Intracountry adoption -There exept immigration!

I'm not sure you realize this - but only ONE of you is required to be a citizen in order to adopt internationally - the requirements are that the country you are adopting from is open to US Citizens adopting their children and the US Government allows it.I'm not sure what country your wife is from, so you may or may not be able to complete an international adoption from her country of origin, however the information you have is correct. In order for your wife to bring her adopted child to the US, she must reside with that adopted child outside of the US for 2 years.

Thank you, every bit of information helps. I cannot be involved in the adoption. They have two processes, one for citizens and another for "foreigners". They are fine that she is married to a US citizen, but if my name is added to the documents then we have to go through the other process, and basically that means a child with serious health issues, which we are not ready for. It is sounding more like we have a big decision to make. I saw an immigration lawyer yesterday but unfortunately he does not appear to have enough experience with foreign adoption situations and could not answer all my questions. For this particular situation I cannot be part of the initial adoption (foreigner). I am pretty sure I can get the courts there to allow me to adopt the child once my wife has finished the process, 6 months to a year afterward. But from everything I am reading the child then is not considered an "Orphan", and I can't find any indication that even a US citizen can do a non-orphan adoption and bring a child in. Everything seems to be setup for one type of international adoption only. Which would leave us to the 2 year requirement + the time it takes to process a family member immigration, which is at least 6 months and can even take a year or two. But all of this is is unusual and I am hoping to find someone who knows more about the possibilities. We hate to give up what is such a good option for us. We are very attached to the idea of adopting a child from her native country. And we are soooooo close!

Welcome to the world of international immigration restrictions, brought to you by politicians who use their opposition to immigration as a way to curry favor with voters. I don't see anything you can do - your spouse's children are under a different set of laws than "orphans." I think if you are not satisfied with your immigration lawyer, go to another one. However, from what I understand, there is going to be a really long wait ahead, no matter who your lawyer is.

This is devistating. We turned our whole lives on end to make this work and my wife had to quit her job. Which of course is a BIG deal these days. All this because of our stupid immigration laws! Otherwise everything is good and we are within weeks of a baby girl. My mom keeps telling me to call my senator, she is convinced they help constituents with stuff like this. I have a hard time beliving they will as I am sure this is not the first couple this has happened to. I have not told my wife yet. She mentioned going to see the little girl this morning. Ouch. That is going to be the worst part. She is going to be devastated.

