We strongly object to Intercountry Adoption Act, 22 CFR Parts 96 and 98.
Read on:

As an adopting parent currently in the process of adopting from Russia,
it distresses me greatly to hear of the proposed regulations in this new
Intercountry Adoption Act, 22 CFR Parts 96 and 98, as the adoption
process is already so expensive. It is obvious to me that the people
involved in drafting these regulations have not tried to adopt from a
foreign country. In talking to others going through the same process, it
seems they strongly object to this act as well, for the same reasons.

I am writing to object to the US State Department\'s handling of the
proposed regulations for the Intercountry Adoption Act, 22 CFR Parts 96
and 98. The proposed regulations will be incredibly damaging to
international adoption. I believe that, if they are adopted, they will
greatly increase the cost of international adoption, possibly by as much
as \$5,000 per adoption. Most of this burden will fall on the middle
class, effectively acting as an additional tax on the majority of your
constituents who wish to adopt internationally.

The fundamental process used to write the regulations was deeply flawed.
No serious attempt was made to involve all parts of the adoption
community. For example, the Department of Health and Human Services
maintains a list of over 1,000 licensed adoption agencies and adoption
attorneys. No notice was sent to these organizations and individuals to
request their input. While a few professional associations were
contacted, there are many adoption practitioners who do not belong to
any professional association, and as a result were never given the
opportunity to comment on the writing of these regulations.

These regulations were written with no regard to the amount they will
cost adoption agencies and adoptive parents. At the October 28, 2003
public information meeting in Washington DC, State Department
representatives stated that the cost of the regulations were taken into
account when they were drafted. When directly asked how much the State
Department officials thought the regulations would cost to implement,
they first avoided the question. Then they asked for the adoption
agencies present to provide input on what the agencies thought the
regulations would cost. This begs the question of how they could have
considered cost when they had no cost estimates. At the October meeting,
adoption agencies informally commented that they estimated that becoming
accredited would cost even small and medium agencies \$50,000 or more.

These regulations were written with no meaningful regard to the impact
they will have on small adoption agencies, or possible new agencies in
the future. The cost of accreditation, the expense of \$1,000,000 per
occurrence of liability insurance, the requirement that each agency
maintain 3 months worth of operating expenses in cash, all in addition
to the expenses and difficulties of meeting state licensing requirement
could cause as many as half of the adoption agencies in the United
States to fail, and virtually no new agencies to get started. Small,
grass roots, adoptive parent founded agencies have been one of the most
important and vital aspects of international adoptions, and the proposed
regulations will destroy too many of them.

While the Intercountry Adoption Act addresses several perceived problems
with international adoption, the US State Department never attempted to
quantify the extent or source of those problems. It is my belief that
unlicensed facilitators and families acting independently are
responsible for a majority of the complaints about international
adoption. The problems they cause will not be addressed by the proposed
regulations at all. If adoption agencies have to raise their fees in
order to obtain accreditation, then this will drive more families into
these riskier, potentially unethical adoptions. No attempt was made by
the State Department, or the consultants hired to write the first draft
of the regulations, to systematically contact and survey internationally
adopting families. Contact information about these families is readily
available from the BCIS.

Comments from Maurice Zovi