This guy’s credentials as a lawyer are not exactly checking out. But I see no evidence of Silbey making money with him - it looks a lot more like he saw a bunch of rubes and acted accordingly.
I think it depends if they can trace him to the group prior to the operation. That would look bad. I’m not saying he isn’t the person wanted by Interpol but so far it’s just a visual similarity which means next to nothing.
Just read where a Hatian judge will release 8 of the 10 so-called missionaries on bail, but will keep group leader Laura Silbey and her personal nanny in custody.
It also turns out that the man associated with Silbey, J. Puello, is of course indeed the same man wanted for crimes against children and human trafficking in El Salvador.
For a good Christian woman, Laura Silbey can’t seem to catch a break—She had all these kids rounded up that she was all set to “rescue” (for a modest finders fee, no doubt) and those Godless hoodoo niggers in Haiti had to jamm up her big payday.
Another thing … The wise Old Rabbi was asked what caused crime. He replied “People who buy stolen goods.”
I know American families who have done this sort of thing. “Nice people” who were unable to get pregnant. Off they flew to Romania or some other hellhole with wads of cash. They came back with perfect little children and all sort of fancy paperwork.
To be fair, they raised the kids well. But at what point does this sort of a adoption become trafficking in children?
I don’t know, but I suspect my friends crossed that line.
The hague convention principles are that first family has to be found, next local/country, and only overseas adoption if the other options arent available.
So in itself the scenario you give doesnt mean it definitely was child trafficking, but of course the chances are much higher that it was so and thats why things like the Hague convention came into being. Anyone not going through agencies operating under that convention is now far more likely to be involved in some form of child trafficking situation.
The problem is people are also willing to pay a lot to have a child through things like IVF or the like, ie its not only the willingness to buy stolen goods that creates the market, as the willingness to pay a lot of money to have a child, making them worthwhile to steal and sell as ‘legitimate’ adopted children, as well as more obvious ‘you’re really doing child trafficking’ setups.
Otara
Curiouser and curiouser. According to the BBC
Yes, but.
My train of thought was simply that"Nice People" can convince themselves to bad things and make bad problems. I mean I know a couple of these couples. Nice people. Not a doubt in my mind they meant well.
Still, the more I learn about international adoptions … well let’s say it raises doubts in my mind.
Were you thinking of the This American Life story of the Nybergs who adopted from Samoa? That was a heartbreaking story. I believe the couple later divorced as well.
“Still, the more I learn about international adoptions … well let’s say it raises doubts in my mind.”
You might want to read up more on how its done in places like Australia then. There are more checks and balances in place to reduce the profit motive aspects, by removing the ability of would be parents being able to directly interact with the people who have the children to adopt, it all goes through the Department of Human services.
As a result its more the scenario you’re describing where it occurs now, rather than inside those systems. As a result international adoptions are dropping drastically here and Im quite sure thats at least partly due to the profit motive being largely removed under this system.
Otara
Well I admit my ignorance. Just my observations of some Yuppie couples in America.
Here’s some remedial reading for you. Children taken from their parents, their culture, and their origins never recover, never forget, and are never “better off” in a real sense. They may well be materially better off, but being forceably separated from your family is always destructive. Answer this, if you will: had someone taken you from your parents and put you in the care of, say, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates or Richard Branson, how do you think you would feel?
Not suite so clear now, is it?
Yes. As severe as the law allows.
A friend of mine adopted a girl from India. A couple of years after the adoption, the local authorities raided the orphanage she came from and, well, you know those “puppy mills” you hear about the ASPCA cracking down on? Basically, picture that, except with children instead of puppies, and you get the idea.
Unfortunately, a large number of “source” countries for international adoption have yet to sign or ratify the Hague Convention. Haiti, incidentally, is one of them.
Which will always be the case as the requirements are fairly stringent, and states without infrastructure are one of those sources.
The philosophy generally is that its better to be stringent and not allow adoption rather than to risk the possibility of child trafficking that would otherwise result. I dont know the US stance on this, but in Australia it basically means you cant internationally adopt children from those countries.
Otara
8 of the 10 have been let go. I say this is the right call. Trying to help should not be a crime. And these 8 were just trying to help. As far as I know…
I agree with this, but it isn’t the law throughout the western world. In Ireland such adoptions are allowed if we have a bilateral agreement with the non-Hague country. The problem is these bilateral agreements are wholly insufficient to ensure the country is actually living up to its responsibilities in this area. We saw this recently with Vietnam (see my earlier post). I believe Britain has similar alternative procedures for non-Hague countries, which are no doubt equally inadequate.