Concerning this outrage, GOAL — the Global Overseas Adoptees’ Link — is questioning the legality of the adoption and demanding accountability from the Korean and Dutch governments.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
26 Comments
Any idea why the couple failed to acquire for their adopted daughter the Dutch citizenship? If I was a responsible parent, that’s one thing that I would have done immediately. It almost sounds like she was just their pet.
As I’ve pointed out on The Marmot’s Hole, this was what made me pissed all the more:
And just to show my contempt for these people, I’m posting the guy’s email address and photo for everyone to see:
Name: Raymond Poeteray
Email: deleted by Robert. Sorry.
Photo:
http://www.occlub.org/occ/acti.....2005_2.JPG
Agreed.
Something smells here.
Focusing more attention on this couple should bring more facts out.
I hope that they (the parents) find themselves under hot lamps in a dark room sweating to answer some very prying questions soon.
Naming the girl “Jade” is also rubbing me the wrong way here. Am I wrong to associate this name as a sex symbol?
littlebrownasian, there are five people in that photo. Please inform us which ones are the couple so that the righteously outraged don’t have to take down all five.
Thanks for the post… I’m a member of GOAL and friends with the director. This really has alarmed a lot of my adoptee friends… And also those who actually are prominent in the adoption arena… Unlike me.. :-). I’m interested to see what happens next.
user-81,
He’s the second from the right. Here’s the reference on that photo: http://www.occlub.org/occ/acti.....-01-ny.htm
littlebrownasian, I guess my sarcasm wasn’t very clear. I think it’s inappropriate to have posted their personal information, regardless of how outraged we might be.
Even though Jade was apparently adopted in 2000, she isn’t mentioned as being part of the family according to the New Year’s Party 2005 article. In contrast to her omission, the couple’s son is referred to. It could be an innocent mistake, but in light of recent events it seems a little creepy.
#4
Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too. They should have had the kid taken away from them just for naming her “Jade.” Not really because it’s a sex symbol, but because in terms of Asian stereotypes, it’s the same as naming your kid “Chopstick.”
Here is something that I just came across — according to the Times Online — they dumped the little girl because she did not fit in…
The article can be read here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t.....048747.ece
@10… yes!
But that’s only part of it.
Being in Asia and adopting an Asian girl and giving her a stereotypical and porn-star name like ‘Jade’, leaves an even greater impression that this couple treated and interacted with her as if she was a commodity — or worse, a vogue bracelet allowed out of her room to show off to friends. And this doesn’t even really touch on the absolutely creepy nature of the whole situation.
Beyond what has already been said about them as parents or people, I’m sure allegations of sex abuse will be coming as some point.
> reportedly because the child could not adapt to Dutch culture.
She was too warm-hearted? Wasn’t stingy enough?
She didn’t adapt? Me thinks what that really means is that her eyes didn’t get any bluer and her hair didn’t lighten out.
To say that she didn’t culturally adapt is ludicrous.
Reading the timesonline link makes it seem even more as if this poor kid may have been treated like a second-class member of the family from the beginning. I find it extremely hard to believe that a diplomat would overlook something as basic as citizenship for an adopted child. Anyway, I just hope that she can find a loving family that doesn’t abuse/neglect her.
littlebrownasian, disregard my remarks. I didn’t realize the couple’s name and faces had already been published in the media.
user-81,
That’s okay. It’s nothing compared to what some in the other blogs came up with concerning the two.
Judging by the photo, the diplomat’s biological children are not endowed with blond hair and blue eyes either.
Sonagi misses my point. It doesn’t matter what the parents looked like. It matters what they expected and wanted, which of course we don’t know for sure. You don’t have to have blond hair to desire that trait (i.e. Hitler).
However, my point is that given the situation, the odd excuses coming from the parents, etc. my thoughts have as good as chance as any of being on the mark.
The idiots (they shouldn’t be called parents) should be thrown in jail!
I get your point, Wangon, but I wonder if you and others noticed that the orange-vested man in the photo does not appear to be of Western European heritage. I googled in Dutch and got a photo of him and his wife:
http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnen.....iek__.html
They are a mixed race couple. He appears to be of South or Southeast Asian descent, and his biological children are mixed race anyway. I don’t think the Korean ethnicity of the girl was the primary reason why the parents did not bond with her. I think it is simply because she was not biologically theirs. Middle class couples spend tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars on fertility treatments, rather than adopting, to have a child who shares their genes, and Korean parents avoid adopting for the same reason. I recall a recent news story about a Korean man who legally divorced his Korean wife, married a young woman from Vietnam, had two children with her, then took away the kids, divorced her and remarried the Korean woman. He went to all that trouble when there are plenty of Korean infants to adopt. Why? I would guess that he wanted only to raise a child who shared his genes.
About the name: Jade was only the 111th most popular name in the USA in 2007, but it was the 7th most popular name for girls in France in 2005. I suspect that the Dutch do not have the same associations with the name that some Americans do.
http://www.babynamesworld.com/meaning_of_Jade.html
I’m down on the couple like the rest of y’all, but the girl’s name is not, by itself, any indication of a problem.
Also, as Sonagi pointed out, going down the race trail here is misleading.
I just learned from that site that “Jade” is derived from the Spanish for “bowel” and was used in the 19th century to mean “nag” or “prostitute.”
Andy, I think your link had the opposite effect on me than you intended it to. Now I’m even more down on the name!
Uh, it is not the 19th century.
Oh snap! No gettin’ by you Mista Jackson!
At least not you.