Visit to Gyumri orphanages and schools #HumanTrafficking

Y CATHERINE YESAYAN

On my train ride to Gyumri, where I was planning to stay for a week to look back to the devastating earthquake of thirty years ago, I sat next to a young mother with her two small kids, traveling to Gyumri to stay for the weekend with family.

Her name was Tamara. I started a conversation with her. I wanted to know about her experience during the earthquake. She was born and raised in Gyumri. She gave me a piece of information that I was not aware of. She said that three years after the earthquake, Great Britain built a school in Gyumri where she attended. The school was named after the poet Lord Byron.

A historical side note: The school was named Lord Byron, because Byron had shown affection for the Armenian culture. In 1816 at the age of 28, Lord Byron had arrived in San Lazzaro Island in Venice, Italy, where the Armenian Mkhitarian fathers had established a prominent center of Armenian studies and culture, and he had plunged into the study of the Armenian language.

Tamara added, “The school was built with the latest technology of the time. It had solar power and during the years between 1991-94 known as the dark years, when Armenia was the throes of the Karabakh war and there was no electricity, and no school in all of Armenia had power, only the Byron School enjoyed electricity.”

Following the 1988 earthquake, all kinds of help from all over the world poured into the country. However, Britain was the first country to erect a school in Gyumri. Later French and German governments rebuilt schools with their respective language emersion.

Prime Minister Margaret Tatcher at the opening ceremony of the Byron school talking to the school kids

Schools in Armenia have language inclinations, meaning some are taught Russian as second language, some French or German and so on. Also the schools are known by numbers. The Byron school which originally was the #20 school in Gyumri, had English as the language emersion.

During the earthquake the original #20 school was hit hard and had toppled, killing 40 students and staff. However, there were a few other schools which had lost three or even four hundred souls.

The five million sterling Pound to build the school was provided partly by the British government and partly by donations raised by the British people and the Armenian community of England. The entire fundraising activity was coordinated by Mr. Kyurkdjian, an Armenian benefactor living in England.

I visited Lord Byron school with my host, Varduhi. There I had the chance to meet with the principle of the school. He gave me a thorough history on the school.

Schools in Armenia are built on multiple levels, however the Byron school, contrary to the norm, was constructed in a single level. At the entrance of the school, the bust of Lord Byron was placed with an inscription.

The author (center) with the principal and vice-principal of the Lord Byron school

The principal said all the building material, the furnishings, the computers, the books and the labor were exported from the United Kingdom. He described how everything had been shipped by boat to the Persian Gulf and from there via land, through Iran, to Armenia and then to Gyumri.

The Byron school opened its doors on June 10, 1990. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom at the time, Margaret Thatcher, attended the opening ceremony. It was her first trip to the Soviet Union. They named the street that the school was on, Margaret Thatcher.
***
On the same day on August 20, after visiting the Byron school, I visited the Terchoonian orphanage in Gyumri. There I met with Sona Simonyan, who has been the director of the orphanage since the day the facility was re-opened fifteen years ago.

I found the orphanage extremely organized and very well maintained. It was a few days before the start of the school and the fresh smell of paint indicated that the school was newly painted and about to open.

Although I had not made a prior arrangement with Sona Simonyan to meet, she welcomed me and allocated enough time to go over the details and answer all the questions I had about the school.

The site of Terchounian Orphanage, which in Armenian is called “Home for Kids,” is steeped in history. Originally the building was built in 1830 to serve as a base for the Russian Army. In the early 20th century, the Near East Relief chose the site to operate an orphanage. Later the building reverted to a military headquarter for the Soviet army.

During the 1988 earthquake, the building was heavily damaged. Thanks to Mr. Terchoonian’s bequest, and the hard work and dedication of men such as the late Archbishop Mesrob Ashjian and Romen Gozmoyan, the orphanage was revived.

Sona Simonyan, the director of the Terchoonian orphanage

The Terchoonian Orphanage of Gyumri, re-opened its doors in the fall of 2003, fifteen years after the earthquake. This was made possible by the generous donation of $350,000 by the family of the late Vahan Terchoonian, to establish a “home for Kids” in Gyumri. Today the orphanage is sustained by the Herman Khenderian Foundation in Detroit.

