Sunday, April 25, 2010

Nước the documentary

The daughter of a former South Vietnamese army captain and a Vietnamese orphan raised by an American family share their stories with a Chinese-American filmmaker. Nước presents fluid memories of growing up American and the continuing waves of those experiences into the present.


Welcome to the premiere showing! We invite you to comment. Please write your questions and suggestions. We are especially looking for succint paragraphs which might be the accompanying text when we share this with others. We will credit you!

Was it what you thought it would be when you heard about it?
Did you wish for more contextual information, and if so-in what areas? What did you find most interesting? Most confusing? Are there other documentaries or narratives that you recommend to us in relation of this project?

Thursday, April 22, 2010

international adoption statistics

http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/FactOverview/international.html

International Adoption in Context
(assembled by Hai Nguyen)

Adoption in the United States is a social and legal process whereby a parent–child relationship is established between people not related by birth. American adoption practices have changed radically over the past two and a half centuries. Originally an informal, spontaneous occurrence comparable to APPRENTICESHIP, adoption has become a formalized legal institution governed by a patchwork of statutes in fifty separate state jurisdictions with increasing federal involvement. During the last century the professionalization of social workers emerged, along with uniform standards for regulating adoptions by the U.S. CHILDREN'S BUREAU and the Child Welfare League of America. Adoption has gone through a revolution since World War II, from an elitist institution that restricted who could adopt and who was adopted to one that that is more inclusive and diverse. Moreover, the past fifty years have seen a movement away from secrecy to an embrace of open adoption and legislative mechanisms for uniting adult adopted people with their biological parents. All of these trends toward inclusiveness and openness are likely to continue. In spite of all these changes, however, Americans' cultural bias toward blood ties remains pervasive, and adoption is still viewed by many as a form of second-rate kinship.
An Act to Provide for the Adoption of Children, America's first adoption statute. It was enacted in 1851 in Massachusetts. The enactment of the Massachusetts Adoption Act marked a watershed in the history of the American family and society. Instead of defining the parent–child relationship exclusively in terms of blood kinship, it was now legally possible to create a family by assuming the responsibility and emotional outlook of a biological parent. In the next quarter century, the Massachusetts Adoption Act came to be regarded as a model statute, and twenty-five states enacted similar laws.

E. Wayne Carp
Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society


According to the Adoption Institute, between 1971 and 2001, U.S. citizens adopted 265,677 children from other countries. This is over a quarter million international adoptions to the US within a three decade period. A large number of internationally adopted children from warring nations tend to be offspring of military personnel who are then discriminated against due to their biracial heritage.


The number of children adopted from Vietnam to the US reached a peak in 1974-1975 primarily due to the U.S.- Vietnam War and Operation Baby Lift, a large-scale humanitarian effort to airlift over 2600 Vietnamese children to the US. Since that time the US has adopted over 8000 children from Vietnam.

Vietnam

Adoption Notice

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of Consular Affairs
Office of Children’s Issues
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________


October 2009

Nearly all cases for which an official referral was issued before September 1, 2008, have now been processed to completion. The U.S. Embassy in Hanoi and Vietnamese officials are assisting families whose cases are still pending. Questions about these cases may be sent to hanoiadoptions@state.gov.

At this time, adoption service providers and prospective adoptive parents should not seek or accept new (or potential) adoption referrals from Vietnam. We will inform adoption service providers and prospective adoptive parents if/when we believe referrals from Vietnam can resume.

As a positive development, the Government of Vietnam recently circulated an initial draft of a proposed new adoption law. As drafted, the proposed legislation attempts to codify and coordinate domestic and intercountry adoption requirements and procedures. The draft itself represents a significant effort and could be a step towards Vietnam’s stated goal of becoming a Party to the Hague Adoption Convention. At this point, however, it is unclear whether the legislation would achieve this goal and when (or if) the Vietnamese legislature will formally consider it. If the legislation passes, it will take time to establish effective new procedures and regulations.

