Adopting (In) Uganda

Pepperdine first became involved in Uganda in 2006 when Bob Goff invited two of our students to join him for a conference he was hosting for the Ugandan judiciary.  On this trip, these two students (Matt Kraus and Lizz Alvarez) learned that unlike their US counterparts, Ugandan judges do not have law clerks (recent law graduates) or legal interns (current law students) to assist them in their work.  When the students returned from Uganda to Pepperdine, they met with Dean Starr and a plan emerged – Pepperdine Law School would adopt Uganda.  I can remember a speech Dean Starr gave to incoming students the next fall, reminding him how blessed they were and how their legal training would allow them to make a huge impact around the world if they chose to reach beyond themselves.  As he closed, he encouraged them to adopt a country.  Just pick one in need, he said, and look for ways to help in the coming years.

Recently, Jay Milbrandt, the Director of Pepperdine’s Global Justice Program, elaborated on the idea of adopting a country in his blog.  Jay has adopted Thailand.  I will confess to being a bit of a skeptic at first about the whole idea of adopting a country.  It wasn’t until my first trip to Uganda in early 2010 that I became a convert, and now I am an evangelist.  It turns out that one can be of assistance in ways that are beyond one’s own area of expertise.  I am a Torts professor and my law practice and scholarly efforts have focused on this area of civil law (people suing other people or corporations for money damages).  Since getting involved in the Ugandan legal system, my work has focused on the criminal and juvenile law side of things.  Since Uganda is a former British territory, their legal system is somewhat similar to ours.  Consequently, it didn’t take long to get a firm grasp on the pertinent legal principles involved in the juvenile justice projects.  Then last month, my focus expanded into Ugandan family law, which turned out to be equally accessible once I delved into it.

When I met a couple from Santa Barbara (Andy and Sara) in Uganda in early November, I learned that their planned four- to six-week adoption trip to Uganda had been involuntarily extended to nearly nine months, and there was no end in sight.  I wrote briefly about them last month here.  Due to the war in Northern Uganda and to the devastating impact of AIDS over the past thirty years, Uganda is a country of children.  The median age of the Uganda population recently increased from fourteen to fifteen.  Consequently, Uganda has an estimated two million orphans.

Nevertheless, the Ugandan Children’s Act prohibits foreign nationals from adopting Ugandan children unless the would-be parents have foster parented the child for three years in Uganda.  The Children’s Act also alludes to something called “Legal Guardianship,” but does not elaborate on the requirements for getting legal guardianship over a child.  The Act also provides that the “best interests of the child” shall be of paramount importance.  Consequently, the practice among many of the High Court (trial level) judges has been to grant applicants (usually, but not always, American couples) an order naming them as legal guardians over the orphan child.  After receiving an order of legal guardianship, the parents can secure a Visa from the US State Department and then travel back to the US with the child, where a US adoption can be completed.  This, of course, effectively circumvents the Ugandan law prohibiting adoption until after spending three years in Uganda with the child.  Accordingly, some judges refuse to grant legal guardianship orders.

Andy and Sara had been granted legal guardianship by one High Court judge over a young Ugandan boy, but had been denied legal guardianship by different High Court judge over a young Ugandan girl.  They were devastated, but because they were convinced that God had knit this family together (including the young Ugandan girl), they were determined to do everything they could to keep the family together, including staying in Uganda for three years, if necessary.

At the time I met them, they were waiting to get a hearing date from the Ugandan Court of Appeals.  It took only a few moments of interaction with them and their two Ugandan children, along with their biological son, to recognize that this was a family that belonged to each other.  While I didn’t know jack about Ugandan family law, I did know where to find the law.  I also knew those responsible for scheduling hearings before the Court of Appeals.  Within a few days, they had a hearing date and I had familiarized myself with the relevant law.  Over the next couple weeks, one of my former students and I prepared an appellate brief and oral argument outline for their lawyer.

Last Wednesday, they had their day in court and Andy and Sara are reporting that it went well.  We are all now praying not only for a favorable ruling, but also that this ruling will come quickly so that they can transition home to be with loved ones over the holidays.  One way or another, they will adopt these Ugandan children and give them a home.

Only thirty-seven more days until my family and I arrive in our adopted country.