they would have sent more children with them, if there had only been room on the bus. It seems that these Americans were trying to do what they could to help these families, while the Haitian govt. has never done anything for them, but now they are spending resources to focus on prosecuting these people - it''s maddening. Do I really think that these kids have a better future staying in Haiti? No way. The child welfare system there was already non-existent, so perhaps this was their one chance to escape an awful future - I would love to see what the govt. does for these kids one month, one year, five years down the line ...

 

[meresal]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:20:41 PM
Author: vespergirl


Sorry if I came off harsh on the Haitian people - I feel really bad for them, but I do have a problem with a culture that views kids as being so dispensable. I know that it's not most Haitians, but it seems that the govt. and even many citizens seem indifferent to children's welfare in that country, and are OK with exploiting children as free slave labor - either by keeping restavecs, or selling their own children into the system.

Regarding the orphans in question, the ones that were being smuggled into the DR, I saw several interviews with their parents on TV, where the parents said that they had no means to take care of the kids, and willingly handed their children over to the missionaries so that they could go to the orphanage in the DR. In fact, many parents said that they would have sent more children with them, if there had only been room on the bus. It seems that these Americans were trying to do what they could to help these families, while the Haitian govt. has never done anything for them, but now they are spending resources to focus on prosecuting these people - it's maddening. Do I really think that these kids have a better future staying in Haiti? No way. The child welfare system there was already non-existent, so perhaps this was their one chance to escape an awful future - I would love to see what the govt. does for these kids one month, one year, five years down the line ...

Vesper- Here is a question I have in the back of my head... how did these particular Hatian parents, with these kids that they "wanted" to give up *(taking your word for it), find these American missionaries that were so willing to smuggle them? That doesn't seem odd to you at all? Why wouldn't these children have been up for adoption if the families really wanted to get rid of them? (Were they?)

In my eyes, the problem is not with the families that apparently wanted to "help" their children, it is with the American's that went there with the intention to undermine a government that is not their own.

Just because our citizens are wealtier than theirs, and our government gives Haiti money, doesn't make each of our citizens any less immune to their political/judicial system. These American's broke a law in another country. Why would there be any different outcome?

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:34:47 PM
Author: meresal

Date: 2/4/2010 10:20:41 PM
Author: vespergirl


Sorry if I came off harsh on the Haitian people - I feel really bad for them, but I do have a problem with a culture that views kids as being so dispensable. I know that it''s not most Haitians, but it seems that the govt. and even many citizens seem indifferent to children''s welfare in that country, and are OK with exploiting children as free slave labor - either by keeping restavecs, or selling their own children into the system.

Regarding the orphans in question, the ones that were being smuggled into the DR, I saw several interviews with their parents on TV, where the parents said that they had no means to take care of the kids, and willingly handed their children over to the missionaries so that they could go to the orphanage in the DR. In fact, many parents said that they would have sent more children with them, if there had only been room on the bus. It seems that these Americans were trying to do what they could to help these families, while the Haitian govt. has never done anything for them, but now they are spending resources to focus on prosecuting these people - it''s maddening. Do I really think that these kids have a better future staying in Haiti? No way. The child welfare system there was already non-existent, so perhaps this was their one chance to escape an awful future - I would love to see what the govt. does for these kids one month, one year, five years down the line ...

Vesper- Here is a question I have in the back of my head... how did these particular Hatian parents, with these kids that they ''wanted'' to give up *(taking your word for it), find these American missionaries that were so willing to smuggle them? That doesn''t seem odd to you at all? Why wouldn''t these children have been up for adoption if the families really wanted to get rid of them? (Were they?)

In my eyes, the problem is not with the families that apparently wanted to ''help'' their children, it is with the American''s that went there with the intention to undermine a government that is not their own.

Just because our citizens are wealtier than theirs, and our government gives Haiti money, doesn''t make each of our citizens any less immune to their political/judicial system. These American''s broke a law in another country. Why would there be any different outcome?

Hey there, this quote is from the article on msnbc that I linked above:

"Most of the children came from the quake-ravaged village of Callebas, where residents told The Associated Press that they handed over their children to the Americans because they were unable to feed or clothe them after the earthquake. They said the missionaries promised to educate the children and let relatives visit."

