First there was the debate about Stuck: the Documentary and it's role in helping or hurting the "plight" of children in orphanages. The debate should not be about whether or not it is a bad thing to be raised in an orphanage (I think pretty much everyone agrees that it is definitely a bad thing). The debate should be about what is the appropriate way(s) to eliminate the need for children to be in orphanages at all.
And the problem is that the people most vocally jumping on board with the "adoption is the best solution" answer are adoptive (or prospective) adoptive parents. And while I have no doubt that their passion comes for a love of their children and a desire to see every child in a home, they have a tendency to reduce the argument to two positions. Either you believe all children should be adopted OR you believe it is okay to "rot" in an orphanage until they age out into the sex trade, etc at a young age.
Stuck: the Documentary is very much all children should be adopted (and any obstacle in the way eliminated, and if that means trafficking and other coercion/corruption happens well that's just the price of doing business an unfortunate occurrence)
Now the rumors are flying that the Duggar's might be considering adoption. And again anyone who questions the wisdom of adopting a child with a traumatic past into a family with 19 (and counting) children is squarely in the "you think it's okay to let kids rot in an orphanage camp" While I am sure they would provide a stable loving home, it is not inappropriate to suggest that not every child from an institutional background should go to a mega family. For some kids, they NEED to be an only or one of a very few. Adoptions disrupt for this reason. But I digress....
They are now being used to promote adoption as the solution to the world's orphan problem (again pointing out that of the oft used 140 million orphans in the world, most have at least one living parent) Seems to me that once again, if you want to reduce the number of kids in orphanages, maybe the focus should be on reuniting children with their original families. That is the third option between adoption and rotting- Reunification with their families. That is the option that Stuck should be focused on and what we as adoptive parents should talk about when people want to help the orphan.
The third option should be the FIRST thing that is looked at. Before international adoption and certainly before a lifetime in an orphanage.
(and I recognize that at an individual child level, adoption can truly be life saving. But if we are ever going to really address the needs of the parentless child, we have to look beyond the individual child- as hard as that is- and look at the systemic situation. When we look only at the individual, we miss the big picture. Things like orphanages full of "created" orphans and offering no assistance, space or care to those children who are truly in need. How much could care be improved if agencies stopped creating orphans to fill the desires for healthy infants. And despite the increase in special needs adoptions (many of whom are truly in need), the most desired child profile is still healthy infant. The very children who are strong candidates for reunification. How much could the model improve for all kids if reunification was the first priority?)
International adoption should be reserved for those children who truly CAN NOT be reunited.
And if the Duggars want to adopt one of those children (and can pass a homestudy)...
best wishes to them
best wishes to them
6 comments:
THANK YOU for such a wonderful post. You said this better than I've been trying to say it all day. I passed this on to people whom I was having a discussion with on a China adoption page because I think this needs to be said, over and over and over again.
THANK YOU for this wonderful post. You said this better than I could, and I've been trying all day! I passed this on to people that were discussing this on a facebook feed because I think this needs to be said, over and over and over again.
Beautifully written - and I can't think of much to add to it. The problem, of course, is the immediacy of the need to care for the children already in institutions vs. making those systemic changes of which you write. I wish I was smart enough to have the answers . . .
Although I truly think that if some of the systemic changes were made (mainly the elimination of "created orphans") then by definition conditions for the children already in care would change for the better. In fact, I have heard anecdotal stories from countries that have closed or curtailed adoptions that once the flood of adoption money dries up, there is a decrease of children in orphanages as the community takes on the role of surrogate parenting/support. Obviously, there are still children in those places who need adoptive families, but in this scenario the kids being placed for adoption are genuinely in need. It is, without a doubt, hard to address as there is an immediate need but also the systemic issues. To what degree are the systemic issues impacting the number of children being placed in orphanages? The solutions are multi-faceted and by no means easy but I will never believe that international adoption (and especially increasing it substantially while agencies make money from it) is the only way and it certainly isn't the best way.
ok..it is fine and dandy to say reunification is what needs to happen.. how? and let's have some real, workable ideas.. not just.. 'give the family the money to raise the child themselves'.. how? how is the reunification supposed to happen? i think most foreign adoptions happen due to $$ issues.. that and the limit on numbers of children and some due to single mother issues.. but how is this going to work? who is footing the bill?
The answers vary based on country and cause. Here's a simple way- stop agencies from going into villages and convincing parents through outright lies, coercion or cash payments to relinquish the children that they are currently parenting successfully. There is documented evidence of agencies entering the villages and telling parents they can relinquish their children and they will get an education in America and come back to support the family. Agencies could be honest with parents that adoption is a PERMANENT severing of the relationship (which is not the same as the informal adoption system practiced in much of the developing world) The US Embassy in Addis Ababa has issued warnings that when they are completing the birth family interviews they are finding many birth families who do not understand (until the embassy tells them) that they no longer have any claim to their children. At that point, though the adoption is final.
Many of other solutions already exist, funding through NGOs and donors but agencies are not looking to partner with them to reunify families but...
Another solution that many NGOs are moving toward- medical clinics to treat/stabilize illness or disability which is another reason kids are dropped off into the orphanage- the parents need short term crisis medical care. LWB unity fund in China is allowing families to stay together by providing medical treatment for the child- thus eliminating the need for the family to abandon the child to get them needed medical care. This is also a major cause of relinquishment in many African countries as well.
How about NGOs setting up a system of microloans- like the Kiva program- which would allow families to create a business and provide for themselves and their children.
Another simple (and cheap) solution is to actually look for the birth family and assess that situation. The Riley family in Uganda is working in an orphanage and is successfully resettling children with their birth families with minimal expense and simple follow-up. There are NGOs (many bringing in millions of dollars in child sponsorship) who easily have the personnel and money to resettle children with their families. Holt International has shifted much of their work in several countries away from adoption as a first option, to adoption as a last option and reunification as the priority.
There are certainly countries that reunification is a much harder option, but why wouldn't we look to try that first. And even in China- the issues are not always what we have been told. There will always be a need for adoption and no one rational thinks the argument for reunification means an end to adoption (although some will try to extrapolate that conclusion as a way to stop the discussion) But the adoption system is full of kids who adoption isn't needed for- orphans created to fill orders for adoptive parents- leaving the kids who adoption is necessary to remain in the orphanages.
Post a Comment