I would point out that even though we're talking about Romania here, this is true in institutions throughout the world, and we just have to acknowledge that institutional care is a horrible situation for kids to grow up in and what they really need is families.

Mr. PITTS. Thank you.

Ms. Murphy-Scheumann, you state in your testimony that reintegration with the family should always be the primary goal. Shouldn't there be limitations on this, such as how long a child has been away from the biological family and what interest the family has expressed to be reunited with the child?

Could you talk about, you know, the family reunification plans a little bit.

Ms. MURPHY-SCHEUMANN. Yes.

What we're stressing is that you should look to the family first, but the Adoption and Safe Families Act, it actually specifically talks about concurrent planning and that as soon as the child enters into the foster care system, they should be looking at a solution already, so at the end of 12 months, either they're reunited or reintegrated with the family or they are free for adoption, but they get out of the foster care system.

So the new benchmark is somewhere around 12 months. Some of our foster kids had 7, 8, 9 years in foster care. As we heard last night, the young lady who spoke at the Angels in Adoption dinner had been in foster care for 18 years. So the Adoption and Safe Family Act is addressing that, and we would encourage Romania to learn from that also.

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Forsyth, you mentioned that some families have had their assigned children pre-selected for domestic adoption. Could you expand on that. What would these children-why would they be pre-selected?

Mr. FORSYTH. Yes, sure.

We know, of course, many families. I mentioned our organization For the Children-SOS. We, through that organization, have met many families of these 200 pending cases and have shared with them the sorrow they felt in recent months to learn that their child is no longer adoptable because they were adopted to a domestic family.

And so these are families that had assignments, just as we do, from the Romanian Government, and children that were assigned to them, who they knew and were in some cases even looking after. I'm an engineer, and statistically, it's illogical to me to think that if there's 80,000 children in Romania that are under government care and a large percentage of those perhaps even now are adoptable, that they would select a child that already has been given a family-especially considering that international adoptions are no longer an option, that they would select a child that already has been assigned to a family to be a domestically adopted child.

The truth of the matter, I think, just from my experience, is that in Romania, as has been testified, social workers are having a difficult time. American families with pending cases have their paperwork in order. It's easy for the social workers to adopt a child that has been oftentimes well cared for because of the situation that they're in and also had their paperwork already ready to go.

Mr. PITTS. From your experiences, how would you describe the future of children in Romania given the current child welfare situation?

Mr. FORSYTH. Well, over the 11 years we've been there, we've seen a number of children grow up, and it's bleak, under the current legislation and under the current opportunities for children, especially those that are Roma, especially those who have specific needs, medical needs, for example. The future is not bright.

Mr. PITTS. And in your experience, is anything being done to minimize the rate of child abandonment in Romania?

Mr. FORSYTH. I think there are. You know, there is a lot going on on the ground in Romania that is very, very encouraging. There are countless numbers of non-government organizations that are working there.

One of the wonderful things that are available to international families are to go and to work with some of these non-government organizations, that Romania currently has their doors open to foreigners to come in and help with, and so my wife and I have been privileged to do that. Through those efforts, on a very small scale, there are differences that are being seen.

In the small town that we've worked with, they've all but eliminated abandoned babies, just in this small little community, because of the outpouring of support they've given through donations given internationally, funding, but also just people going to work with those organizations, to help minimize child abandonment issues.

And so there are some small success stories, but the problem is much greater than that.

Mr. PITTS. Thank you very much for your testimony.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Commissioner Pitts.

I just want to thank our distinguished panelists again for your testimonies, which we will use and ponder over and pore over, frankly. You've made a number of good recommendations.

For instance, Dr. Johnson, I would be very interested in knowing what the Ministry of Health's response in Romania is to your findings.

We have testimony that is being submitted for the record by the House of Angels, and Simona Stewart makes the point that there are many hundreds of babies simply abandoned in state hospitals, and then asks very poignantly: "I say to you: Had Emma Nicholson, MEP, spent 1 day with me in any Romanian child ward of any Romanian state hospital, I tell you, she'd go home in tears at the misery that she has caused"—and, as she points out, this is a Romanian citizen who is in the business of every day trying to care for these children.

It is a nightmare, and your empirical data, I think, is very, very helpful and persuasive in trying to say to the government: "We care about your children, the families that are here care about your children." The data clearly shows: 1 day in excess of being in one of those institutions hurts.