I am not aware of any country that will allow your wife to adopt as a single, if you are legally married. The issue is NOT with U.S. immigration. Around the world, single people living with partners in an unmarried relationship cannot adopt as a couple, and legally married people cannot adopt as singles. When you adopt, you have to go through a homestudy and disclose all marriages and divorces. And both spouses must agree to the adoption and be able to create a welcoming home for a child.As a result, if you are married, you will either have to accept the rules of the foreign country, regarding whom you can adopt, or else you will have to adopt from another country, which will allow you to adopt a child of the age, gender, and health status that you wish. Do be aware, of course, that just because a child is listed as special needs, does not necessarily mean that the child has huge issues. In many countries, special needs means only something that would either be hard to treat in that country, though it would be easy in the U.S., or that a condition is considered stigmatizing in the foreign country, but not in the U.S.As an example, in some countries, a child with a big birthmark might face prejudice, because some folks will think he/she is "marked by the Devil." Or a child might have an extra toe, easily removed surgically. Or a boy might have an undescended testicle at birth, something that can be fixed very easily. It would be worth your while to look into what special needs are in the country of your choice. Things might not be as bad as they seem to you right now.Also, think about it. What is more important to you? Having a child to love? Or having a child that looks like she could have been conceived by you? Many, many families find that they can love children who are blonde, when they have dark hair, or dark haired when they are blonde. Many families adopt from countries halfway around the world, without any connection to those countries except for the willingness to teach their child to honor and respect both the culture of her birthland and the culture of her adoptive family's heritage.I do not know what ethnicity you have, but there may even be countries where you can adopt a child who looks very similar to you. As an example, a person of Romanian ancestry might choose to adopt a Russian child or a child from Kazakhstan or a child from Poland, because Romania is closed to foreign adoption. All of those countries allow adoption and would not require the couple to adopt a child with special needs, unless there were some other obstacles with regard to your family size, age, or whatever.Immigration is not really an issue. As long as one spouse is a U.S. citizen, you can bring an "eligible orphan" orphan into the U.S. immediately after adoption, assuming that you have a valid homestudy, meet the relatively simple requirements of your state of residence and the USCIS, and are doing an adoption that meets the requirements of the child's country of citizenship. If the other country has ratified the Hague Convention on international adoption, you will also have to meet Hague requirements. There is absolutely no need to live away from home for two years if you do an adoption that meets these requirements.Let me also suggest, if the ethnic origin of the child is important to you, that you look for such a child IN the U.S. If you adopt domesically, you will not have to deal with immigration, and since you are a citizen, you should not experience a lot of problems.There are children of many ethnicities in the foster care system, and if you work through a foster care agency in an area where there are many people of the desired ethnicity, you may have luck going that route. Adoptions through the foster care system are often free or very low cost. There are very few infants available, however, so you might have to consider an older child.A better option, if you are in a state that allows private adoption, is to use a social worker (not an agency) to do your homestudy, identify a birthmother on your own, and use an attorney to ensure that all contacts with the birthmother are legal (for example, in terms of paying only birthmother expenses allowed by law), to help you avoid scams, and to finalize the adoption in court.In U.S. communities with a high concentration of people of your ethnicity, there are bound to be pregnant women who do not feel that they can parent. As an example, they may be single in a culture that opposes premarital relationships, or they may feel that they don't have enough money to raise another child. Very often, local doctors know about these women, and could help you and your spouse identify a woman who desires to find good adoptive parents, of the same ethnicity. Other people in the community, even members of the clergy, might be able to help you. So if you are well-respected in the community, a little networking could well help you to identify a good adoption situation.All in all, you do NOT need to give up your dreams of parenting, or to cause marital problems by living apart, or to move overseas. You DO have options, and they are good ones. They may not be the options you initially considered, but if you really think things through, and really want to be parents, you can find ways of doing a legal and ethical adoption that gives you the child of your dreams.Sharon

Thank you for the information. Other cultures and governments don't always think "like us" and have other situations. In this case we *are* able to do this, I just had to sign a document that said I am ok with the adoption, apparently it is not completely unusual, and even done with some "foreign" adoptions, so there is at least one country that does this. I have seen the law that explicitly details it and the specifics of how we are adopting. As I said, the adoption is in her country as a national and will not be something you will be familiar with. If you are thinking this is not legal your observation is mistaken. It is unusual though, as most Americans adopt as Americans with a foreign country. Surely you saw in China that there are often laws or customs that applied differently to you as a foreigner in China, than may have applied to a Chinese citizen. That is just the way many of these countries work. Our difficulty is with the immigration system. It revolves around the term "ORPHAN" and it appears our girl would no longer fit the legal term when everything is done (she will have a legal parent), we have fulfilled our legal obligations, and my wife is ready to rejoin me. My mistake was in not understanding the distinction that immigration puts on "ORPHAN" vs "adopted" child. Americans apparently have no way to bring in an "adopted" child without living 2 years out of country, only an "ORPHANED" child. The laws appear to be written specifically for that type of situation. I suspect that many private adoptions in foreign countries that do not go through an orphanage stretch those terms. (on a side note I now understand what likely happened in Haiti, a loose use of the term "ORPHAN" probably worked in the past, only it got scrutiny). But this is all getting off topic. Thank you for the information. It appears we will not be doing this adoption. I just have to break it to my wife, which I dread. She will be heartbroken.

enjoyoutdoors - it seems to me that you are focusing on the child's orphan status AFTER the adoption is completed. Of course the child isn't an orphan at that point! But thousands of adoptions are done every year with the child moving to the USA after the adoption is already completed. They can do that because they were certified as orphans BEFORE the adoption happened. That's the point of all the USCIS paperwork - to show that the child is an orphan already, before the adoption. (Among other things.) It seems to me that you may just be going about this backwards. You have to do all the paperwork for immigration FIRST. Then adopt the child. Then bring the child to the USA. That's the reason the "traditional" way of doing international adoptions became the traditional way in the first place. Not because we love paperwork, but because it's the best and easiest way to satisfy all the legalities of adoption and immigration. There truly isn't a better or faster way available. So like sak9645 said - homestudy, follow USCIS requirements, follow Hague rules if the other country is party to them, then adopt the child who was already determined to be an "orphan", then bring the child to the USA. One thing to check before your wife adopts the child without you being party to the adoption - check the immigration paperwork and determine if you can sponsor the child to enter with the adoption visa if your wife is the parent - but you (the sponsor) - are not a parent. That might still be a hang up for you. But the definition of "orphan" not applying after the adoption isn't a hang up.

By the way, my wife and I did do a homestudy. But we shifted gears when we went there for a visit and were told we could do it this way. Please understand we did not set out to adopt this way. We were going for a traditional adoption and were just naive and thought the challenge was only in being "able to find a child and adopt". It seemed like the perfect situation given we really wanted to adopt from her country and we aren't exactly sitting on cash. I am pretty sure the orphan status won't transition. Our court documents will show that I adopted the child under my wife, not from the Orphanage. If I could adopt directly from the Orphanage we would just do that? It would be worth getting in touch with another lawyer, but it would have to be someone who has dealt with unusual situations like this. If anyone knows a good lawyer that has a lot of experience I definetly would appreciate a recommendation. I hope I do not sound defensive or argumentative. I am just getting a little worn out and depressed by all of this. But thank you for trying to help.

Yes, that is EXACTLY the issue we are hitting.

The story here is quite riveting. I'm new to the forum as I've just began hitting the immense red tape involved in the adoption process. Honestly, this could be a story that many of the daytime shows would be interested in(Oprah, Good morning America, Dateline, etc...). I think presenting this story to the media outlets could REALLY open up everyone's eyes and even get our legislators involved in cleaning up this process. I'm sorry I don't have any specific solution to this, but just a thought. I wish you nothing but the best in your efforts!

