Listen to the article
Thousands of pages of declassified court documents reveal how federal officials and a Virginia court facilitated an American Marine’s adoption of an Afghan war orphan, directly contradicting the U.S. government’s stated policy to reunite the child with her Afghan family.
The Associated Press obtained these records after a three-year legal battle, uncovering how bureaucratic failures enabled Marine Joshua Mast and his wife Stephanie to adopt a child who was being raised by a family appointed by the Afghan government thousands of miles away.
These documents expose a concerning situation that has evolved into an international incident. U.S. government officials warn the case threatens America’s global standing and could be perceived as an endorsement of child trafficking.
The child’s story began in 2019 when U.S. soldiers rescued her from battlefield rubble in Afghanistan and transported her to a hospital at an American military base. The State Department under the Trump administration worked with Afghan authorities to locate her relatives.
Despite these efforts, the Masts remained determined to bring the child to America. They convinced a Virginia judge to grant them adoption rights while the girl was still 7,000 miles away. Using these court-approved documents, the couple later took custody of the child from her Afghan caregivers during the chaotic U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.
The adoption process approved by Fluvanna County Circuit Court Judge Richard Moore bypassed critical legal protections designed to safeguard children. Virginia law does not permit a judge to approve the adoption of a foreign child without the home country’s consent, yet Judge Moore proceeded based primarily on Mast’s assertion that the child was “stateless.”
Legal experts representing various parties in the case have highlighted numerous procedural flaws. The attorney appointed to represent the child’s interests described these shortcomings as “glaring.” Standard adoption requirements—such as having a parent or agency put the child up for adoption, requiring the child’s presence during home visits, investigating the child’s background, and notifying current custodians—were all waived.
Judge Moore later acknowledged these procedural irregularities in a 38-page opinion published before his retirement. At one hearing, he reflected, “I’ll probably think about this the rest of my life whether I should have said, sorry, that child is in Afghanistan. We’re just going to stand down. I don’t know whether that’s what I should have done.”
The newly released records show the court lacked critical information when granting the adoption in December 2020. Federal officials maintain they received no notification of Mast’s adoption petition. Had they been informed, government lawyers state they would have clarified that the child was not stateless and that authorities were actively searching for her family.
Contrary to Mast’s claims that the child required urgent medical attention, records show her doctor had described her as “a healthy healing infant who needs normal infant care” just a month before the adoption proceedings. Judge Moore also remained unaware that a federal judge had previously rejected the Masts’ attempt to prevent the U.S. government from reuniting the girl with her Afghan relatives.
The documents reveal inconsistent approaches within federal agencies. While an Army colonel declared that the military had determined Mast was “attempting to interfere inappropriately,” other officials within the same agencies assisted him.
At Mast’s request, military personnel evacuated the Afghan family caring for the child during the 2021 withdrawal, prioritizing them alongside Afghans who had assisted American forces. Government employees at a Virginia refugee resettlement center later accepted Mast’s adoption documents at face value, unaware that their own government had already deemed them “flawed.” In a heartbreaking scene, a State Department employee, following supervisors’ orders, physically removed the child from her Afghan caregivers and transferred her to the Masts while the Afghan woman collapsed in distress.
This case highlights critical failures across multiple levels of government, raising serious questions about inter-agency communication, judicial oversight in international adoption cases, and the protection of vulnerable children in conflict zones.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
Adoption cases involving children from war-torn regions are always fraught with difficult tradeoffs. I appreciate the AP’s effort to uncover the full story here.
It sounds like there were failures in communication and coordination between different government agencies. Improving those processes could help avoid similar issues in the future.
While the desire to help the child is understandable, the apparent disregard for established policies and procedures is troubling. Maintaining proper protocols is important, even in exceptional circumstances.
I’m glad the full details are now public. Transparency can help identify breakdowns and inform reforms to prevent similar issues in the future.
This case seems to involve a mix of good intentions, bureaucratic failures, and potential ethical breaches. It will be important to carefully review the evidence and determine the appropriate next steps.
The concern over child trafficking is understandable and should be taken seriously. Ensuring the child’s safety and wellbeing must be the top priority.
The AP’s investigation has uncovered a complex and troubling situation. I hope the government uses this as an opportunity to improve its policies and procedures around international adoptions.
It’s concerning that the U.S. government’s actions may have contradicted its own stated policies. Maintaining consistency and transparency is crucial in these sensitive matters.
This is a complex and sensitive case with many layers. I’m curious to learn more about the government’s perspective and how they are balancing international policies with the child’s wellbeing.
It’s good that the full details are coming to light through declassified documents. Transparency is important, even if the situation is challenging.
This case highlights the complexities of international adoption and the potential for unintended consequences. I hope the child’s wellbeing remains the top priority as this situation is resolved.
The threat to America’s global standing is concerning. Rebuilding trust and upholding principles will be critical moving forward.