International Adoption - Peeling back the onion

Ok, I probably shouldn't, but I'm going to jump into this fray...
Ever since the earthquake in Haiti and the return of the young boy to Russia, there have been a number of blog posts (1) (2), editorial comments, and newspaper articles about the subject of International Adoption and some specifically about Christians and adoption.

There is one camp that believes that International Adoption should not be considered as an option for a child until at least 3 years (or more) has passed since the child was separated from their parents.

There are some that believe that a child should never be adopted internationally - that removing them from their birth culture is a terrible thing.

There are some that believe that adoption is "rescuing" a child.

I don't believe any of these. If we want to eliminate International Adoption, we must eliminate the NEED for international adoption. To do that, we need to first understand WHY a child is even available for adoption. This is not an easy answer as the answer depends a lot on what country the child was born in.

In China, most children are available for adoption because their parents have given them up for adoption (i.e. abandoned) because they want a male child, don't want a child with a physical disability or birth defect, or simply can't afford to raise the child.

In many African countries, many children are available for adoption as a result of the HIV crisis.

In South American countries, Eastern European countries and Haiti, many children are available because their parents are simply too poor to take care of the child or as a result of cultural attitudes towards birth defects/disabilities.

To address these issues will take a many-pronged approach. In places like China, it will require changing government laws as well as cultural attitudes. However, many might argue that their culture is THEIR culture and we should not try to change it. So be it. But that leaves the door WIDE OPEN for international adoption.

In places like Africa, it means providing AIDS treatment and educating people regarding the disease and how it is transmitted. It may mean changing cultural attitudes. However, there are MANY children already orphaned by AIDS. These children MUST have an opportunity to grow up in a loving family.

In places like South America, Eastern Europe, America and Haiti, eliminating the need for international adoption means working to provide a stable and growing economy where everyone has an opportunity to earn a decent living to provide for their families. Notice, I DIDN'T say, providing food and clean water - though this is a viable short term solution.

In America and other countries, it also means eliminating the problem of neglect and abuse. The root of these issues is predominantly drug and alcohol abuse. Eliminating the orphans as a result of this requires eliminating drug and alcohol abuse. If anyone knows the solution to this particular problem, I think you would be a billionaire.

The CHURCH is slowly working on these issues - however, it is happening mainly via para-church organizations such as Compassion International, World Vision, and Children's Hope Chest (I'll address my own personal journey in this area in another post)

Here is what I believe is best for children:

It is BEST for a child to never be removed from their family. Until the above root causes are resolved, this remains an elusive option for many children.

I believe that it would be 2nd BEST for a child to be adopted by a loving family in their country of origin - preferably a relative. Unfortunately, this option is not available to many kids due to cultural notions (adopted children are 2nd class children, restaviks) and the added cost of supporting another child.

I beleive that it would be 3rd BEST for a child to be adopted by a loving family internationally. This option IS available, but unfortunately, MANY people/organizations are opposed to this solution

I believe that the 4th BEST option for a child is to be in a foster care situation in their country of origin. Yes, I place this AFTER international adoption. A permanent, committed family, IMO, is ALWAYS better than a temporary solution. (Just ask any kid who has aged out of foster care here in America).

I believe that the LAST resort is for a child to live in an institution in their home country.

So, for better or worse, to address the fundamental issue of orphans, there should be LONG TERM efforts underway to effect the changes necessary for biological parents to raise their children. Until that happens, I'll continue to support Domestic/International adoption as the backup solution to a huge problem.