| Page 3 of 3 < |
Would-Be Parents Fret Over Looming Changes
Most far-reaching in its implications, however, was a vote by Guatemala's Congress in May to accede to an international treaty on standards for international adoptions that requires governments to appoint a central authority to manage the process. (Although Guatemala signed the treaty years ago, an earlier vote to accede to the treaty was done through means deemed unconstitutional by Guatemala's Supreme Court.)
The legislators' vote was partly motivated by necessity. The United States is on track to accede to the treaty by spring, at which point U.S. authorities will be unable to accept adoptions from Guatemala unless the system there is also up to treaty standards.
Still, Guatemala's lawmakers set off alarm bells by setting the date for Guatemala's accession for Jan. 1 -- well before the United States will be in compliance. This has raised questions about whether an estimated 5,000 adoptions currently in process will be allowed to proceed if they are not completed by the end of this year.
"I can't even think about that possibility," said a tearful Terry Lewis, 47, a therapist in Gaithersburg who is in the final stages of adopting a 14-month-old boy who she and her husband have already named Shepherd. The couple have visited the child three times, bringing along their 2-year-old son, Zachary, whom they adopted from Guatemala a year ago. "Every time we leave Sheppie, it's like we're left with this big hole. I don't know how else to put it except that he's my kid."
More recently, Guatemala's legislative leaders have been considering a law that would push the accession date back to next spring and exempt cases that are in process from the treaty. But in the absence of an ironclad guarantee that all ongoing cases will be grandfathered into the new system, many prospective parents remain nervous.
Meanwhile, Americans considering new adoptions, such as the Eubanks, worry that the government-run, centralized system that Guatemalan lawmakers are crafting to replace the private model will make it all but impossible for uneducated, rural women who wish to give up a child to find the proper channels.
"Any oversight is good. But you need to make the system safe for the women," Renee Eubanks said. "It's so frustrating because here we are, ready to provide a loving home for a child who needs it, and then you have the politics come in and disrupt everything."



