International Adoption....is it right?

Jennifer L

It *can* be right.

We do not live in a perfect world. There are millions of children all over the planet that are in need of families. Most of those children have a very bleak future.

International adoption is not the cure for global poverty. It's a band aid. Any Adoptive parent worth his/her salt will tell you that. The solutions toward global poverty, political instability, famine, etc are far reaching. It is a responsibility of First World nations to work on this.

But First World nations have been throwing money toward this cause, with very little effect. A common argument against international adoption is that the money spent by adoptive parents would be better used to fight poverty as a whole. In my opinion, it's utterly laughable to think that if the trillions of dollars being spent by the G-8 has not even made a dent in the conditions of Third World nations, that the few paltry thousands spent by adoptive parents will somehow fix everything, that all the causes for children being orphaned/abandoned would be resolved, if only the would-be adoptive parents would spend their money that way.

Yeah. Right.

So, while world leaders are trying to solve these complicated problems, what happens to the orphaned or abandoned children waiting for these solutions to help them?

Precious little.

This is where international adoption can be a band aid. It's a stop-gap for children that don't have families RIGHT NOW. Or at least, that is how it should be.

Unfortunately, many adoptive parents are unwilling to consider adopting older children or sibling groups (domestic or abroad) and are willing to pay huge sums to adopt an infant or toddler. Less than 8% of all visas granted to international adoptees are for children older than 5, while less than 3% are for children older than 8. (2005 statistics)

Anytime there is such a "demand" and huge amounts of money are involved, there is the potiential for corruption. This is where the terrible stories about Guatemala have originated.

It becomes the responsibility of the adoptive parents to ensure that they are dealing with a legitimate, reputable agency and to ensure that the adoption was completed legally and ethically. This isn't always easy to prove.

In our adoption journey, my children were relinquished to an orphange by their mother, specifically for adoption to the United States. They stayed in the orphanage for almost three years while an adoptive family was found for them. When we went to the home country to complete the adoption, we met with and spoke to their mother. (And yes, the children were old enough to verify that this was indeed, their mother). To me, that's the best "check". Don't trust the agency, speak directly to the individuals involved. That is becoming more and more common with international adoptions, however it's not possible in all cases and in all countries.

A few words about cultural preservation: yes, this is very important. APs that adopt non-English speaking children (especially older children) should be marginally conversant in that child's language. I fully support adopting sibling groups (there are MANY sibling groups available for adoption. A reputable agency will not separate siblings!!) This helps the "genetic mirror" factor and more importantly, keeps a family together. The adoptive parents have an obligation to keep a cultural connection alive, make return visits to the country of origin, promote a positive ethnic pride and connect with other families of the same ethnicity. This isn't always easy, but it's important.

My children are from Liberia (Africa) and we live in a city with a very large African refugee population. We have been welcomed and embraced with open arms by the African community. I've been told that "this makes you our sister, too!" I have never experienced ANY feelings of resentment, condemnation or anger from the African community. None. We are approached on the street by African immigrants and greeted warmly, given phone numbers, etc. The overwhelming response has been positive, encouraging and supportive. The only time I've ever been called a child trafficker is by the (presumably) never-been-impoverished Westerners on THIS forum.

Good luck on your paper

Randy B

While I agree that yes, there are problems in some areas and in some cases there are also plenty of international adoptions that are totally legal and ethical in my mind. The two children I personally saw in the Indian orphanage who had badly cleft pallets and were adopted to Sweden and the UK respectively were good examples. These children would never have been adopted in India and were more then likely placed in the orphanage because of their "deformity". My own daughter, with her medical and developmental issues is another good case. She was a child born in a rural village in a country where girl babies are seen as more of a liability then anything. She was placed for adoption and by the time we came along she was 8 months old and only 4.5 kg (10 lbs). Within no time, I'm convinced, if someone hadn't come along to adopt her she would have wasted away and died. In many of these countries domestic adoptions, to the numbers they need, are often not an option and international adoptions are the only hopes that many of these children will have.

People are always going to quote all of the studies of problems and all of the allegations and while I don't deny that there are those issues, at the same time they (the studies) don't capture the full picture of what is actually going on and the benefits that can be had in the system.

cmc

I live in India and see incredible poverty every day on every street. Many children are not cared for and are exploited - some dragged around by beggars in the hopes of getting more money etc. There are cases of international adoptees being abused, but I think it is far more common for them to have a better life in their new home. There is definitely corruption in the adoption process here - which they should work on eliminating. However I think eliminating corruption in adoption will be a lot less difficult than eliminating global poverty, so I support international adoption.

There aren't enough homes in India for all the children who need them, so domestic adoption alone won't be enough. Sadly the adoption process is such a mess that children may live their entire lives in an orphanage without the chance to find an adoptive family. There is more wealthy in India now, but it is not shared by all. Also there is still a lot of bias towards boys, so often girl children are neglected. Everyday I read stories about young girls being killed by falling down a well, being run over by a car etc - and it seems it is nearly always girls. I know all these families do not want to place their children for adoption, but for those that do I think it should be an option.

