ADOPTED RUSSIAN BOY REJECTED, IN SELF DEFENSE

You mean that this very deadly dangerous 7 years old who the poor women had not choice but to place him on a plane to Russia show no sign of being so until after January?

Maybe a demon enter his body and all they needed to do was to find a priest.

Since you don't read this response, I'll re-post it here


I'm quite aware of a lot of foster parents and adopters, who get/got problems with their child after some time.

I know a lot of families, who get/got problems with their biological children.

My question David: where, do you suggest, should those biological children be send? Back to ... some stork's nest? (To Scandinavia, since Hans Christian Anderson wrote about that in his fairy tales!!!)

So bad and so fast that the only solution was to run to the airport????????

And I thought the stork brought the babies back from Egypt! Even in the middle of winter - poor creatures.

You know with the kind of rapid onset of behaviors so bad that two growth women was in fear of their lives from one 7 years old to the point that they ran with the child to the airport, the only likely driving force seem to be a demon.

Too bad they did not go by a Catholic church on the way to the airport as it is my understanding that priests are very good at helping out little boys drive out demons.

Please take note of the two t0 three months old scars found on the boy body.


http://www.astrochicks.com/2010/04/torry-hansen-sheriff-to-file-charges-was-artem-saveliev-abused-by-adoptive-family/comment-page-1/

Authorities in Russia say Artem Saveliev, the abandoned Russian boy, has shown no violent tendencies since his arrival. Artem, has been placed in protective care and has been examined by local doctors. What’s most disturbing, is Russian doctors have found “some scars and some bodily injuries,” including marks on his leg and hands. The marks are believed to be two to three months old. Was Artem physically abused by Torry and Nancy Hansen?

Source

This seems to similar how it's handled elsewhere .... besides the reaction of the adopters.

Certainly, Moscow Times report could be biased and only showing the Russian point of view.

But at least, it gives some quite interesting facts (which easily can be cross-checked).

I agree - I for one, have considered adoption, but for financial reasons has not pursued it. If this situation were to change, we would consider again so this is helpful for people like me.

Thank u, Walter.
Yes; it looks like it. I can think of some cases wherein
the kid was OK well into his adolescence and then violently massacred the whole family.
There is no way to judge how much time will pass before the violence begins. I imagine that @ case is unique.


I m not much of a demonologist, so I 'll defer to your expertise on that.



For that matter, even unexpected abrupt changes have happened among parents resulting in divorce.


Well, if the biological child has repeatedly threatened his parents
with felonious violence and then actually attempted to DO it,
as has been alleged in this case (qua starting fires), then I suggest
a complaint to the police and that he be sent to jail, pending trial for his crimes.

Incidentally, that works both ways:
if a parent threatens a child with felonious violence,
then I suggest that the child complain to the police
and send THE PARENT to jail, pending trial for his crimes.


I 'm not enuf of an ornithologist to judge storks' nests, Walter.
I 've had some Robins' nests in my backyard, but that 's about the best that I can do.

(I will confess to having put out peanuts for the Bluejays
and some sunflower seeds for the Cardinals,
but thay did not establish nests on my property.)




Well, he can go there on vacation, if he wants to, after he gets out of jail.





David

It's interesting that both Russian and American authorities are both saying that Hansen is still the legal parent of the boy because she has not relinquished her parental rights in a legally appropriate manner.

I don't think Hansen wanted to go through the legal process of relinquishing her parental rights--not in the U.S. or in Russia. To do that, she'd have to go into a court and admit that she failed as a mother. Even if she described a violent, unmanageable child, she would have to admit she failed to get him help, she failed to get the situation under control. And, I think, she'd also have to admit that she failed to develop any love for this child, and that would make her look like a complete failure as a parent. For Hansen, legally relinquishing her parental rights would have exposed her to shame. To preserve her self esteem, it was far better to handle the matter with secrecy--just quietly return the child, and back out of the whole deal.

