This is a very sad story.

Diane Higbie and her husband, Bob Higbie, tried for some years to adopt this child, who is in Russia.

For various reasons, this adoption failed. It seems much of this failure had to do with the financial policies of Reece’s Rainbow and the incompetence of the agencies working with Reece’s Rainbow. Those of such a mind can find the entire email dialog on the Internet.

Now it would seem Diane Higbie goes ahead with the potentially improper adoption of three preselected children in Ukraine. This, she does in ignorance or defiance of the fact that Ukraine is not allowing preselection even in the case where the child participated in a visiting initiative.

Yet, Andrea Roberts continues to post this child. This, she does without the notification that the child is in Russia of a consequence not able for the adoption into the American family.

You will note in excess of US$35000 is in the child’s fund. Yet, it is not allocated to other children. This is what Andrea Roberts did for other children. The question, it must be asked, is why not these funds?

It is a question to which it seems Andrea Roberts won’t answer.

The obvious fact though is that Reece’s Rainbow is not making consistent policies. This appears then to violate the tax code in the United States.

At the Third Russian-American Child Welfare Forum, American failure to address “child trading Internet sites” was cited as impediment to the reopening of Russian adoptions to Americans.

Sites such as Reece’s Rainbow and Rainbow Kids have featured photographs and medical histories of Russian children, in violation of Russian law. Moreover, aforesaid sites continue the same practices in other countries, such as Ukraine, where American adoptions remain, for time being, possible.

Andrea Roberts, director of Reece’s Rainbow, has often stated that the evangelical religious position on adoptions overpowers the laws of Russia and other sovereign states. It is believed by many that this position was a significant factor in the closure of Russia to Americans. Likewise, the inappropriate behavior of hosting organizations operating in Ukraine, such as Project 143 and New Horizons for Children may have a similar contributory effect there.

Here is an interesting post from a Yahoo group on Ukrainian adoptions.

The post makes it quite clear that two organizations operating “hosting programs” for Ukrainian children (New Horizons for Children and Project 143) have “recommended” or “preferred” facilitators for the adoption of hosted children.

Both programs, on their websites, make it clear that they are not involved in adoptions. If this is true, why are they recommending facilitators? Project 143 is slightly more interesting, they, on their site, show a clear link with One World Adoptions in Georgia. The founder of One World Adoptions, Susan Secor Manning, was a part of the scandal ridden and now out of business Amrex adoption network with Serge Zasyatkin.

In any case, the idea of preselecting children for adoption is contrary to the Ukrainian method of blind referrals. There are documented cases of families arriving in Ukraine determined to adopt a specific child, and then, their lamentations when that is not possible.

Therefore, caution is advised when anyone guarantees that a specific Ukrainian child could be adopted.

Another source of concern is the nearly universal practice of photolisting “hosting” children with nonetheless the clear implication that these children are also available for adoption. This practice is illegal under Ukrainian law.

But the main point is that the motivations and honesty of organizations such as New Horizons for Children and Project 143 are to be questioned. Their disregard for the law of Ukraine could well be a contributing factor in Ukraine’s potential decision to either halt the operation of hosting programs or merely, as has done Russia, to cease permitting Americans from adopting Ukrainian children.

You need to pity this family:

They are hoping that they can adopt this boy, they hosted him previously through Project 143.

Apparently they never read this.

It is well known, that Project 143 works with agencies such as Susan Manning and One World Adoptions. This agency could be in trouble since Congo has closed to adoption. Susan Manning is not a stranger to trouble, as she used to be part of Amrex.

Ukraine is looking very closely at the relationship between hosting programs and adoptions. More and more petitions are being denied. One has to wonder how much longer hosting programs can survive making claims that are contrary to Ukrainian law, given that the Ukrainian system is one of blind referrals, as opposed to preselection.

However, the entire idea of the preselection is crucial for the continued success of Reece’s Rainbow, given the closure of Russia since one year.

Amy and John Jupin, of Alabama, USA, sought to adopt the child with the coded name “Davis” from Reece’s Rainbow.

The ban on Russian adoptions by Americans ended that effort. Of course, the fact that Reece’s Rainbow did not handle paperwork properly introduced many the delay as well. Had the Jupin family used the respected adoption assistant, a different conclusion was inevitable.

Along the way, on her blog, Amy Jupin complained of expenses. Yet the Jupin family has purchased a vacation beach cottage at the Mobile Bay of Alabama.

Yet as to be seen here, Amy Jupin now asks for more money to try for yet a second Reece’s Rainbow adoption:

Why do they ask for money? An honest family would sell the luxury of the second home. But no, the greed of Reece’s Rainbow is a disease. This disease, it is communicated to John and Amy Jupin.

It seems a clear consequence that the adoption situation in both Ukraine and Latvia will change, so as it did change in Russia. What will be the event of that on Reece’s Rainbow?

Go here to read some background on John and Amy Jupin.

Now as you will see:

zh_dacha

They seek funds for another Reece’s Rainbow adoption.

Why if they have money for two homes do they beg on here for money?

This is a problem with Reece’s Rainbow: the pathological fixation on money. It is the disease of both Andrea Roberts and the Jupin Family. The Jupins clearly think that if they ask enough, others will pay their adoption. This is the deplorable condition.

We furthermore, assert and proclaim: Andrea Roberts and Reece’s Rainbow, via the illegality, contributed to the Russian decision to enact an adoption ban.

Reece’s Rainbow shows illegal photographs of children.

Reece’s Rainbow engages in the preselection of children in the nations where such is not permitted.

Reece’s Rainbow has allegiance to a thug, Sergei Zevlever, in Ukraine.

Reece’s Rainbow was the conduit in the adoption done by Jeremy and Marlo Williams, where Jeremy’s mother, Peggy admitted bribes were paid.

Reece’s Rainbow is clearly breaking many laws. Russia noticed it and enacted the ban.

Yet the greed of Roberts and the Jupins continues.

Given the abject failure of the adoption of “Davis” what is the thinking that the Jupins’ second adoption will not in like manner end in failure? Think on that when you are asked to send money.

For some time there has been a debate about the ILlegal and IMproper nature of the adoption of the Reece’s Rainbow child known as “Tera” by Oklahoma based software technician Jeremy Williams and his wife, bassist Marlo Williams.

This document will remove all the doubt!

This shows the clear and illegal preselection of a Russian child. It is clear that the child’s medical conditions were known to the Williams from Reece’s Rainbow.

Yet the mother of Jeremy Williams, former Gideon missionary Peggy Williams was that foolish to admit of a criminal act. She clearly wrote on her Facebook page that Jeremy and Marlo had to pay bribes. This is illegal in both America and Russia, yet Peggy openly mentioned it. This is then not defamation to say that there were illegal portions of the Reece’s Rainbow adoption of “Tera” by Jeremy and Marlo Williams. There is simply confirmation of it by Jeremy’s mother, and though the Facebook page was removed it was preserved and is now here for all to see.

Do you wonder if Reece’s Rainbow helped in the decision of Russia to ban the adoptions? Wonder no longer, the criminal acts of Reece’s Rainbow and its founder Andrea Roberts were certainly at the center of deliberations in the Duma!

Please to take a look at the web page of Susan Manning’s One World Adoption Services for Ukraine:

As you can see, though supposedly an adoption agency, Susan Manning and One World Adoption Services are also involved in the hosting programs.

Previously, the US Consul General to Ukraine had warned that hosting a child did not guarantee adopting that child as such the practice was contrary to the Ukrainian law.

It seems in truth that Susan Manning and One World Adoptions ignore this warning. The problem is then for the family. The family spends money to host and is then hopeful of the adoption. Upon learning that the law was broken and then there is not to be then the adoption, the family undergoes sadness and a loss of money.

Katrina Yoder seemed to have taken over the “transitional home” in Chita, Russia that had been operated by Gary and Pam Amstutz. They seem to have left Russia after scrutiny due to their role in an adoption of three preselected children and police complaints about the residents of the transitional home.

Yet, note that Katrina Yoder has not since December 2012 updated her blog.

ky_2012

Does this mean she, too, has left Russia? Perhaps the Russian adoption ban caused a decrease in donations to Reflections of Hope, also called Reflections Russia, the missionary organization.

One World Adoption Services (OWAS) of Georgia, USA, operated by psychology graduate, Susan Secor Manning, has decided to go out of business after being punished with a 90-day suspension over allegations of improper documentation in its operations in Congo.

The 90-day suspension was ordered by the New York-based Council on Accreditation, the authority designated by the U.S. State Department to monitor and accredit American adoption agencies that operate abroad per the terms of the Hague Convention. According to the council’s investigation, the suspension was warranted for several violations of international adoption regulations that occurred in Congo.

One World’s closure comes amid continuing turmoil over pending adoptions of children in the Congo by families in America and elsewhere. Hundreds of adoptions have been stalled since Congolese authorities stopped issuing the exit permits needed for the children to leave the country, even in cases where the adoptions had been officially approved.

Susan Secor Manning had been previously involved in the AMREX adoption network, which dissolved under a cloud of allegations of improper actions regarding adoptions in Russia. One World Adoption Services had also been working with orphan hosting organizations such as Project 143 to facilitate the adoptions of hosted children from nations such as Ukraine and Latvia. Due to laws on the preselection of children, the legality of these adoptions had often been called into question.

This takes the form of a personal question for Reece’s Rainbow founder, Andrea Roberts.

Andrea Roberts, please tell us the details of your adoption of two boys from Estonia.

What happened? Rumors abound that you disrupted the adoptions and that one of your biological children fell from an upper floor window.

Given your pro-adoption stance, it is only fair and reasonable that you provide a full explanation!

Our sources in Ukraine have given us some disturbing news.

This news is that many of the illegally preselected and photolisted children from Reece’s Rainbow are not actually suitable for adoptions.

Families have complained about violent behavior by the children. Many lack access to mental health services and decide to try to return the children to Ukraine. They claim that the children were represented as being “healthy” by Reece’s Rainbow and its coordinators.

When trying to make the return of the children, they learn of the costs involved. They also learn that there are no sources of these funds in the United States or Ukraine. Many have had to resort to fundraising to do the adoption and do not have the money to do a return through legal means.

As a result, the children end up in prison. Surely this is a worse fate than if they had stayed in Ukraine.

This has not escaped the scrutiny of Ukrainian authorities. A proposed solution has been the banning of adoptions by any entity associated in any way with Reece’s Rainbow. More extreme parties claim that organizations such as Reece’s Rainbow have utterly destroyed the integrity of Ukrainian adoptions, and are arguing for a complete ban.

This document confirms that Jeremy and Marlo Williams of Oklahoma, USA had pursued the adoption of “Tera” through Reece’s Rainbow:

Indeed, it is the same Williams family whose mother in law, missionary Peggy Williams had put on “Facebook” that bribes were paid for the adoption. Those wishing to see Peggy’s confession may do so by looking to this link.

If this is not corruption then there is not any such corruption.

Responsible journalists should look to these things and then be asking from Andrea Roberts the details.

There is not any denial that the ILLEGAL actions of Andrea Robers and Reece’s Rainbow had a contribution to the halting of adoptions from Russia. Similar illegal activities in both Ukraine and Latvia will possibly have the same results there.

As part of the US’ participation in the Hague Convention on adoptions, agencies are now subject to oversight from the Council on Accreditation.

In 2013, European Adoption Consultants (EAC) came close to losing its accreditation. One issue was the possibility of participation in child trafficking in Russia by EAC.