This was the same orphanage that Mr. Terchoonian as a child had found refuge after escaping the massacres of the Ottoman Empire. He eventually immigrated to the United States.

The name Terchoonian can be translated into “Not having an owner.” Mr. Terchoonian had chosen that name for himself because he had no one in the world.

At present, the orphanage caters to 90 kids— 50 kids stay overnight. There are 53 staff and 27 teachers.

Today there are two more orphanages in Gyumri. One is for handicapped children and the other is managed by the Catholic Charities.

The Armenian Genocide, which took place at the end of the Ottoman Empire in the early years of 20th century, sent waves of refugees from Turkey towards the East. Gyumri is within a close proximity—only 10 miles— East of the border of Turkey, in Armenia, thus a large number of victims fleeing from the mass killings could reach Gyumri and find refuge there. The orphanage was operated by the Near East Relief.

The Near East Relief (NER) was founded in 1919 to raise necessary funds to take care of people who had flown mass killings from the Ottoman Empire.

The NER produced many posters, through which the organization could reach people and raise awareness about the misfortunes happening to Armenian people during those days.

Fortunately, the collection of those posters still exists. One of the iconic posters is a photo of the Terchoonian orphanage, in the early 1900s, where the students have lined up on the grounds of the orphanage and have spelled out the words: “AMERICA WE THANK YOU” that was captured in an aerial shot.

On the walls of the school/orphanage, I saw many pictures from the early 1900s. One of the pictures was that iconic picture that depicts “America We Thank You.”

This humanitarian effort of Near East Relief gained momentum when the American ambassador in Constantinople, Henry Morgenthau, wrote a report detailing the genocide of the Armenian people in Turkey. On October 22, 1916, President Woodrow Wilson urged the American people to make contributions to help Armenians in distress.

The Near East Relief saved the lives of 132,000 orphans who were placed in different facilities.

The NER also mobilized the American people to raise over $116 million, in today’s dollars equivalent to $1.25 Billion.

This research about the earthquake expanded my knowledge and I learned facts that I was not aware of. I did it with love, and I hope you enjoyed reading my reflections.

HRD staffers make unannounced visit to Gyumri's schools and orphanages #HumantTrafficking

Armenia’s Human Rights Defender’s Office, in a statement released today, says that staffers of its Children’s Protection Unit made unannounced visits to the Gyumri #3 Special School, to the Gyumri Fridtjof Nansen Children’s Home, and the Gyumri Trchunyan orphanage last week.  

The staffers inspected conditions in these facilities and talked to children and teachers about problems they face.

https://hetq.am/en/article/99488

Why International Adoption is decreasing, the adoption agencies have themselves to blame for trafficking #HopscotchAdoptions

In a recent flurry of articles, the National Council for Adoption asserts that the State Department is responsible for the plummeting number of intercountry adoptions. They are wrong. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

There are a multitude of reasons international adoptions to the United States and all other receiving countries have declined. Foreign governments have moved, in many cases, to bolster their own child welfare programs. But as they make progress they have also become concerned about what they increasingly view as lax practices by U.S. adoption service providers (ASPs) and inadequate regulation by federal and state child welfare agencies.

Statistics from the U.S. Department of State.

Susan Jacobs, former Special Advisor to the Office of Children’s Issues at the U.S. State Department. Photo courtesy of Jacobs.

The unfortunate practice of unregulated custody transfer, more commonly referred to as “rehoming,” has become the focus of major concern for sending countries, as well as the State Department. Guatemala, Cambodia, Ethiopia and Nepal have all closed their intercountry adoption programs due to concerns about child trafficking as well as rehoming and other questionable practices by ASPs. The U.S. Department of Justice has successfully prosecuted more than one ASP for criminal activity, but concerns remain.

Russian adoption is a particularly troublesome issue. Russian children have been overrepresented in child fatality and abuse statistics. In one notorious rehoming case, an American adoptive mother put her Russian adopted son on a flight back to Moscow with a one-way ticket.

Ultimately, Russia’s closure was out of the State Department’s hands when Russia chose to close intercountry adoptions in retaliation to U.S. Congress’ passage of the Magnitsky Act.

Maureen Flatley, consultant specializing in adoption and child welfare policy. Photo courtesy of Flatley.