LAWS Affecting Vietnamese Exodus

LAWS Affecting Vietnamese Exodus
(assembled by Khanh)

Before 1980
“Vietnamese refugees admitted to U.S. under special parole powers of the U.S. President and through special short-term legislation”
(Freeman 3)

Refugee Act of 1980
(Freeman 3)
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/policy/refact1.htm
“The Refugee Act of 1980 created The Federal Refugee Resettlement Program to provide for the effective resettlement of refugees and to assist them to achieve economic self-sufficiency as quickly as possible after arrival in the United States.”
“A 1985 ceiling of 70,000 refugees, with 270,000 immigrants total and 20,000 from any one country, was established. Annually, the Proposed Refugee Admissions Report to the Congress is written detailing new circumstances involving refugees worldwide, and determining the new annual ceiling of refugees resettling in the United States.”

“The primary goal of the Refugee Act of 1980 was to bring U.S. law into compliance with the requirements of international law. Though domestic U.S. law has long contained provisions designed to protect certain persons fearing persecution, U.S. accession to the 1967 Refugee Protocol created certain specific legal obligations pursuant to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Years of controversy about these obligations led to the passage of the Refugee Act.”

Orderly Departure Program (ODP)
Established by United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). Allow Vietnamese to leave Vietnam without attempting dangerous escapades. VN people can go from VN directly to new homes in U.S., Canada, etc. Widened spectrum of refugee to asylum seekers from oppressive regimes not only Communism). Some people come with immigrant not refugee status. Need sponsor.
Good idea, but initially political prisoners were not allowed to leave VN. VN gov’t used ODP to get rid of unwanted peoples e.g. Amerasians & ethnic Chinese. Feared anti-VN Communism mobilization of exiles. Lengthy legal process w/ disagreements b/t U.S. & VN.
1988: U.S. pledged to bring over remaining 85000 VN political prisoners who have been imprisoned for over 3 yrs.
(Freeman 4, 34)

1987
Humanitarian Operation (HO)
Special Released Reeducation Center Detainee Resettlement Program
Agreement b/t Vietnam & U.S. Former reeducation camp prisoners must have been imprisoned for 3 or more years
(Freeman 4)

December 1987
Amerasian Homecoming Program
Allowed admission of Amerasians & family. About 40000 Amerasians and family came to U.S. in 1994.
(Freeman 35)

1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees
1967 Protocal-provided protection for asylum seekers. People should not be returned a/g their own will to a place where they feared persecution
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
(Freeman 34)

1989
Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA)
Designated March 14, 1989 as cutoff date for asylum seekers
Wanted to discourage continued escapes from VN by refugees
People before date immediately granted refugee status; countries of asylum interviewed them to determine admittance
• Those w/ relatives in new country
• Prove involvement w/ U.S. in VN
People after date had to be screened for refugee status
Children under 16 yrs. Were evaluated by Special Committee to determine resettlement or repatriation
Over 200000 asylum seekers after CPA past
75-80% denied refugee status
June 1993: over 45000 denied refuge refused repatriation→UNHCR & Vietnam agreed on forced repatriation
(Freeman 38-39)



