Why We Aren't Paying Our Children's "Ransom."

This Sunday at Mass, our pastor preached a sermon about the Corporal Works of Mercy, which include things like "feed the hungry" and "give drink to the thirsty," among others.  One of them is "to ransom the captive."  Now, our priest said that he wasn't sure how modern day Americans could do that, and moved on to the next thing on the list.

On the car ride to lunch (Papa Beast and I always enjoy lunch together after church on Sundays), we discussed how we can improve in terms of doing good works and helping others.  Once again, the topic of ransoming captives came up and I jokingly said that some people would say that our adoption fees count.  Immediately, Papa Beast's face changed, and he was quite offended by that line of thinking.

Sometimes, often in Christian circles, adoption fees and other related expenses are referred to as a ransom.  This is sometimes a way to drum up donations toward these expenses. 

We don't agree with the implications of the word "ransom" when referring to adoption.

Much of the fees go to keep an agency going, including paying its staff and dealing with overhead costs.  We chose to work with a non-profit agency, and we know that every dollar we pay them is being used to bring home our children.  But it isn't a ransom.

Because a ransom implies that someone is keeping our children captive on purpose, and is demanding payment in order to set them free.

Who, exactly, is keeping our children captive?

Is it our social worker, who has done so much to help us bring our children home?  She has prepared our documents, taught our classes, spent hours interviewing us individually and together, spent even more hours on the phone helping us evaluate files and come to a decision that is right for our family, and more.

Is it our program coordinator, who has also spent countless hours working on our case and other cases in Central Asia and elsewhere?  Who put so much work into getting the Kazakhstan program going, to no avail? 

Is it our agency itself, which has done so much work for so many orphans? 

Is it the airline?

The hotel?

The doctors we paid to do our medical exams?
The doctor we will pay to review our children's medical files?

None of these people want our children (or any children) to remain in orphanages without a mother and father to love them.  None of them want our adoption to take a long time or even to cost so much.  But, sadly, there are many pieces to the puzzle, and all of those pieces are expensive in terms of both time and money.

Some people seem to imply that the money given to the child's birth country is a ransom.  And yet, most of it seems to go to court expenses and orphanage donations.  As Papa Beast said on Sunday, how could he not pay that forward, when money from previous families has helped to keep a roof over our children's heads?

Others seem upset about giving gifts to the director and workers at the orphanage.  I personally cannot imagine begrudging a lipstick, a bottle of perfume, or a jar of peanut butter (which is expensive and hard to find overseas) to the women who have changed my children's diapers for incredibly low pay (some websites say that orphanage workers in Kyrgyzstan make the equivalent of $1-2 a day).  

It also seems that the culture of the former USSR is often one of gift giving rather than tipping, at least when it comes to certain things, like drivers and translators.  Here in the States, we would probably find ourselves giving people like that a small tip, while in Kyrgyzstan it seems to be more culturally acceptable to give them a small gift instead.  Cultural differences don't constitute a ransom, however.  :)


Note: for a full list of the Corporal Works of Mercy, along with the Spiritual Works of Mercy, see here -- Catholic Encyclopedia.