Jenny Bowen got the most amount of votes in the race to carry the Olympic torch in Beijing in 2008.

Of course, the final decision will be made by a committee in China but it is pretty amazing that Jenny and her organization, Half the Sky, have made such an impression. If, in fact, that Jenny and eight kids from the orphanages that Half the Sky supports gets to run, the impact for the kids in orphanages in China will be enormous.

While many people in and around adoption from China continue to fret over the length of the wait for their children and the implications of the new requirements for parents, the Half the Sky Foundation is focused on the children who remain in China’s orphanages. They supply much needed support to the children and the facilities who are waiting for their ‘forever families’ including ‘Granny’s’ to love and hold them, schools, and playgrounds.

Jenny Bowen and her team have done a remarkable job at working with the government in China to take care of the kids in China.

Maybe if Jenny and the kids do run, it will not only raise awareness for the children in China, but for kids in need all over the world.

Whatever happens, my hat’s off to Jenny and the people that have made this happen. I am proud to be a part of it.

With Respect,
Deb

Yesterday, I voted for Jenny Bowen, the founder of Half the Sky-an organization dedicated to making the lives of children living in orphanages better-to carry the Olympic Torch.

Jenny, an American, lives and works in Beijing. She said she will run with eight Chinese children who are orphans.

On many levels this is a wonderful thing-it raises awareness for the kids who are left behind in China’s orphanages, the publicity could help Half the Sky raise money which could help more children, its a great image of international co-operation and it is great showcase for adoption.

Today, I read some of the comments on the site. There are some people that think Jenny is ‘cheating’. They question how she could have gotten so many votes in a short period of time. Indeed, her votes nearly doubled in less than 24 hours and it appears she is closing in on the leader.

This is a perfect example of the power of the internet-adoption groups-representing thousands of families formed via adoption-all over the world are being rallied to Jenny’s side.

Of course, in many cases the rank and file Chinese citizen is not privvy to groups, blogs and other lightning fast communciation tools. It is easy to see where the idea that Jenny was cheating could come from.

So, is Jenny’s selection really a good thing? I am certainly not as sure as I was yestday. I wonder how we would react if a Chinese citizen had carried the torch in Atlanta or Salt Lake City? I suspect there would be outrage that one of ‘our own’ got supplanted by someone who was not a citizen. Should Jenny win, what impact will it really have on international relations? on adoption?

The Chinese have a long tradition of saving face. How will they handle the international public scrutiny on their adoption policies. Not only will the world comment on what happens to China’s children, but the Chinese themselves will be made aware of just how many kids are leaving the country or languishing in orphanages. Much of this information has been kept from rank and file Chinese citizens.

So, like most complex questions there are positives and negatives. I know which way I am leaning. Maybe the eight kids representing all the children in the orphanages should carry the torch…

What do you think?

With Respect,
Deb

Please take a minute and vote for Jenny Bowan to carry the Olympic Torch in Beijing. Jenny is the founder of the Half the Sky Foundation which is dedicated to the children in China that are still in orphanages. The program has done some incredible things-increased the number of foster parents, improved orphanage conditions dramatically, provided education and medical care. In short, this organization is performing miracles. We would love to see Jenny represent the orphans of China-usually girls. They are a group that is often forgotten. Please vote for Jenny today-and pass this onto anyone you think might be interested.

Vote here:http://pub1.chinadaily.com.cn/olympics/torch/members.shtml?mid=212

Good Monday morning and welcome to October. October is a busy month-the Supreme Court begins its sessions today, harvest festivals begin popping up all over the country,kids gear up for Halloween-second only to Christmas in terms of retail sales.
Beijing is choosing their Olympic torch bearer and people all over the world put their own unique spin on the transition from summer to autumn.

We celebrated Asian Mid-Autumn festival last night-albeit a few days late-we ate moon cakes (we liked the winter melon the best), the kids made dumplings and we ate delicious, homemade and authentic Chinese food. Seated at our table were three Shanghai natives, one girl who’s mom is Chinese and her father white, one woman born in Uruguay, a couple of plain old Americans of European ancestry and a girl who joined her family via adoption from China.

It was quite exciting-people speaking in Chinese and Spanish, the kids trying to communicate with the the non-English speaking group, the English-speaking rolling Chinese words around on their tongues, and the non-English speakers doing the same with English. Of course, there was plenty of Spanish thrown in to the mix.

As I was shooed out of my kitchen when the Shanghaiense women took over, I was able to sit back and watch the show. Not once did I hear the kids-or adults-become frustrated by the difficulty in communication. Not once did I hear anything about the ‘unusual food’. The kids-and adults-listened in awe as they were told the story of the Mid-Autumn festival communicated in Chinese, Spanish, English, and pantomime.

