As you can see here, as of 2010, it bought you the time (for what it is worth) and efforts (such as they may have been) of Thomas Difilipo. Note he’s the only person with any listed compensation-is JCICS a “one man show” of some kind?
This is from a 2010 disclosure made by JCICS-why do they not have something on file for 2011?
JCICS stands fro “Joint Council on International Children’s Services” -but what does this mean? What is JCICS “joint” with? What are these councils?
At the end of the day, it sounds like a pretentious and pompous name for a trade association for adoption agencies.
JCICS, like agencies such as EAC, IAG and AAC (often referred by FRUA as “the big three Russian adoption agencies”) has been running about like a beheaded chicken over the Russian ban on American adoptions. And, with about as much effectiveness. The agencies, by Russian law, have had to close down their Russian programs. There is nothing they, JCICS or Mr. Difilipo can do about the ban. The so-called “soft diplomacy” mentioned on the JCICS website, if it happened at all, was a waste of time and effort.
Instead of looking for ways to create a cartel of adoption agencies by banning independent adoptions, JCICS should have looked into ways of responding Russia’s concerns. These include means of checking on adopted children, getting appropriate penalties for adopted children, and deterring, if not outright eliminating the violation of certain countries’ laws on the despicable practice of photolisting.
JCICS did not do these things. Russia has banned adoptions by Americans. JCICS constituency, the adoption agencies, may well reconsider the need to belong to JCICS and Mr. Difilipo may be hard put to find a source for his salary.
It appears as though Russia wants to keep the adoption agreement in place for a year. This is, undoubtedly, to allow Russia to monitor Russian children in the United States.
Even though the agreement will remain in force, it does not, in any way, reverse the ban on the adoption of Russian children by Americans that came into force on January 1, 2013.
The ban is a reaction to many things, including the Magnitsky Act, improper practices of adoption agencies and advocacy groups, and lax treatment of parents who have abused children adopted from Russia.
Organizations serving as trade associations for adoption agencies, such as FRUA and JCICS have had no success whatsoever in lifting the ban or even obtaining information about its implications.
Have a look. This is from the EAC blog.
It should not have been too very hard for EAC and Margaret Cole to know that Russia had an election in March.
But, then they made a guess. What guess? That the bilateral agreement on adoptions (Russian Duma bill 45441-6) “may” be ratified after that. Did they have details on that, or was it just an unlucky guess?
Why unlucky guess? Well, as is now about as well documented a fact as there is, the agreement not only hasn’t been ratified, but it seems that if ratification is going to happen at all, it is going to happen in the very distant future. We may have flying cars in fact before it passes.
This is bad news for EAC and some other agencies. It means they have to remain competitive when in fact what they would dearly love to have is a monopoly. Well the only monopoly they get is one with a Boardwalk.
Sorry Margaret Cole, better luck next time, but for now, you can add another “EPIC FAIL” to your list of accomplishments.
Have a look. In January of 2012, EAC heard “rumors” that the Russian-US bilateral adoption agreement would be taken up in February.
This did not happen.
But take note of the comment about independent adoption. It is in the best interests of EAC and other members of the Russian adoption agency “cartel” for this to end. Why? It means more business for them, and, as the power of their cartel increases, so too does their ability to raise prices.
The truth of the matter is that the Russian Duma has deferred consideration of the agreement indefinitely. The agreement, now nearly a year old, will undoubtedly require modification. Secretary of State Clinton, featured prominently in EAC’s advertising, will not be Secretary of State even if Barack Obama is re-elected. Changes to the agreement would have to be negotiated with either a second Obama administration or an incoming Romney administration.
The earliest, then, that changes could be considered would be early 2013.
Recently, “licensed” Russian adoption agencies have had some serious problems. It appears that a number of them, such as About a Child (AAC), Christian World Adoption (CWA), Hand in Hand, Homestudy and Placement Services (HAPS), and The Small World Foundation of Missouri (SWAF) have come under some level of scrutiny. The motivation for this scrutiny appears to be the illegal use of photographs and medical records of children in Russian orphanages in conjunction with the Reece’s Rainbow organization.
It seems unrealistic to assume that Russia would “accept” agencies who have been involved in illegal activities there.
In any case, Margaret Cole’s prediction about the ratification date of the agreement is worth nothing more than a laugh now. One hopes that she did not rush to buy Facebook stock at $37.00 a share, thinking she had made the proverbial “killing” in the stock market.
Yes, that’s right.
This agency, Families Through International Adoption (FTIA), operated by attorney, Keith Wallace, did just that! They let a single man, pedophile Matthew Mancuso, adopt a young Russian girl. Not only did Mancuso abuse her, he made pornography of her.
Surprisingly, despite Mancuso’s conviction and rather embarrassing congressional testimony from both Wallace and his coordinator, New Jersey resident, Sergei Dymtchenko, FTIA remains licensed in Russia.
What a wonderful addition to the adoption cartel they will make. Not only will prices go up, but it seems that if pedophiles and pornographers want to adopt, they might just still be able to do it.
You can read more about this here.
Here’s a screenshot from Margaret Cole’s “personal” website.
Margaret Cole is the founder and director of European Adoption Consultants (EAC).
As you can see, by her own admission, three of her children work at EAC. Isn’t that cozy?
Equally cozy would be the monopolistic cartel that could result from the Russian adoption agreement. Cole and other agencies have banded together to try to make sure only a few agencies are allowed to operate in Russia.
This is not for the benefit of Russian children. It is so Cole can pay herself and her family members even more, since EAC will be able to raise its prices.