“Every time celebrities such as popstar Madonna and actor Angelina Jolie decide to adopt a child from a developing country, they set off the same old debate: is it right to create a rainbow family and should the developing world be insulted by the suggestion that we cannot take care of our children?” Saira Kurup, Times of India, April 5, 20091
 On April 1st, 2008, the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption entered into force in the United States, thus changing the landscape of international adoptions by American couples. The global impact is not yet known, as the U.S. adoptions accounts for about half of all the adoptions worldwide and changing the rules of the game will impact, not only the U.S. but host countries as well.2
In the United States, there were 17,438 international adoptions in 2008, 19,613 in 2007, and a peak of 22,884 in 2004.3 U.S. families pay an average $30,000 for an international adoption, including at least one visit to the host country. Many factors may have been at play for the recent decrease in international adoptions amongst Americans, such as increased delays and bureaucracy, crackdowns on baby trafficking and other unethical practices, moratoriums, fluctuating regulations, and the slowing of the U.S. economy.4 Changing patterns in adoptions from Russia and China accounted for 90 percent of the decline. 5
Related International Laws
There are a number of international conventions in place to address international adoption. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, was ratified by 192 countries. The United States and Somalia have signed the convention, but not ratified it. Another international convention, the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, 1993 was approved by 75 nations, including the U.S. It focuses on protecting all parties in international adoption and preventing child trafficking. It also focuses on placing children who are up for adoption in their home countries, if possible.
The Hague Convention was finally enacted in the U.S. on April 1st, 2008.6 This will greatly impact how international adoptions are carried out within the U.S. One non-binding provision, “right to background information,” may lead to more closed adoptions. Private adoption agencies will now need to be accredited. It must be noted that Hague countries are still allowed to adopt children from non-Hague countries.
Concerns about The Hague conventions include difficulty in enforcing the convention, as well as the steep price tag associated with its adoption.
International Adoption Trends
The top countries for global adoption shift as countries revisit their laws and place holds on international adoptions. In recent years, top senders of international adoptions have included:
- China (whose numbers are decreasing due to easing of the one-child policies and due to stricter laws concerning age and physical and mental health of the adoptive parents);
- Guatemala (where, unfortunately, fraud is on the rise and the U.S. State Department has advised couples not to initiate adoption with this country);
- Romania (known for dire conditions in its orphanages and for adoptees with significant mental health issues);
- Russia (once popular, but has recently enacted stricter rules, following a high profile, 2005 murder of an adopted Russian child);
- Cambodia (whose adoptions have dropped significantly following a 2001 State Department ban due to corruption and baby-selling);7 and,
- South Korea (once a leader in international adoption, but has gradually reduced their numbers and plans to end its program by 2015).8
Attitudes towards international adoption are changing in Cambodia and China, which are seeing a rise of domestic adoptions. In Cambodia, some orphanages are starting to attract local families to live in the orphanage compound and act as foster parents and care for the children until they graduate high school. Foster parents are paid and agree not to have their own children until three years after they have joined the orphanage compound, giving them time to bond with the orphans.9
In China, local adoptions are also on the rise, as social attitudes evolve towards adopted children and as economic conditions allow for more couples to afford adopting a second child. There are no limits on the number of orphans that families can adopt. Additionally, couples in China are marrying later, thus unable to have their own children and are therefore looking to adopt. Foster parenting is becoming increasingly common as well; the children tend to remain at the orphanages, while foster parents visit them and give fund to the orphanage to help raise them.10
Case Study: African Adoption Laws
Nigeria has emerged as the top African country for U.S. adoptions. Over the past couple of years, adoptions from Ethiopia and Liberia have risen as well. Adoptions from Africa have been on the rise, as the number of orphans has been increasing, due to the impacts of AIDS and related illnesses, and also due to the increased acceptance of trans-racial adoptions within the U.S. Traditionally, African children have lived within the community, with extended family raising the children; however, AIDs-related losses have depleted the extended family options.11
John Ishiyama and Marijke Breuning of Truman State University wrote an analysis explaining the differences in African adoption laws.12 They identified several broad areas of controversy for international adoptions: international legal issues, the impact of globalization and neo-imperialism, cultural factors, and democracy and governance issues.13
Ishiyama and Breuning explained that until the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, 1993, there was a lack of transparency on Africana adoption. Some feared that babies were being sold. This became less of an issue after the convention was passed. They explained that globalization and neo-liberalism were factors because African viewed adoption by Western countries as stealing “precious resources” from Africa for their own betterment. Ishiyama and Breuning note that others feel that some international adoptions could shed light on Africa and lead to increased charitable giving or improved social services for the children left behind.