Here is just a sample from the court documentation:

By the extensive use of lawyers, EAC was able to overcome objections. Do be noting though that the Council on Accreditation only has one investigator, so it is not fully clear that this was an honest outcome.

Questions continue to linger about EAC. Also be noting that EAC engaged in an extensive publicity campaign surrounding the passage of the RU-US adoption agreement. EAC sought to take business from others, using advertisements crafted to give the appearance of being official government documents featuring Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Finally, EAC has clearly been involved in the arranging of adoptions of preselected children from Russia to America, in clear violation of Russian law.

In January of 2013, blogger, Cassy Fiano, interviewed director of Reece’s Rainbow, Andrea Roberts.

Unfortunately, Fiano was either poorly prepared for the interview or she had her own agenda for the interview, instead of the truth, which is, of course, the objective of journalism.

As a public service, some corrections are made to Fiano’s work.

Cassy Fiano: Can you tell me a little bit about yourself and how Reece’s Rainbow got started?

Ms. Roberts failed to mention, and Ms. Fiano must not have known, that Ms. Roberts had adopted two boys from Estonia, and then, for undisclosed reasons, the adoptions were disrupted. You can find more details here.

Cassy Fiano: You are not an adoption agency. So what is it that Reece’s Rainbow actually does?

Ms. Roberts failed to mention, and Ms. Fiano must not have known, that Reece’s Rainbow, in addition to its financial activities, “matches” families with children. Unfortunately, quality control at Reece’s Rainbow is poor, and there have been many cases where the “matched” children were not available for adoption. You can find more details here.

It would seem, then, that Reece’s Rainbow does perform some of the functions of an adoption agency. As such, it would be for the Council on Accreditation to determine the implications of their actions.

Cassy Fiano: Another allegation is that Reece’s Rainbow-affiliated staff have been arrested for violating Russian adoption laws, and that your families have bragged about paying bribes to expedite their adoptions.

Ms. Roberts failed to mention, and Ms. Fiano must not have known about the adoption done by Jeremy and Marlo Williams of Oklahoma, USA, of a child who had been called “Tera” on Reece’s Rainbow. Former missionary, Peggy Williams, the mother of Jeremy, had talked openly about the payment of bribes on this adoption. You can find more details here as well as here.

An examination of this blog will show, on many occasions, public questions have been asked of Andrea Roberts. To date, she has yet to respond.

It is quite obvious that Reece’s Rainbow is involved in highly questionable practices. The sloppy work of Ms. Fiano is a disservice to those with a sincere interest in adoption, as it may mislead people into thinking that Reece’s Rainbow is a reputable organization.

Reece’s Rainbow has published this:

It is, surprisingly for Reece’s Rainbow, quite clear.

Nonetheless, many people, such as Kenlyn Jones, have violated American gambling laws to raise funds for adoptions.

Reece’s Rainbow has done nothing about this.

Reece’s Rainbow should refuse to work with criminals such as Kenlyn Jones. Andrea Roberts, the director of Reece’s Rainbow, is making a big mistake by failing to address this issue.

Laurie Ahern, President of Disability Rights International (DRI), has documented many problems in Ukrainian adoption.

Notably, Ahern discusses the case of an American family who paid $2,900 to host two Ukrainian girls. Yet, the family did not complete the required background check.

Hosting programs have been a longstanding problem in adoption. Even in advance of the Russian adoption ban, the Georgia, USA based “New Horizons for Children” was prohibited from operating in Russia. Its director, LeAnn Dakake, has not responded to allegations of corruption in the Kaluga Region.

In addition to the child trafficking problem, it is to be noted that organizations such as Gaithersburg, USA based “Reece’s Rainbow” persist in providing photographs of Ukrainian children, in contravention of Ukrainian law. Its director, Andrea Roberts, has not responded to allegations of illegal practices in Ukraine. There are cases in which the children in appearing photographs on Reece’s Rainbow were not available for adoption, resulting in lost money for families who believed the representations of Andrea Roberts. As Dakake and New Horizons for Children, there had been problems associated with Reece’s Rainbow before the ban. Some commentators have postulated that the illegal conduct of Reece’s Rainbow, its staff, and clients, contributed to the ban. In one much discussed case, the Williams family of Oklahoma, USA had posted to “Facebook” boasts of the bribes paid to speed the process of adopting the child from Krasnoyarsk, Russia.