I became aware of the story this morning when I saw it featured on the news networks (CNN & NBC). The reporter was interviewing a dad who said that he willingly handed over his two daughters, because he was told they were being brought to an orphanage in the DR. He said that he was currently living in a tent, with no food or water for them, and he wanted them to be taken care of.

As I originally stated, I do think that the Americans went about it the wrong way, but I feel that it''s a grey issue, because they were providing food, clothing, medical attention, and help to these children, which the Haitian govt. hasn''t provided to any of its people since the earthquake occurred. From the parents that I saw interviewed on TV, they seemed eager to get their children into a safe place, and when their own govt. failed them, they turned to the American missionaries. Now those same people are being prosecuted for trying to help ...

You mentioned that the Americans went there to undermine the Haitian govt. - I think that their intention was to help children. Honestly, if the Haitians are so resentful of American interference in their issues, then why are they holding their hands out to the American govt. & citizens for help in their time of crisis? You can''t have it both ways ... I gladly donated to the Red Cross right after the earthquake, because I feel that Haiti needs humanitarian help from groups like them and Doctors Without Borders. But it is a fact that the govt. is incredibly corrupt, and most of the aid that we send never reaches the suffering Haitian people who really need it.

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:20:41 PM
Author: vespergirl


Regarding the orphans in question, the ones that were being smuggled into the DR, I saw several interviews with their parents on TV, where the parents said that they had no means to take care of the kids, and willingly handed their children over to the missionaries so that they could go to the orphanage in the DR. In fact, many parents said that they would have sent more children with them, if there had only been room on the bus. It seems that these Americans were trying to do what they could to help these families, while the Haitian govt. has never done anything for them, but now they are spending resources to focus on prosecuting these people - it''s maddening. Do I really think that these kids have a better future staying in Haiti? No way. The child welfare system there was already non-existent, so perhaps this was their one chance to escape an awful future - I would love to see what the govt. does for these kids one month, one year, five years down the line ...

I understand your frustration, but what you''re arguing is essentially that two wrongs make a right -- that because the Haitian government is ineffective in this area, it''s OK to disregard its laws. On a less philosophical note I think the larger problem is that there are probably groups out there who are looking for an opportunity to exploit the situation so they can exploit the children. The law, however two-faced it might appear, is intended to prevent that.

There are groups within Haiti that are set up to facilitate adoptions while working within Haitian law and international law. The Haitian government has been expediting adoptions that were in the pipeline -- which presumably means that the necessary family clearances have taken place both in Haiti and in the receiving country. The missionary group could have provided support to one of these groups instead of just acting on their own...

 

[meresal]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:50:22 PM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 2/4/2010 10:34:47 PM
Author: meresal

Date: 2/4/2010 10:20:41 PM
Author: vespergirl


Sorry if I came off harsh on the Haitian people - I feel really bad for them, but I do have a problem with a culture that views kids as being so dispensable. I know that it's not most Haitians, but it seems that the govt. and even many citizens seem indifferent to children's welfare in that country, and are OK with exploiting children as free slave labor - either by keeping restavecs, or selling their own children into the system.

Regarding the orphans in question, the ones that were being smuggled into the DR, I saw several interviews with their parents on TV, where the parents said that they had no means to take care of the kids, and willingly handed their children over to the missionaries so that they could go to the orphanage in the DR. In fact, many parents said that they would have sent more children with them, if there had only been room on the bus. It seems that these Americans were trying to do what they could to help these families, while the Haitian govt. has never done anything for them, but now they are spending resources to focus on prosecuting these people - it's maddening. Do I really think that these kids have a better future staying in Haiti? No way. The child welfare system there was already non-existent, so perhaps this was their one chance to escape an awful future - I would love to see what the govt. does for these kids one month, one year, five years down the line ...

Vesper- Here is a question I have in the back of my head... how did these particular Hatian parents, with these kids that they 'wanted' to give up *(taking your word for it), find these American missionaries that were so willing to smuggle them? That doesn't seem odd to you at all? Why wouldn't these children have been up for adoption if the families really wanted to get rid of them? (Were they?)

In my eyes, the problem is not with the families that apparently wanted to 'help' their children, it is with the American's that went there with the intention to undermine a government that is not their own.

Just because our citizens are wealtier than theirs, and our government gives Haiti money, doesn't make each of our citizens any less immune to their political/judicial system. These American's broke a law in another country. Why would there be any different outcome?

Hey there, this quote is from the article on msnbc that I linked above:

'Most of the children came from the quake-ravaged village of Callebas, where residents told The Associated Press that they handed over their children to the Americans because they were unable to feed or clothe them after the earthquake. They said the missionaries promised to educate the children and let relatives visit.'

I became aware of the story this morning when I saw it featured on the news networks (CNN & NBC). The reporter was interviewing a dad who said that he willingly handed over his two daughters, because he was told they were being brought to an orphanage in the DR. He said that he was currently living in a tent, with no food or water for them, and he wanted them to be taken care of.

As I originally stated, I do think that the Americans went about it the wrong way, but I feel that it's a grey issue, because they were providing food, clothing, medical attention, and help to these children, which the Haitian govt. hasn't provided to any of its people since the earthquake occurred. From the parents that I saw interviewed on TV, they seemed eager to get their children into a safe place, and when their own govt. failed them, they turned to the American missionaries. Now those same people are being prosecuted for trying to help ...

You mentioned that the Americans went there to undermine the Haitian govt. - I think that their intention was to help children. Honestly, if the Haitians are so resentful of American interference in their issues, then why are they holding their hands out to the American govt. & citizens for help in their time of crisis? You can't have it both ways ... I gladly donated to the Red Cross right after the earthquake, because I feel that Haiti needs humanitarian help from groups like them and Doctors Without Borders. But it is a fact that the govt. is incredibly corrupt, and most of the aid that we send never reaches the suffering Haitian people who really need it.

I understand. I guess I just feel like this is why we have Red Cross and other Aid organizations, to do the work with the citizens. Unfortunately this is happening in a country where the supplies aren't getting to the needy... however, IMO, that does not mean that we as American citizens should pack our bags and go help in the tent communities and on the streets of Haiti. Becuase this is what happens. You see the hurt and the anger and the starvation and you can't say no. Then you end up in trouble for "trying to help".

Their government, in many ways, is obviously not what we all approve of, but it is their government. IMO, it has to be respected when you are there.

ETA: +1 to PP. They have adoption agencies to help their citizens. It is not missionaries jobs to step in, which is my main point and which you also agree with.

 

[Should Be Studying]

Date: 2/4/2010 10:50:22 PM
Author: vespergirl

You mentioned that the Americans went there to undermine the Haitian govt. - I think that their intention was to help children. Honestly, if the Haitians are so resentful of American interference in their issues, then why are they holding their hands out to the American govt. & citizens for help in their time of crisis? You can't have it both ways ... I gladly donated to the Red Cross right after the earthquake, because I feel that Haiti needs humanitarian help from groups like them and Doctors Without Borders. But it is a fact that the govt. is incredibly corrupt, and most of the aid that we send never reaches the suffering Haitian people who really need it.

Hi!

I am a little confused about your comments here, because I can't figure out who is resentful, and who exactly is "holding their hands out." Regardless, I don't think it seems fair to say that people's donations give them a right to do as they please. Although I also have mixed feelings about what is going on with this missionary situation, child trafficking IS a huge concern in Haiti, and you can't just believe everything you see on the news. Who knows if those were really their parents, because all government records have pretty much been lost. My point is that this particular situation may be emotional, but shipping children out of a country so hastily is not the best solution right now. It may feel good to say that from here (because who wants to see children suffer?) but for those who may not really be orphans, or for those who may really be victims of trafficking, the line must be drawn now.

I think it is clear that America has done an incredible job of giving support to Haiti in this time of need. At the same time, so have so many other countries! The WORLD has come together to help this country, because this natural disaster is one of the worst we have ever seen.

ETA: Sorry, I see from reading other posts that you are using the word Haitians to refer to the government. I think you've touched on just some of the problems with the Haitian government, and it is sad that the people have suffered and will continue to suffer as a result of their corruption and inefficiency. I hope this creates the opportunity for a real government to emerge, because the Haitian people need it. At the same time, I don't think that the Haitian government is being allowed to touch any of the donations that are coming in at this points, as the NGOs are handling them.

 

[Mrs Mitchell]

This story disturbed me. Where would these children would have ended up?

Anyone who has adopted a child will know that every aspect of a prospective adopter''s life is scrutinised. Adoptive parents must satisfy legal criteria and will be assessed to determine their suitability to care for an adopted child. There may also be long term monitoring and support post-adoption (in some countries). I''m not saying that system is perfect or foolproof, but it is there for a reason.

If children are taken unlawfully from their country, presumably they will be entering the host country unlawfully too. I would fear that this puts them outside the care and protection that lawful adoption procedures would give them. Where would they end up? With a loving family who will give them a wonderful life, or in an expoitative, abusive situation, with few of their needs met, in a foreign land? I can''t answer that question (obviously) but the situation has the potential to cause at least an equal amount of misery for these little ones in the long term.

Even in the best case scenario, if a child ends up with a loving family, placing a child for adoption privately would be illegal in the UK, don''t know how it would be in the US. Here, the adults who adopted unlawfully would be prosecuted and would be unable to acquire parental rights over the child. The child would become the responsibility of the local authority, which does not guarantee a happy outcome.

 

[meresal]

Mrs Mitchell, you kind of touched on another aspect that crossed my mind last night after climbing into bed...

Let say the American''s did get these children into the DR. Where were they going? Did they already have an agency lined up? Which would be ever more incriminating. If they didn''t have an agency lined up, and maybe it doesn''t work like here in the US, but what adoption agency is going to take on 33 children with no papers? How can these American''s promise that they will have a better life in the DR? Just because it isn''t Haiti?

I was watching the news this morning and now one of the lawyers is saying that 9 or 10 of the American''s didn''t "realize" what they had agreed to by going into Haiti. Whether that is believable is to be told. I''m a bit of a conspiracy theorist when it comes to certain situations, but I still believe that this whole was planned before even leaving the states. Mayeb not the kids that they were going to take, but I have a feeling that at least a bit of that missionary group was traveling to Haiti to "help" children escape.

 

[dragonfly411]

I have to agree that they were probably well intentioned (and in all likelihood very ill informed) folks who wanted to help but didn''t go about things properly and now here they are.

 

[janinegirly]

I agree that rules are rules and even if the offenders seem well intentioned, you cannot differentiate who gets a pass on the established processes based on perceived intentions or how generous their country of origin has been. And like PP said (what, I''m agreeing with her?)--Haiti is one of hundreds of poor nations with heartbreaking conditions for their children--the US cannot save them all and individual citizens/organizations should not assume they know what needs to be done and act upon it unilaterally as they please! Yes it is ironic that the Haiti government is in disarray (with prisoners running amuck)--yet it found the wherewithal to arrest these individuals---but that''s all the more reason these particular people should not have put themselves in that predicament to start with.

However I also do not agree with the blanket statement that Haiti is in the predicament it has been due to European imperialism--you cannot ignore history but each nation must also accept accountability for present conditions particularly in cases where they have been self-ruled for sometime (with extensive aid from the US).

 

[risingsun]

Date: 2/5/2010 11:45:20 AM
Author: dragonfly411
I have to agree that they were probably well intentioned (and in all likelihood very ill informed) folks who wanted to help but didn''t go about things properly and now here they are.

I agree with dragonfly, but I would like to know who is going to actually help these children. Will a corrupt government fulfill their obligations after all these years of failure and/or disinterest.

 

[Mrs Mitchell]

Sadly, probably no one will help them. As a mother, it breaks my heart.

However, had these people succeeded in taking them out of the country, as I said in my last post on this thread, who would help them then? I'm a little cynical about the intention behind this. When I worked in child protection, we had two cases of 'orphans' rescued from other countries in crisis. They were not happy stories and these children swapped one form of misery for another.