This momentum eventually led to the passage of the 1965 Immigration & Nationality Act. The Act abolished the restrictive national origins system originally passed in 1924 in favor of a quota and preference system. Priority was now given to "family reunification" so that U.S. citizens and permanent residents could sponsor the following types of immigrants in this order of preference:
1. Unmarried children under 21 years of age of U.S. citizens
2. Spouses and unmarried children of permanent residents
3. Professionals, scientists, and artists "of exceptional ability"
4. Married children over 21 years of age and their spouses and children of U.S. citizens
5. Siblings and their spouses and children of U.S. citizens
6. Workers in occupations with labor shortages
7. Political refugees
Each country in the eastern hemisphere was given a quota of 20,000 but children under 21, spouses, and parents of U.S. citizens were exempt from this quota. Also, countries in the western hemisphere would not be subject to any quotas. Seventy-four percent of the eastern hemisphere's quota was allotted to the four family reunification preferences, 20% of the quota was given to meeting the two occupational preferences, and six percent was allotted to political refugees. Immigrants admitted using the second preference could also petition to bring over their parents (who would not be subject to numerical quotas).
The third and sixth preferences would have to be verified and approved by the U.S. Department of Labor. There was also a non-preference category for immigrants who would invest at least $40,000 in a business once they came to the U.S. Also, in 1980, the seventh preference for refugees was replaced by more comprehensive legislation that expanded the quotas for refugees, in response to mass refugee migrations for Viet Nam and other countries around the world.
These preferences were structured to encourage U.S. citizens already in the U.S. to sponsor their other family members as new immigrants. At first, the architects and supporters of this Act did not expect a large increase in Asian immigrants because since Asian countries had very low rates of immigration prior to 1965, the expectation was that there were not large enough numbers of Asians in the U.S. to matter. At the time, Asian Americans were only 0.5% of total U.S. population. Therefore, U.S. officials expected immigration from Europe to account for the vast majority of these new immigrants.
However, as it turned out, because most European immigrants had come to the U.S. much earlier than Asians, there weren't many immediate family left in Europe to reunite. Also, Europe was experiencing its own post-war economic boom, so there was little incentive for Europeans to immigrate elsewhere. On the other hand, Asian Americans and Asian immigrants saw this as a great opportunity to bring over family members, if they were U.S. citizens.
Many Asian war brides who married U.S. servicemen after World War II began using the family reunification preferences to bring over their siblings. However, the first Asians to immigrate to the U.S. under the provisions of this Act were mainly professionals and political refugees. Once they arrived in the U.S., they applied for permanent resident status and eventually for U.S. citizenship. Then many took full advantage of the family reunification preferences of the 1965 Act to bring over spouses, children, siblings, and parents.
Thus began the cycle of chain immigration and sponsorship -- initial Asian immigrants (many of whom came as professionals or refugees) would attain permanent resident and later citizenship status and would sponsor family members and relatives. After these family member and relatives arrived in the U.S. and became permanent residents and citizens, they in turn would sponsor their family members and relatives, and so on.

Read more:

Total Number of Immigrants Admitted by Continent and Selected Country of Birth, 1971-2002
Continent/
Country of Origin # of Immigrants
1971 - 2002
Africa 825,700
Asia 1 7,331,500
Bangladesh 93,900
Cambodia 150,900
China 2 1,179,300
India 1,005,100
Japan 177,600
Laos 215,800
Philippines 1,508,100
South Korea 839,600
Viet Nam 1,098,000
Europe 3 3,300,400
North America 9,844,500
Caribbean 2,936,800
Central America 1,334,200
Mexico 5,141,600
South America 1,479,700

All Countries 19,410,300
Source: Statistical Abstract of the U.S., 2004 (Table 8)
1 Includes middle eastern countries and Israel
2 From 1971-1990, data includes Taiwan
3 Includes old Soviet Union countries and Russia
This cyclical process of Asian immigration produced significant and unanticipated increases in the Asian American population beginning in the late 1960s. The table on the right uses data from the 2004 Statistical Abstract of the U.S. and provides descriptive statistics on the number of immigrants admitted to the U.S. by continent and selected countries of birth from 1971 to 2002 (the last year in which full statistics are available).
As the results show, since 1971, out of the 18 million or so immigrants around the world admitted to the U.S., about 7.3 million of them were born in Asia, with the most coming from the Philippines, followed by China (which includes numbers from Taiwan from 1971-1990), then Viet Nam and India. Overall, immigrants born in Mexico account the largest national group, with over five million coming to the U.S. since 1971.
These unprecedented numbers of immigrants from Asia have led to many demographic, economic, and cultural shifts in the Asian American community and mainstream American society in general. Once mainly composed of the U.S.-born, virtually all Asian American ethnic groups are now predominantly foreign-born due to the influx of so many immigrants as a result of the 1965 Act. Among other consequences, their presence has contributed to the revitalization (as well as the new development) of many Asian enclaves in several major metropolitan areas in the U.S.

Read more: