An Unforgettable Day in the Court of Appeals
I arrived at 8:45 a.m. for the 9:30 a.m. announcement of the appellate decision in the Ribbens legal guardianship appeal. They had been denied legal guardianship at the trial court over sweet little 20-month-old Nya not because they were not perfectly fit parents (they are), and not because Nya is not an abandoned child (she is), but because the trial court judge interpreted Ugandan law not to permit legal guardianship by non-Ugandans unless the would-be legal guardians also complied with the adoption laws. The adoption laws require non-Ugandans to foster parent the child in Uganda for three years before an adoption can be granted. Many trial court judges have been granting applicants legal guardianship to skirt the adoption laws, and so a split had developed among the courts. Today, the court of appeals resolved that split.
At about 9:15 a.m., Sara and Nya arrived with a friend and we all waited together . . . until 11:10, when the Registrar called them in for their ruling. The Registrar read the entire opinion – about twenty pages – as we hung on every word. Ugandan appellate decisions are very thorough, and unlike those in the United States, they don’t reveal how they are ruling until the very end. As a rule, Ugandans speak very softly, and the Registrar did not violate this rule. We strained to hear as he read the opinion, which began by thoroughly summarizing the trial court opinion. It then summarized in detail the arguments made by counsel during the oral argument. Next, the opinion summarized all of the relevant principals of law. It then turned its attention to the factual record, describing each of the exhibits, affidavits, and findings of the welfare officers in both Uganda and the United States with respect to the fitness of the parents and the eligibility of Nya under Ugandan law based upon her status as an abandon child. Surely, we are getting the result next? We leaned forward, strained to hear with our hearts pounding and heard very clearly . . . a description of the points of error alleged by the Ribbens’ lawyer. C’mon dude, we are on page 18, give us a hint – did the Ribbens prevail or not?
“We declare Andy and Sara Ribbens to be the legal guardians of Nya with the full right to take her to the United States” (or words to that effect). Tears. Lots of them. Nya slept through the entire thing.
The opinion was unanimous. And not only did the Ribbens win, but another couple whose case had been consolidated with theirs also prevailed. And not only did that couple win, but all other would-be adoptive parents in Uganda won. The brush is now clear for legal guardianships in Uganda. This case created the precedent necessary to open the doors of the orphanages in Uganda so that hundreds (perhaps thousands) of these orphans will finally have families.
It was such a blessing to be able to be there when Sara called Andy and told him through her tears, “She is ours, she is finally ours.” I filmed the phone call, but will leave it to Sara to share it if she chooses to do so.
Hopefully, the visa process will run smoothly and the Ribbens family can be united in the United States within the next couple of weeks.
It was a good day. Thanks for your prayers and well wishes.
To read Sara’s post from her blog today, click here.
Tears of joy mixed with sadder tears thinking of what these families have gone through and more what the children have gone through. But for now, just back to the tears of joy and adding in some shouts of Hallelujah, praise the Lord!
Good work sir. Good work.
Now, to pray that God will knit together more families and that fewer orphans will be without parents and siblings for birthdays, holidays, milestones, meals, every day things.
This is astounding! Who would have thought God was going to do this wonderful thing? I am sure that you are grateful and humbled to be chosen to make such a difference in Uganda for so many starfish. We love you.
Praise God. I don’t know these people and tears are running down my cheeks.
“This case created the precedent necessary to open the doors of the orphanages in Uganda so that hundreds (perhaps thousands) of these orphans will finally have families.”
Jim, this is a misleading statement. Most (over 80%) of children in institutional care HAVE Ugandan families already who could, with some support be resettled. Intercountry adoption should not take precident over us working hard on the ground to get these children back into their birth families or be placed with a Ugandan adoptive family. I am afriad this naive view of Intercountry adoption is hindering attempts on the ground. If the level of effort and resources put into IA were put into domestic solutions then we would see a huge decrease in children in institutional care and THEN deal with the children who need IA. But most have it the other way around which sustains and supports a system fraught with corruption. Are you really willing to support a current IA system which is paramounts to child trafficking?
Mark,
Thanks for weighing in on this important issue. It is encouraging to know that there are many smart and passionate people who want what is best for the children. I am confident that as everyone works together to develop a good system for identifying and assisting those children who truly are in need of a home, one will emerge. I am glad to know you here in Uganda and look forward to further meetings and interactions as we work together.
Jim
Will pray for Gods perfect will for all those kids. May they find loving christian homes.
YES!!!! still in awe. what a week. well really, what a year!!!