This agency, IAG (International Assistance Group) has closed. Its website is still active, but the Council on Accreditation reports the closure.

This agency had been operated by Larissa Mason. At the time of the ban on Russian adoptions by Americans, Mason announced exploratory programs in nations such as Bulgaria. It would appear these efforts have failed.

Moreover, in one of the conference calls with the US Department of State concerning the ban, a person who represented as being from IAG asked if the US government would impose sanctions on those motivating and supporting the ban.

The US-Russian bilateral agreement was, in retrospect, a clear effort by a small group of adoption agencies to establish a cartel. With the agreement backing them and in effect serving to have eliminated competition, these few agencies could raise their prices, claiming increased expenses following from requirements of the agreement.

As is well in documentation, the agreement was put into effect in November of 2012. There was celebratory activity from the agencies. Yet by the end of 2012, the ban had been put into place. It is likely that the Government of the Russian Federation came to the conclusion that the agencies had manipulated the terms of the agreement. Further, efforts by credentialed officials of the Government of the Russian Federation to participated in activities required under the agreement met with failure. As the example, visiting and examining adopted children. Such a case was seen when a judge in Florida, USA refused access to a Russian child. The judge claimed that the bilateral adoption agreement was not valid in the territory of Florida.

In the course of displaying illegal photographs of Ukrainian children listed on Reece’s Rainbow, Julia Nalle proclaimed that she had found both of her sons through that questionable organization.

But that is not what happened in the case of her second adopted child, John (called “Ian” on Reece’s Rainbow). Initially, they had selected the Reeece’s Rainbow child known as “Harper.” The development was that “Harper” did not want to be adopted.

So the Nalle family received a second referral, to “Ian” but he was not on Reece’s Rainbow:

“Ian” was suddenly added to Reece’s Rainbow, and funds for “Harper” were transferred to him. This is of course nothing but another example of how Andrea Roberts manipulates things to her benefit. She could not, clearly, allow the Nalle family to have to pay for their own adoption. This event makes an utter mockery of the statement that the money is for children, it goes to people such as Julia Nalle who provide support and succor in various forms to Reece’s Rainbow.

It is not by any means clear why Julia and Rob Nalle had made the choice to make such a misstatement. The entire story of “Harper” remains on their blog. Perhaps there is yet some hidden agenda being pursued by them as accomplices of Andrea Roberts?

If and when asked, Reece’s Rainbow’s Andrea Roberts says it is a “ministry” (as in “the means by which something is accomplished” rather than the religious sense) and not an adoption agency.

However, it remains clear that Reece’s Rainbow was clearly engaged in “matching children” in Russia even though that contravened Russian law.

It is the well documented case of Jeremy and Marlo Williams. They sought to adopt a child listed on Reece’s Rainbow. They proceeded with the adoption through the illegal methods of Reece’s Rainbow.

It would appear another family had already begun in the process of adopting the same child. Therefore, as is well documented through the comments of Jeremy Williams’ mother, Peggy Williams, bribes were paid to remove the other family and have the child “designated” for the Williams.

This is a long document showing a conversation started by Marlo Williams. Perhaps but not certainly these emergency funds requested constituted some of the bribes extolled by Peggy Williams!

Given the foolishness of the Williams, much such documentation on their adoption is available. It is to be sent to the Council on Accreditation with the hope that the organization will use the authority given to it by the U.S. Secretary of State to enforce a proscription on Reece’s Rainbow. Given the horrific criminal acts of the Williams family, this poor child should be taken into state care and then allocated to an honest family. To be sure, payers of bribes such as the Williams cannot provide the decent child upbringing environment!