While individual states have struggled with the best path to end this dangerous practice, Congress is advancing a bill to clearly define rehoming as child endangerment to ensure consistent implementation across the country. The passage of the Safe Home Act sponsored by Rep. Jim Langevin, (D-R.I.), and Rep. Donald Bacon (R-Neb.) would send a strong message to foreign governments that the U.S. takes the safety and well-being of their children seriously.

There have been a number of high-profile fatalities of children adopted from other countries. Hyunsu O’Callahan from Korea, Sherin Matthews from India and Hana Williams from Ethiopia all died after careless home studies, lax supervision and non-existent or fraudulent post-placement reporting. Even one case like this is too many. But for sending countries, the aggregation of child fatality and near fatality data has resulted in serious and growing concerns. Foreign countries look to the United States for stronger, more consistent home study standards and more effective supervision.

Another challenge is that some countries, including South Korea, have made it clear that the failure of the U.S. government to ensure full citizenship for adoptees is unacceptable. The failure of the U.S. government to protect adoptees not covered by the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 has eroded confidence in the United States as a destination for their children. More than 50,000 adoptees who came to this country prior to the enactment of the bill are at risk of deportation. Unfortunately, the Adoptee Citizenship Act remains hostage to a process that confuses strengthening adoption policy with “weakening” immigration policy.

The causes of decline are not all bad, either. For many years, the State Department has led international efforts to promote ethical adoption standards around the world while these and other factors have driven numbers down. To a great extent, the decline in intercountry adoptions reflects changing practices in many countries from which Americans had historically adopted in great numbers. Domestic adoptions have increased in some countries like China, resulting in a decrease in international adoptions. This is a turn of events we should applaud and support, not simply view it through the eyes of frustrated American consumers of adoption services.

South Korea was the first country to send children to the United States for adoption and for many years sent the most children. However, in addition to South Korea’s concerns about adoptee citizenship and for a variety of other reasons, over the last few years that country has reduced the number of adoptions by 10 percent every year as they embrace more progressive child welfare practices. A number of high profile deportation cases involving Korean adoptees – one of whom, Philip Clay, committed suicide outside of a Korean government office – have galvanized Korea’s concerns about our failure to take care of important policy details for adoptees. Meanwhile, other countries are watching these dynamics and further hardening their positions about adoption to the United States.

While all of these trends have played out, the State Department has worked diligently on a number of fronts to ensure ethical, appropriate adoption practice. Their diplomatic efforts have resulted in the reopening of Vietnam and efforts continue elsewhere. American diplomats around the world continue to communicate with countries interested in progressive child welfare policy, domestic adoption and intercountry adoption when appropriate. The consensus among academic and diplomatic experts is clear, however, that regulation by other countries – not the U.S. State Department – has contributed to the decline.

As these longstanding concerns grow around the world, we are now confronted with another set of circumstances that continue to undermine, rather than foster confidence in the United States as a partner in intercountry adoption and child welfare. It is almost impossible to imagine the outrage of governments like Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador and others who see firsthand the abuse of their children at our borders. The images of children in cages, babies sleeping on gravel under bridges and a deliberate family separation policy have done little to bolster confidence in our ability to ensure the safety, permanence and well-being of children from around the world who arrive here under various circumstances.

The notion that the State Department maintains “anti-adoption” policies that are “preventing Americans from becoming parents,” as the National Council for Adoption asserts, is both offensive and wrong. In fact, there are more than 100,000 American children legally free for adoption in the U.S. foster care system who would disagree as well. But as long as we ignore the real issues that have undermined intercountry adoption as a social practice, those problems will not be addressed.

The State Department’s efforts are a part of that solution. Congress must play a major role in addressing other concerns. Passage of bills to address unregulated custody transfers, adoptee citizenship, home study standards, post-placement supervision enforcement and the standing of border kids would go a long way toward building confidence with sending countries. In the meantime, the State Department can’t enforce policy that Congress does not generate.

Ambassador Susan Jacobs (ret.) was formerly the Special Advisor to the Office of Children’s Issues at the U.S. Department of State.

Maureen Flatley is a consultant specializing in adoption and child welfare policy.

https://chronicleofsocialchange.org/adoption/the-truth-about-intercountry-adoptions-decline