So, Hansen sent the child back to Russia with a letter saying she no longer wished to parent him and she wanted the adoption "disannulled". Disannulled--erased, made to disappear, treated as though it had never occurred. In other words, there would be no black mark against Hansen's character or reputation for this misadventure into parenthood--the whole incident would simply vanish, and things, for her, would be as they were before she brought this child into her life. No one ever need know the child had even been in her life--there would be no record of a failed adoption, it would simply be "disannulled".

Hansen seems to have accused the Russians of breach of contract, claiming they deceived her about the boy and saddled her with defective, dangerous merchandise. This approach absolves her of any failure to know what she was doing when she agreed to the adoption. She was merely a babe in the woods, and those mean old Russians took advantage of her. Poor Hansen, too naive to even Google "Russian adoptions" to see what she might be getting herself into before she agreed to parent the child. She had to rely on what those people told her, and they did her wrong. Neat way to try to get herself off the hook, without any admission of responsibility on her part.

To punch up the veracity of her claim, Hansen accused the child of being violent, psychopathic, and a threat to her family. She made these statements in her letter to the Russians without any evidence to back them up, or even any descriptions of what the child had done. Forget what Grandma later said to the media--that was "evidence" presented after the worldwide outrage erupted, in defense of what they had done. Hansen, in the letter she sent with the boy, provided no examples or descriptions of the violent behavior which provoked her to send the child back to them--not a single one. The Russians were simply to take Hansen's words and use their own imaginations to conjure up monstrous acts of violence which this 7 year old had perpetrated upon them. After all, didn't they already know about all of those other violent psychopaths they had previously placed for adoption? Well, this was just one more. Didn't they know how to Google "Russian adoptions"? Hansen didn't seem to think she owed them any detailed explanations. Here's your kid back, just gimme my disannullment.

So, after carefully conjuring up this scheme, to avoid the sense of failure and shame which might have come with relinquishing her parental rights in an appropriate legal manner, Torry Hansen succeeded in bringing worldwide attention to her failure and poor judgment as a mother. The person who wanted to keep private matters under wraps is now the target of government investigations on several levels, and is having her character publicly decimated in countries all over the globe. Why? She was as dumb to the possible consequences and ramifications of sending her child back to Russia, as she had been dumb to the potential adjustment difficulties of a child plucked from a Russian orphanage.

This woman does not realize, in advance, the possible consequences of her actions. And, when confronted with the consequences of what she has done, she does not acknowledge responsibility--she externalizes blame. It's the child's fault, it's the Russians fault. This devil-child made me do it.

Torry Hansen's first move, changing the child's name, not just his last name, but his first name, shows you just how insensitive she was to this child's feelings. His first name, in particular, is an important part of his identity, his sense of self. It's the name he calls himself. And she took that away. She tried to "disannul" his past and his identity. She wanted to re-mold this child, not accept him intact and help him adjust to a new and confusing environment. She may have figured that buying him toys and giving him a home would be enough. He'd learn to conform, he'd be grateful and docile and obedient. And, in time, maybe she would learn to feel some love for him, this new re-modeled child who would love her and satisfy her needs.But, maybe the child resisted these efforts to reshape him. Maybe he had the audacity to assert himself. Maybe he plain didn't like what these women were trying to do to him. And maybe he tried to fight back. He'd try to hit them with an object. He'd threaten to harm them. How many ways can a 7 year old find to gain some leverage in an unequal power struggle? Not too many--at 7 your options, and thought processes are somewhat limited.

This child wasn't really threatening the Hansens' safety, as they asserted in that letter, but he may have been threatening their sense of control over him. If they were really worried about their safety, they would have taken much more direct and immediate action to get him out of the house--like putting him in a hospital. He just wasn't going along with their game plan, he wasn't turning into the child they wanted. Maybe he tracked mud on the rug, ate with his hands, got fingerprints all over the walls, refused to brush his teeth, refused to do as he was told. Maybe this child, who was used to group life in an orphanage, didn't like being alone in a home with one or two women and sometimes a cousin to play with. Maybe he needed structure and routine, like he had in the orphanage. Maybe he needed more children to play with. Maybe he needed to go to school--which would have given him structure and routine and other children to play with, things which would have helped to diminish the confusion of his readjustment, things which would have given him a sense of stability.

But the Hansens weren't thinking about what the child needed, they wanted things done their way. Sending him to school just wasn't on their to-do list. Let him get used to just being at home, let him get used to having a new name. Let him accommodate to us.

Most of all, as time went by, this child wasn't inspiring their love. Those warm, gushy maternal feelings were not springing from the Hansens' hearts. So, the child was just a challenge for them, a source of stress, a burden they hadn't bargained on and didn't want. And they'd be stuck with him for the rest of their lives. What to do, what to do? They can't ask for help, because then they'd be admitting failure. And besides, this isn't the kind of child they hoped for, so things will never get better. What to do, what to do? Disannullment, of course. Just say he's like those other psychopathic kids and send him back. Don't take any responsibility for the situation, just blame the kid and send him back. It all seems so simple. Put him on a plane with a letter, have someone pick him up and take him to the Education Ministry, and it will all be over. Poof, magic, disanullment, it will all disappear...it will all end.

No, Torry Hanson. That might have ended the child's ordeal with you, but your ordeal is just beginning. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

And, guess what, Torry, you still haven't relinquished your parental rights, you are still the parent of this child. This is far from over...

Judgmental much?

Sorry, but this cracked me up:



Our son was six when we adopted him. We kept his name, even moving his old last name to his middle name and sticking our surname on the end.

He immediately began experimenting with names. His poor kindergarten teacher finally gave up and any time a paper was turned in with the name of a kid who was not in the class whe knew who it belonged to.

He changed his name regularly for about a year and a half before settling on a name he likes. And a new middle name that he likes.

The only thing he "kept" was our last name.

So much for a name being identity.

boomerang, your child knew you before you formally adopted him, you weren't a stranger to him. He hadn't just come from a foreign country, with all the confusion that involves. And he chose to experiment with names--the choice was made by him, spontaneously. You had been smart enough not to try to foist a new name on your child.

That doesn't equate with a Russian child suddenly going to live in a different country with a total stranger. He had lived with a mother, then in an orphanage. His name may have been the only constant thing in his life, the one thing that was uniquely his. It may have been very important to him. Your name is part of your self identity. And I doubt that he was the one who wanted or chose the new first name. That's an unlikely thing for a 7 year old child to think about in the midst of a lot of chaos and confusion surrounding relocation and adjustment.

And, when she sent him back to Russia, she took her name back. He went back under his real first name--again, by her choice.

Of course I'm being judgmental--and I'm not very subtle about doing it. I'm entitled to have an opinion about this situation. The whole world is chiming in with opinions.

This Russian boy had to adjust to a new inviroment. Moving from a Russian orphanage to an American middle class home would probably be like one us becoming President of USA overnight without even running for being President.
Then he has to adjust to a new language, not being able to use his own, as noone else is speaking Russian.
The last thing he has from his previous life is his name.

There is a big difference to an American child who knows America, speaks the language and it still took him year to find a name he really liked.

the report I linked earlier in the thread stated that he does not speak Russian.....do you know differently?

He does speak Russian. One of the videos I saw, in which he was speaking with a doctor in Moscow, shows him speaking in Russian as well as English. His English seems limited.
I think it was the tour guide who picked him up at the plane who said the child did not speak Russian. That seems strange. Why wouldn't the child speak Russian?

That is correct, and did sound strange, but I had not heard otherwise factually.

Can you explain how a child in Russia cannot speak Russian?
This is what I saw in an English paper, which contradicts what you have

Adoption officials in Partizansk, near Vladivostok, said they were stunned by the claims.

'She seemed a nice, kind woman. Artem immediately reached out to her. She even learned a few Russian words to communicate with her future son,' said Vera Kuznetsova.

He at least understands Russian. In this video, some of the man's questions are in Russian. The child answers in English

http://en.rian.ru/video/20100412/158534223.html

I was glad that my mom named me David.
I was very pleased to dump my middle and last names.
I wanted a euphonious, easily spelled last name. That was my chosen identity.