It is a form of child abuse, however unwitting it may be, it is a form of child abuse. We want Romania to rejoin the countries of the world that see the best interest of the child as the prime inter

est, not trying to appease and to appeal or to pander to a rapporteur who happens to hold the cards as to accession into the EU.

And I thought your point, Ms. Murphy-Scheumann, about the NATO accession, that the statements were favorable to adoption when that was helpful to their cause, and now just the opposite, when it seems to be helpful to the opposite, that doesn't bring honor to any government anywhere.

So, again, your testimonies are outstanding, and this will be the first of a series of hearings. We hope hopefully, with the Ambassador's help to bring the head of the adoptions program here.

Anytime, anywhere, the MEP leaders would like to meet with us, this Commission stands ready, willing, and able, and we will again issue an invitation to them to come because this injury has to be undone, and this harm which continues has to be undone.

So thank you so much for your tremendous testimonies.
The hearing is adjourned. [Applause.]

[Whereupon, at 12:59 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

APPENDICES

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. SAM BROWNBACK, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE

The Helsinki Commission today examines the effect of Romania's ban on intercountry adoption on the lives of the children of Romania. Some 37,000 children live in institutions in Romania today, tens of thousands of others are in foster care. Romania does not to date have the capability to adequately cope with this humanitarian crisis nor does it have a robust practice of domestic adoptions. Yet the Romanian Government was led to believe that banning intercountry adoptions was an appropriate price for membership to the European Union. The Romanians under the leadership of thenPresident Iliescu capitulated. That the EU, which has traditionally stood with the United States in defense of human rights, should demand such a policy is appalling. That the Romanians should accept it is equally troubling. By adopting a law prohibiting intercountry adoption, except in the exceedingly rare case of a biological grandparent living abroad, Romania has denied thousands of children a loving home and a caring family.

I am particularly concerned about the fate of the Roma children who have been abandoned. Unfortunately, there is still a common stereotype, even among well-educated Romanians, that Romani children are genetically predisposed to lying, stealing and other criminal behavior. There is also a considerable amount of discrimination against those born with any type of disability. Faced with prejudice by prospective adoptive parents in Romania, and cut off from international adoptions, these children will most certainly not find homes.

Romania's primary antagonist pressing for a ban on intercountry adoptions has been the former rapporteur for Romania's accession to the EU. She asserts that individuals who adopt internationally are those who are turned down to adopt in their own countries and are likely pedophiles and child traffickers. She alleges that children adopted internationally suffer dismal fates. She has no facts to support her allegations. She espouses a view that places biological, cultural and linguistic origin as a source of a person's identity above the importance of children having a family. This view sees it as a primary, fundamental right of every child to retain a connection, even if only the faint hope of a connection, to a biological mother. According to this view, international adoption violates the child's identity by placing him or her in a culture and family that does not correspond to his or her true identity. Those who have driven this issue within the EU emphasize the corruption problem because they know that is the best argument to win people over to their side, but their real motivation is sinister, one that emphasizes ethnic identity over basic humanity, and sentences children to a life of loneliness without parents to love and care for them.

Prior to enactment of the anti-adoption law, approximately 200 Romanian children had been matched with adoptive parents in the United States. These families have committed their hearts to these children. Dozens have written to the Helsinki Commission pleading for our help. Does anyone really believe that they are motivated by

anything other than compassion? Congressman Smith, who has been at the forefront of efforts to combat human trafficking, and I, can say with absolute certainty that this is not child trafficking.

I'd like to share with you the story of one family-in this room. today-whose adoption got stuck in the pipeline. Becky Hubbell and David Clark are from Leawood, Kansas. If the Romanian Government would allow this couple to proceed with the adoption of Vasile Leica, who is now 7 years old, he would be joining a family of 5 children, with parents who have been married for 32 years. Both parents are accomplished professionals who have adopted children from China, India and Romania. Every year for the past five years, Becky Hubbell has traveled to Botosani, Romania with a team of doctors and surgeons providing free care to children and adults. Becky has also helped establish children's homes in Romania and Moldova and a home for unwed mothers in India. Are Vasile's interests really best served by growing up in a group home for children rather than joining this loving family? Absolutely not. You can be sympathetic with Romania's need to join the European Union and still recognize that the adoption law is deeply damaging to the lives of thousands of children. There has to be a better and more humane way to deal with this problem and I urge the EU and Romania to sit down and take seriously the fate of thousands of innocent children and the loving families that await them.