THE ABOUT ADOPTION PROJECT

            Adoption is not a new concept; in fact, people have been practicing forms of adoption all throughout history (Price, 2005). It allows children who might not otherwise get to experience a loving home and nurturing environment, grow up with a family. While originally adoption was fairly simple, it is now an extensive legal process which can span anywhere from a few months to a few years (Price, 2005). While usually thought of kindly, the adoption process actually has both positives and negatives which impact all parties involved. 

Put simply, adoption is “the process of claiming an unknown child and turning him or her into a son or daughter” (Raleigh, 2016). This process oftentimes results in a couple or family raising a child that was removed from an undesirable situation such as poverty, war, or a natural disaster. There are two different types of adoption, domestic and international, and three different members of the adoption triad, the birth parents or family, the adoptive parents or family, and the child being adopted (Raleigh, 2016). Domestic adoptions are when a child is adopted within his or her country of birth. On the other hand, international adoptions occur when a child is removed from his or her country of birth and raised by parents in a different country. The latter type of adoption tends to raise more concerns, which is something that will be discussed at a later point. 

            The history of adoption and adoption legislation is fairly extensive which is why I will only be focusing on the history of adoption as it pertains to the United States. Adoption legislation was originally implemented by the states around the mid nineteenth century (Kahan, 2006). These states issued regulations which set an important precedent establishing “first, it stated that the adoption had to be in the best interests of the child. Second, it put the judge in the position of evaluating the qualifications of potential adoptive parents” (Kahan, 2006). While these laws helped raise awareness of adoption and increased the likelihood that people would put the welfare of children in mind, it also encouraged a lot of children and parents to use the system for personal benefit. These concerns are what led to the creation of public institutions like the US Children’s Bureau, juvenile courts, and mothers’ pensions (Kahan, 2006). 

While at the surface adoption appears to be a humanitarian action, the process has become increasingly complex and the legal and economic aspects of the process has turned adoption, especially international adoption, into a debate. The debate often surrounds the potential greed and corruption that could result in a for-profit business model which most adoption agencies follow. This can result in a “dramatic decline in adoptions due to legal restrictions as a violation of children's rights to a loving home, while the opponents highlight the widespread practices of baby-buying and other abusive practices” (Khun & Lahiri, 2017). This means that a major concern regarding international adoptions is that there will be corruption and coercion which will result in families of poor socioeconomic backgrounds feeling like they have no other option other than to “put up” their child for adoption. 

            While there are likely countless success stories about adoption, there are also a lot of concerns about the process and the effect it has on the children, the birth parents or family, and the adoptive parents or family. Another one of the major concerns regarding international adoptions is that the adoptee is likely to grow up disconnected from his or her native language and culture. This can lead to the child feeling disconnected to the adoptive parents and family members and in select cases can even result in the children and their families seeking counseling (Price, 2005). This unideal form of tension within a household can be problematic and is a unique problem for people who adopt children from a different race. 

            This is not to say adoption is a bad thing; on the contrary, it is fairly successful with benefits for every party involved. The adoptive parents are able to obtain a child to raise as their own, the birth parents are relived from the burden of raising the child and in some cases are compensated in other ways, and the adoptee is generally taken from an undesirable environment to be raised in a more loving and nurturing one. The undesirable environments are generally considered to be poor socioeconomic situations in countries that “(1) perceived needs of homeless children, often precipitated by war, poverty or other forms of social crisis, and (2) [whether or not they have] political attitudes, which can make international adoption unacceptable as a method of addressing children's needs regardless of the extent of those needs and the degree of social crisis” (Bartholet, 2007). These two major factors affect the narrative of adoptions since countries can limit or eliminate the adoption of children depending on the state of the country. 

            One of the main reasons people apply to adopt children is because of infertility, which makes the adoption process extremely beneficial for older couples who might not be able to produce a child on their own. The general demographic makeup of couples who sought adoption were “white, married (for the first time), in their mid-thirties, infertile for a physical reason, active in their church, close to their families, psychologically well adjusted, and consisted of mothers who planned to stay home with the child and parents who shared the adoptee's religion” (Kahan, 2006). This is something that is important to note because it means that healthcare and women’s reproductive health play a huge role in the adoption market. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that if reproductive and health research and technology were to continue advancing so that women did not become infertile as quickly then fewer children would be adopted. 

            Adoption can be a beautiful and unique process that brings families together who may not otherwise have been able to be formed. While there may be some flaws in the system that can result in less than perfect results, it still provides an opportunity and overall healthy alternative for couples and children who might be struggling. It should be a concern for legislators and those looking to adopt the dangers that come with a for-profit business model, since it can result in dangerous situations for children and birth families. However, there are also many opportunities for meaningful connections to be made. 

WORKS CITED

Bartholet, Elizabeth. “International Adoption: Thoughts on the Human Rights Issues.” Buffalo 

Human Rights Law Review, vol. 13, 2007, p. 203.

Khun, Channary, and Sajal Lahiri. “The Economics of International Child Adoption: An 

Analysis of Adoptions by U.S. Parents.” The Quarterly Review of Economics and 

Finance, vol. 64, 2017, pp. 22–31.

Kahan, Michelle. “‘Put up’ on Platforms: a History of Twentieth Century Adoption Policy in the 

United States.” Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, vol. 33, no. 3, 2006, p. 51.

Price, Karin. “Best Interest of a Child: An Introduction to International Adoptions.” Social Work 

& Christianity, vol. 32, no. 3, 2005, pp. 248–262.

Raleigh, Elizabeth. “An Assortative Adoption Marketplace: Foster Care, Domestic, and 

Transnational Adoptions.” Sociology Compass, vol. 10, no. 6, 2016, pp. 506–517.