Of course, there were some goofs-we forgot to treat the older women with the respect they deserved. We should have seated them at the head of the table-but everyone sat down willy-nilly. But in general, we managed the evening without international incidents.

We were lucky to truly bring authentic experiences to our children. It broadened their horizons and gave them insight into a distinctly different cultural experience.

With more of these kinds of experiences the kids (and their adults) will truly be able to understand and respect culture, choices and ‘abilities’. We are five kids closer to a bully-free future!

“The Jade Dragon” is a story of two girls-one born in China-Stephanie-and adopted and one born in the US to Chinese-born parents-Ginny. Ginny, feeling like the odd-girl out is thrilled when Stephanie joins her class. At last, another girl who looks like her. Maybe she can finally get a best friend. Unfortunately, Stephanie is not interested in anything Chinese-even Ginny-and Stephanie’s mother continually rants about Stephanie’s lack of “Chineseness”, making it difficult for her daughter to forge a relationship she desires.

While the story, is about the relationship between the two girls, it is the context in which the story plays out that is interesting. Written in the 80s with references to “The Smurf” and “Star Wars”, the language used about adoption is now considered a no-no. For example, Ginny’s mother refers to Stephanie’s birth parents as her ‘real’ parents-a moniker that parents whose children joined them via adoption have fought hard to stamp out and how unlucky Stephanie is because her parents didn’t want her (ouch). Ginny’s mother also refers to Ginny as an ABC-American Born Chinese. She scoffs at Ginny’s attempt to walk the line between dutiful Chinese daughter and hip American girl.

Most interesting is the peek into the girls’ psyches. Both girls feel that they are outcasts-different in a fundamental way. Ginny asks Stephanie if she wishes her white parents were Chinese. Stephanie confesses that she wishes they all were white. Ginny also ‘confesses’ to not wanting to be Chinese-more to please Stephanie and gain her trust than anything else.

This type of story is important for a couple of reasons:
1. It provides insight on the difficulties growing up as a person of color in
the world.
2. It highlights the juxtaposition between kids wanting to be “American” and
their parents desires to instill traditional values and culture.
3. It shows the lenghths that kids will go to in order to fit in.

While I cringed at the ‘improper’ adoption language and other slang, my daughter didn’t blink at them. She related to both characters-Stephanie for being the Asian daughter adopted by white parents and to Ginny, always feeling like she didn’t belong-except when surrounded by other Asians.

Your children may not be Asian or adopted, but the feelings that Ginny and Stephanie explore may be a wake up call. If your kids aren’t ‘different’ they may get a better understanding of what that feels like. And you can start to “really” understand the power of language for form values.

With respect,
Deb

The battle over the appropriateness of a recent YouTube video depicting adoption from China is still raging-weeks after the video was first uploaded. This discussion followed hot on the heels of the controversy generated by O. Yang’s photos of white fathers and daughters born in China. Like everything, some people feel that it is satire and other think it is a horrendous and destructive and racist piece of ‘entertainment’.

Who is right? And do we have the right to make that decision?

Merriman-Webster Online dictionary defines satire as:
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly

Franky, both the video and photo series meet the criteria as satire. Yet, members of the community were enraged that these artistic endeavors saw the light of day.
They want these types of things stricken from our collective memories? Other think that if something offends you then you should just not partake.

So what is a thinking person to do? Surely, ignoring the offensive material is one way. Censorship of offensive material may be desirable, but not realistic in our free speech society.

Thinking people have to come to grips with the fact that there will always be material, billed as entertainment, will sneak into our lives-and it will always create controversy. However, as time goes by, things that were once considered ok, become obsolete (think about Aunt Jemima Pancakes-Aunt Jemima was portrayed with a kerchief on her head, thick, full lips and curly, curly hair early on…and by the next generation her look had changed significantly because the earlier look was hopelessly stereotyped.) We can hope that what we find offensive will go the way of the original Aunt Jemima.

Until that happens, we might want to look at these things as opportunities to help our kids understand the role that the media plays in our points of view of what is ok and what isn’t. We can use these opportunities to discuss the ‘whys’ and ‘what ifs’ of our value systems.

It is a great opportunity for you to show your kids the difference between satire and racism-from your point of view. We should not give up the fight to eliminate bias and racism, but we should use what examples to show our kids the consequences of ’satire’.

With luck, by the time our kids get older, they will find hurtful satire has gone by the wayside because they don’t get the play they once had.

With respect,
Deb

Just when we were all excited about the way Binky Barnes’s family expansion was handled on PBS, another video surfaces on YouTube. You don’t even what to see what was behind door number two.

Someone thought it was funny to present adoption from China as a shopping trip-pick the one you want, wrap her up and bring her home. The video came complete with images of girls from China in plastic shopping bags. Not only was the video in horrendously bad taste, it was just plain stupid.

Of course, those in the adoption community were shocked and dismayed at the portrayal of adoption, but the damage goes far deeper than families formed by adoption.

While Binky Barnes was likely watched by many people, the video on YouTube had the opportunity to travel worldwide. It is likely that many more people were able to see the YouTube video than watched the Arthur episode.

In 30 seconds-or even from the opening shot, the YouTube video did more damage to adoption than we have seen in a long time. It is frustrating, of course, that just as we think we are making progress, something devastating happens that makes us shake our collective heads in bewilderment. Some people will give up, thinking that they can’t do anything about it. Others will become militant and angry, determined to have the world see their ‘correct’ point of view. Still others, will hunker down, regroup and continue to raise awarness and consciouness that bias-and clearly the YouTube video was biased-is just not acceptable in the 21st Century.

While the target of this YouTube video was adoption and adoption from China in particular, the next target could be ANY group, or anyone who is ‘different’. The target of the next attack could be your family, your child, your community.

The 9/11 attacks were caused in part by bias against Americans-that is a very visible reminder of the consequences of bias.

It is our job to stop biases before they escalate-to bullying, to violence or worse.

What course of action will you take in your home today?

With Respect,
Deb

Finally, families formed through adoption have something to cheer about in the media. For the first time in recent memory a media vehicle has hit on the facts and emotions about adoption on the nose!

Congratulations are in order to the team, lead by Executive Producer Pierre Valette, who created the Arthur episodes following Binky Barnes and his family as they expand their family with the adoption of a baby girl from China. This is one of the first shows featuring adoption that wasn’t demeaning or pandering. In fact, reviews indicate just the opposite-the show was able to accurately portray some of the feelings that a waiting sibling might have when facing the addition of a new family member. Binky Barnes’s emotions run the gamete from excitement to dismay-and fear of getting the dreaded inoculations needed to travel to China to meet his sister.

This episode-and its sequel go a long way in normalizing adoption bringing it out of the shadows and exposing children and their parents to family formation in the real world. Attention is even paid to proper adoption language (probably for the first time in TV history). This show is a far cry from other adoption-related shows including the infamous Who’s Your Daddy which served only to infuriate families all over the country and exploit the participants.

Thank you Pierre Valette, the entire team and the folks at PBS for making this happen. We just took a giant step in leveling the playing field for families formed by adoption.

With respect,
Deb

Never one to miss the chance to ‘beat a dead horse’, even I was surprised to see the fervor which still surrounded the photo exhibit, Daddy and I by O.Zhang.

It is interesting to see how people have become experts-in photography, East-West relations, father/daughter relationships and even ESP! The flap over the appropriateness of the photos and their ‘true’ meaning’ continues unabated-particularly in the adoption community.

As of yesterday, some of the more skeevy photos were taken off of O.Zhang’s site. This morning, one adoption group member reported that the photographer had taken note of the derision the photos were causing and reacted by re-arranging her website.

I am not sure if this is the effect that is most beneficial-in the long run-for our kids. On the positive side a group of people joined together and had their voices heard. Our kids can see democracy in action which is a great thing.

However, I wonder if this is the best course of action for kids long term. Intentional or not, O.Zhang’s photos made people think about their biases and stereotypes. Some people were uncomfortable and (some oblivious, too) with the feelings that came up. It’s ok to be uncomfortable, right? Sometimes changing oneself takes time and courage. Shouldn’t we be thanking O.Zhang for pushing bias to the front burner? Isn’t owning our biases the way to keep them to ourselves and not pass them on to our kids?

Of course, it is. But like any problem, the first step is recognizing that there is a problem. Zhang’s photos forced us to remember that our biases are alive and well, albeit, deeply buried. As the old saying goes, “Da Nile, isn’t just a river in Egypt.”

The question is what are we going to to about it. Here are some thoughts:

1. Give yourself a break for feeling biases-we all do, no matter what.

2. You have a choice whether or not to pass your biases onto your children. That involves being as present and aware as you can be. When your child hears you mutter, “go faster you little old lady” when you are driving behind a senior citizen, they will pick up that there is something wrong with being old. They will file that away and pull it out when they ‘need’ to.

3. Your language matters. You have probably tried to limit your use of four-letter words around your kids, but you might not have thought about other labels that serve to cement biases. Labels like ‘illegal alien or immigrant’ are not only divisive, they are not accurate. People are in the US without paperwork-which is illegal, but people themselves are not illegal. Don’t dismiss language as ‘political correctness’ and wait for it to wane. Respectful ways to talk about people who are different than you are makes a BIG impression on your kids. It is the first step in raising kids that are respectful-and successful.