Under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, which everyone should be familiar with if they plan to adopt internationally and immigrate the child, there is a very specific definition of an orphan. It may be different from what you are thinking. Basically under the INA, a child cannot be immigrated to the U.S. if he/she has been living with two parents prior to the adoption. In general, this means his/her biological parents. However, it can also be interpreted by the USCIS to mean one bio parent and that parent's spouse or live-in companion, who may be considered a stepparent, even if there is no official marriage and adoption by the second adult. This interpretation has sometimes been contested by families, but it is not known how often they have prevailed. To qualify as an orphan under the INA, the child must have been either: 1. Abandoned, with the identity and/or whereabouts of the parents unknown. 2. A true orphan, with both parents deceased; death certificates must be provided. 3. Living with a single parent who was unable to support the child at a level considered normal IN THAT COUNTRY (not by U.S. standards). 4. Removed from the parental home by a legal entity in the foreign country for a reason such as abuse or neglect, which has resulted in the official termination of parental rights. 5. Legally relinquished by both parents or the sole parent, who have not had any contact with the child for a signficant period of time, often said to be at least a year. (The parents can't try to evade the law by putting the child in an orphanage to make him/her eligible for a visa, but continuing to maintain contact.) If immigration reform occurs, some people have suggested that the orphan definition be changed, so that a child who was living with two parents prior to adoption can receive an adoption visa. The USCIS opposes this change, however, on the grounds that it would increase the number of fraudulent visa requests. In the Western world, adoption ALWAYS means that the birth family forfeits all parental rights and obligations, and that the adoptive family takes on the same rights and responsibilities that it would have if the child was born to them. The USCIS supports this concept of adoption, which is different from the concept prevalent in countries governed by Islamic law, for example. To digress a bit, Islamic law is exactly the opposite of Western law with regard to adoption; an "adopted" Muslim child is actually in a situation that we would consider foster care. The biological parents retain all legal rights and obligations of parents and, if at all possible, must be involved in decisions about the child's upbringing and religious education. The child may return to the biological family any time he/she wishes, if it is considered to be in his/her best interests. The adoptive family is considered to be doing a good deed, as Allah would want; however, they are merely helping the bio familiy by taking care of the child for a short or long period of time. Getting back to the Western concept, which is what the U.S. supports, what happens all too frequently, these days, is that two loving parents overseas want to obtain a visa so that their child can come to live, on a long term basis, with relatives in the U.S. They do not want, however, to give up parental rights; they simply want the child to have the advantages of an American education and life in the U.S, and then return home to them. They will maintain close contact, send money, and visit when they can. It is very difficult to obtain a non-adoption visa, however. A tourist visa is good only for a limited time, and there are very strict rules for medical and student visas. There are also quotas for immigrant visas. In this sort of case, it is not uncommon for two-parent families to try to circumvent U.S. law, in some countries. A common visa fraud scheme involves the parents going through a sham relinquishment and adoption. They put the child into an orphanage, pretending to be giving the child up so that the child can be given in guardianship to relatives, who promise to adopt him/her in the U.S. On that basis, they try to get get an adoption visa for the child. However, since they love their child and don't really want to relinquish him/her, and since they know that orphanages aren't good places for kids, they visit regularly, bringing food and gifts and so on. They usually hope that they can get an immigrant visa for the child after a fairly short period of time, and that once the child is in the U.S., even if an adoption occurs there, they will continue to function as the child's parents. The USCIS believes that, if the INA is changed to allow children of two parent families to be given adoption visas, the number of such sham adoptions will increase dramatically. The USCIS wants to keep the adoption system "clean", by closing loopholes, so that visas are issued only in cases where a child will NOT have a permanent, loving family who can support him/her, unless he/she is adopted internationally. The USCIS supports the Hague Convention on intercountry adoption and hopes that all countries will ratify it. There is some belief that, if an adoption is done under Hague rules, there will be no opportunities for adoption fraud, because only legitimate adoptions will be processed in the foreign country. It appears that the USCIS might be willing to allow adoptions from two parent families in countries that have ratified the Hague Convention, and that apply Hague requirements to all adoptions of children from that country by Americans, since the rules for Hague adoptions would preclude the sorts of problems mentioned above. I hope that you understand this reasoning, even if you do not agree with it. As a U.S. citizen, you can and should "weigh in" on proposals to reform the INA and other aspects of immigration law. Unfortunately, at present, the INA IS the law of the land, whatever you may think of it, and will apply to all adoptions. I really wish that you had gotten competent advice BEFORE you tried to do the adoption you completed. You would have saved yourself a lot of money, time, and heartache. There are LOTS of ways to do legal intercountry adoption, and you surely could have found ones that would work well for you and your wife. As an example, you could easily have adopted from a different country -- one that would allow a child to be adopted by a U.S. citizen and a permanent resident of the U.S. Right now, your wife has legal and moral responsibility for a child whom she cannot bring to the U.S., and her options are limited -- relinquish the child, live overseas for a few more years (possibly losing her permanent resident status), etc. Other families, who pursued legal adoptions at the same time as you, but in a more appropriate manner, are now home in the U.S. with their families. The best thing you can do now is to seek counsel from a top quality immigration lawyer who is also a member of the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys; you need one who understands both adoption and immigration. I wish you well in your efforts. Sharon

Thank you for sharing your story. My husband and I have been researching on the many approaches we can take with independent adoption. My husband is a US citizen and I'm a citizen (US permant resident) of another country as well. It was also mentioned to us that adopting as a citizen of country of origin would be a faster process and felt optimistic about those plans. However, we hit a dead end and 3 arrows pointing at varying directions and don't know which one to take right now. I hope to find more information through this forum about the necessary steps to independent adoption.