Ishiyama and Breuning found that despite all of these potential issues, the strongest indicator for Africa adoption laws is the country’s economic interdependence with the international community. So countries that were engaged with the global economy were more likely to have adoption rules that are less strict.
They noted though that those countries with the most inter-country adoptions were not members of the Hague Convention, so most African adoptions are not held accountable to Hague Conventions restrictions.
Problems in Global Adoption and Human Rights Concerns
Human rights abuses are a major issue of concern. Unfortunately, there are many examples of children being taken from their home countries, who were taken under dubious circumstances. One such fraud scheme in 2007 involved 81 Samoan children being taken under the guise of receiving a U.S. education; parents were told the children would return home when they turned 18. Instead, the children were adopted by families in Utah, who were not aware of the scheme.14
Swedish and U.S. families recently stopped adopting children from Vietnam because of the Vietnam analysis in the 2008 Annual State Department Reports on Human Rights. The reports noted that there were serious problems with the Vietnamese adoption program, including paying parents to put their children up for adoption, trafficking of Vietnamese infants, and reported kidnappings. Ireland uses only the Helping Hands intermediary agency in Vietnam and has been able to keep adopting Vietnamese children since it is able to monitor this one organization; the U.S. was using 40 different agencies.15
Conclusion
UNICEF has estimated that international adoption at its peak did not begin to address the problems facing orphans around the world. In 2005, only 0.02 percent of UNICEF's estimated 132 million orphans worldwide were adopted internationally.16 Despite all the problems associated with international adoption, hopefully regulations, such as Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, 1993 will ensure the rules of the games are in place and hopefully enforced, thus encouraging people both domestically and internationally to help care for orphaned children.
1 Kurup, Saira. “International celebrities want the children we don’t.” The Times of India. April 5, 2009.
2 Ishiyama, John. and Breuning, Marijke. “The Politics of Intercountry Adoption:Explaining Variation in the Legal Requirements of Sub-Saharan African Countries.”
3 Kalston, Sally. “International adoptions by Americans get really tough.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. March 15, 2009.
4 Ibid.
5 Spiegel, Erin. “Adoptions of foreign children plunge.” Washington Times. March 8, 2009.
6 Craft, Carrie. “What Is the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption?”
7 Charles, Ellen. “Where do babies come from.”
8 Gammage, Jeff. “Rules are changing; programs are closing.” Philadelphia Inquirer. Mar. 1, 2009.
9 Hyland, Ann. “It take a village.” Wall Street Journal. March 12, 2009.
10 Naville, Jane Lanhee Lee. “All in the Family.” Wall Street Journal. March 13, 2009.
11 Ishiyama, John. and Breuning, Marijke. “The Politics of Intercountry Adoption:Explaining Variation in the Legal Requirements of Sub-Saharan African Countries.”
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Larsen, Elizabeth. “Did I Steal My Daughter? The Tribulations of Global Adoption.” Mother Jones. November/December 2007 Issue.
15 Tighe, Mark. “Vietnamese adoptions thrown into doubt.” The Times. March 7, 2009.
16 Spiegel, Erin. “Adoptions of foreign children plunge.” Washington Times. March 8, 2009.
* Picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/toasty/1986154200/ |