Anything that makes us stop, think and react is a good thing-especially as it relates to how we raise our kids.

While I was not so crazy about the photos-I think that they are doing a good job of making us talk about some of our racial, sexual and cultural issues.

I welcome things that make me think and challenge me to be a better parent-even if it makes me crazy.

With Respect,
Deb

Lots of talk about photographer O Zhang’s exhibit Daddy and I (http://web.mac.com/zhang_o/iWeb/Site/Daddy%20&%20I%20.html) has been bubbling up in blogs and Internet chat groups over the past week or so.

The exhibit is a series of photographs of girls who joined their families via adoption from China and their Caucasian fathers. Sounds good so far, right?

The artist’s statement about the photos indicates that he was trying to “capture the affection between a female child an an adult male”-especially when different racial and cultural groups are part of the mix. Zhang further writes, “through the relationship of the emerging feminine power of the adolescent girl to the mature father, each image explores the relation of the two often divided cultures: East and West.”

Sounds reasonable, right?

Why, then, are the photos creating such a stir? Maybe it is about the vague sense of unease we get when we look at the photos? We ask ourselves, “Are these poses appropriate for a father and daughter?” or “Are these photos suggestive?”. Are they intentionally provocative? What would your reaction be if you didn’t know they were fathers and daughters?

Our reactions are largely based on our own internal wiring and the ever present biases and stereotypes that are part of what makes us human.

And maybe, despite the photographers ’statement’ about the images, that is what the photos are supposed to do. Instead of simply exploring the relationships between fathers and daughters in a trans-racial family, the photos force us to come to grips with some long-held biases relating to older men and young girls, sexual stereotypes and the ‘right-ness’ of trans-racial families to name just a few.

Whatever the photographer’s intent, the result is that people are looking at these photos and reacting-viscerally. Some are appalled, shocked and angry. Others think that the images do show the love and respect between fathers and daughters that transcend race and culture.

But, the important thing is your reaction to the photos? Do it make you feel warm and fuzzy or creepy? Maybe you think that the brouhaha is a just another publicity stunt to help the artist sell more photos and stage more shows. Whatever, you think-the point is you did think.

Thinking is the first step to identifying our biases and stereotypes. We don’t have to get rid of them if we don’t want to. We just have to choose whether or not we want to pass them on to our kids.

Jack Welch, the former CEO of General Electric, once said, “we need to view reality as it is and not as we want it to be.”

Bigotry and bias have no place in the 21st century-the world is too diverse-and dangerous for us not to figure out how we can find our place without stepping on someone else’s place.

And just so you know, I did think the photos were skeevy. They had a big yuck factor for me.

With respect,
Deb

Parents in Tennessee were ordered to reliquish custody of their Chinese-born daughter to her birth parents.

Just reading those words can send shivers down the spines of even the most secure adoptive parent. But when you know the rest of the story-that the child had been in foster care in US because her birthparents lost their income and medical insurance and did not understand that they were potentially giving up their custodial rights. They just thought they could leave her in foster care until they got back on their feet.

Seven year later, the young girl-who has lived with the Tennessee couple-will be returned to her birthparents by the end of July. The judge ruled that the birthparents did not understand the consequences of their actions and in fact, had been fighting for her since they put her into foster care.

Some people are outraged-how can rip away all that the girl has come to know? How can the seperate her from the ‘parents’ who raised her for the last seven years? Many wonder what the long-term consequences of the decision on the child.

At the end of the day, this girl belongs with her parents-in this case the ones who brought her into this world. In fact, all children are better off if they are raised by their birthparents and in their birth-culture if it is possible.

Now, this doesn’t mean adoption is wrong and that all children of adoption should be returned to their birthparents. Far from it. What it means is that we better make darn good and sure that the children who are available for adoption, are, in fact, available for adoption. No glitches in the system should be acceptable.

The heartache and heartbreak that everyone in the Tennessee situation went through is enormous and has to be eliminated-not just in this case but for all adoptions.

It is stories like this-that make national headlines-that reinforce the negative stereotypes about adoption. In this case, it also reinforces stereotypes and myths about Chinese people and their acceptance in this country.

Adoption, like racism, sexism, ageism etc is just another divide-another way for people to seperate themselves from others-and not in a positive way.

We have to stop all the ‘isms’. We have to get our kids on a level playing field-no matter what they look like, where they come from or how they joined their families.

Let’s do the right thing…starting right now.

With respect and celebration,
Deb