Mei-Ling

"They want a fresh new baby, and will overlook the crimes that can be committed to secure that baby. They dont want to parent, or they would become foster parents. They want a new baby, plain and simple, and there aren't enough here in the states."

No no, I disagree! Just because you don't want to foster a child doesn't mean you don't want to parent. What logic is THAT?! :

But OTOH... being an international adoptee, I have mixed feelings on the subject. For the most part, I wish it did not exist as I have witnessed pain on both sides during contact and reunion - not just from MY personal journey, but from other videos. But I also recognize there is a necessary need for it as long as poverty, malnourishment, and China's OCP exist.

I don't like it because it separates families in order to create families. I don't like it because adoptees return to their birth countries and are seen as outsiders because they do not know the language or the customs. I don't like it because of the heartbreak it causes.

Being someone who HAS "spoken" to her parents via the microphone, I can honestly tell you that doing language classes wasn't enough. Doing tutoring wasn't enough. Doing a language exchange with an immigrant wasn't enough. The only thing "enough" in my opinion is to go TO the country and immerse yourself. And that's the sort of primal loss that adoption forces upon an adoptee - to not only take them away from their origins, but to inevitable disconnect them from even having the TOOLS to try and connect to their families and cultures.

Speaking to my mother through the microphone was one of the most happy yet painful times during my entire life so far. Seeing their pictures made me realize ("OMG I look like someone!") how much of a reassurance it was to FINALLY see someone who looked genetically like me. Hearing their voices... oh, the heartache. I still don't know if it's better just to HEAR them, or if the humiliation is worse because I can't understand them without a translator.

Please watch the link I have pasted for you - that is the reality of many birthmothers in Korea who have FINALLY had the chance to touch and hug their children. Just make sure you have tissues handy, because you'll need them. I sure did.

Penny P

I think it can be right. There are cases of corruption in adoption. But thre are also alot of orphans in third world countries who will live on the streets, or in orphanages. The amount of poverty in these countries is so huge, not like poverty in developed countries. It's not the same. We are all citizens of the world. It is a good thing to give a homeless family-less child these things through adoption....whether international or domestic. Helping orphans is a good thing! Babies, toddlers, children, teens.....homes and families are always better than institutions. Yes, the kids may loose some of their culture. I bet that if asked, most of those kids would pick a family and a home hands down, over living in an institution or the streets in poverty. I don't know how anyone can say otherwise.

Sophie

yes it is right

kateiskate

As an international adoptee, I do not think it is 'right'. I think separating a child from it's mother, home country and culture, having it learn another language and become an outsider in two countries is unnatural and harsh.

I do think that many parents choose to adopt internationally because they are looking to adopt a baby and, let's face it, the waiting lists are longer than the available babies stateside. Along with the need to adopt infants, a lot of parents get caught up in wanting to 'save' a baby. Rather than allowing international adoption to 'save' babies, I think a greater focus should be put on helping these women raise their own children and when that fails, domestic adoption within these countries. At least that way the children will not eventually have language and cultural boundaries when they want to search. That would really be one less layer of pain for international adoptees.

cantstopLinnyG

In my opinion, it is legalized human trafficking. Many foreign countries have seen a rise in rape, because people realize how much money a newborn is worth. Kidnapping, rape, murder and baby selling are horrific crimes against humanity. Yet Americans look the otrher way and buy into the line that "Oh, these children will waste away in an orphanage". They want a fresh new baby, and will overlook the crimes that can be committed to secure that baby. They dont want to parent, or they would become foster parents. They want a new baby, plain and simple, and there aren't enough here in the states.

No child deserves to lose their families, culture, language or identity. International adoption, in my opinion, will be banished soon.

international adoption links.

http://www.youtube.com/user/adoptedthemovie

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/outlook/2009-01-11/adoption/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/09/AR2009010903118.html

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/4/emw117838.htm

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12185524

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/outlook/2009-01-11/adoption/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27859660

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4508&page=0

Just because a child is available for "adoption" in a foreign country, doesn't make the adoption legal, or moral.

******ETA****
Sorry you disagree with me Mei-Ling. I disagree with your disagreement. If people really just want to parent, they would become foster parents. But they DONT. Their need to parent is about THEM, and not about the child. They want a new fresh baby, and most will stop at nothing to get them. They dont want to foster, because foster kids KNOW their first families. Too much baggage. Adoption, unfortunately, is RARELY about the child, it's about the parents.

Independ"ant"

No its not right nor a right. Its more like the violation of the human rights of the natural parents and their children.

Step into my parlor......
http://www.libertadlatina.org/
http://www.libertadlatina.org/Crisis_Adoptions.htm

jessica300

no.

http://www.brandeis.edu/investigate/gender/adoption/index.html

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: