I would like to speak for a moment about adoption and crises. I have noticed a range of adoption stories during the Haiti earthquake news coverage, such as: Haitian adoptions should be fast-tracked; planeloads of children being flown to Europe; and the story about the Midwestern Baptists. During this horrible event in Haiti, a light bulb has come on for me. Crises make people think they need to adopt! I thought back to previous crises and remembered adoption responses that stemmed from the tsunami of 2004, from Katrina flooding of 2005, from the Chinese earthquake in 2008, etc.. I think the pattern goes something like this.
Catastrophe happens. >> Media shows heart-wrenching pictures of children suffering. >> People watching feel immense sympathy for the children. >> They think, ‘I have resources to take care of that hurting child that I see on the news. I have got to help!’ >> Adoption is suggested as a way to address the hardships facing children affected by the crisis.
I totally understand the logic that makes people call for large-scale adoptions of crisis-affected children, but I disagree with the conclusion. How sad would it be if, for example, a girl loses her mother. Awful. Then if she is swept up in a hasty adoption, she loses her only chance to reconnect with the father who lives across town, the aunts, the grandmothers, and the close family friends who know her and love her. As a rule, those relatives and friends would do anything in their power to take care of the children they love. Granted, if the child were adopted, she would have all the opportunities and resources of Western parents, but that can’t be good enough reason to permanently separate her from a loving family and community, especially in the midst of a trauma. That would be a tragedy upon tragedy .
I recall something that a family court judge in Birmingham used to say. In line with child welfare as a whole, most of his cases were neglect trials. The judge was adamant that a child should not be taken away from his family simply because the family was poor. If the family was too poor to provide adequate housing, food, or clothing for the child, then they should be given ample resources and support to get back on their feet. Loving relationships are a trump card when establishing what is in a child’s best interest.
So, I am generally against adopting children out of crisis situations simply because their future could be brighter if they grew up elsewhere. Add on concerns about selling children, kidnapping children, and the dangers of inadequate adoptive parent screening, and the whole thing can turn rotten quickly.
I am a huge fan of adoption. It can bring incredible gifts and benefits to children, families and society at large. I am all for adoption, but only when it is done ethically.
The Better Care Network and the Adoption Institute have some interesting papers on the subject if you’re interested in further reading. The best child welfare practitioners turn crisis-inspired adoption inquiries into opportunities to get people interested in other ways of adopting. Your average Sue and Tom aren’t asking to adopt from Haiti because they want to exploit someone. They just saw pictures that melted their hearts; and that’s exactly what vulnerable children (from near and far) need: parents with soft hearts.