No longer adopt children from China
Source: By Rishika Singh: The Indian Express
China will no longer send children overseas for adoption, marking the end of a policy that resulted in tens of thousands of Chinese babies being adopted across the world.
According to a recent Reuters report, China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning said the government had adjusted its cross-border adoption policy to be “in line” with international trends.
Americans have formed the largest group of foreigners adopting Chinese children over the years. Many American news organisations reported prospective parents being left in limbo after the announcement. Some reports also linked it to China’s falling birth rate in recent years amid factors such as high childcare costs.
First, what is the announcement?
Mao said foreign adoptions are now limited to “a child or stepchild of blood relatives of the same generation who are within three generations of foreigners coming to China to adopt”. “We express our appreciation to those foreign governments and families, who wish to adopt Chinese children, for their good intention and the love and kindness they have shown,” she added.
The US State Department said, “We understand there are hundreds of families still pending completion of their adoption, and we sympathize with their situation,” according to The Associated Press.
More than 160,000 Chinese children have been adopted by families globally since China officially introduced a policy on international adoptions in 1992. Of them, around 80,000 children were adopted in the United States, according to data cited by the US-based organisation China’s Children International (CCI).
What led to the rise of intercountry adoptions from China?
Before the founding of a Chinese Communist state in 1949, adoptions within the country were not very common due to prevalent traditional beliefs about the idea of family and bloodline.
However, the mandatory One-Child Policy introduced in 1979 for population control led to a change. Many couples who ended up having more than one child gave their children away to childless family members to escape the notice of government authorities. Others lacking such options turned to orphanages.
Apart from making international adoptions more organised, the 1992 policy restricted domestic adoptions. Asian studies scholar Kay Johnson, who also adopted her child from China, wrote in the Law and Society Review Journal in 2002, “The main purpose of codifying these restrictions into law was to provide birth-planning officials with additional regulatory weapons to shore up the one-child policy by eliminating adoption as a potential loophole for those who sought to hide the birth of a child, typically a daughter, in order to try again to have a son over quota,” Kay wrote.
According to the South China Morning Post, Between 1999 and 2016, 86 per cent of the Chinese children adopted in the US were girls.
Another reason international adoptions became common in China was that they became “deeply entrenched”, wrote Kay. Foreign adoptive parents funded agencies and NGOs through donations, resulting in a relatively efficient system over time.
For American couples too, adoption from countries like South Korea, Vietnam and others was culturally acceptable. Ryan Hanlon of the National Council for Adoption told NPR in 2018 that conflicts like World War II and the Vietnam War have prompted Americans to care for children seen as vulnerable.
However, the practice has also been considered unethical in some cases. Guatemala’s system came under the scanner when it was found middlemen had separated thousands of children from their families to enlist them for adoption in the West.
What is the context for the policy change?
An editorial in China’s state-run media organisation Global Times said the change “not only respects the spirit of relevant international covenants, but is also an inevitable advance in China’s social security system.”
The 1993 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Convention) is a major international agreement on safeguarding intercountry adoptions. It allows adoption in cases where the child has been deemed eligible by the country of origin; and “Due consideration has been given to finding an adoption placement for the child in its country of origin.”
Today, domestic adoptions account for nearly 90 per cent of all adoptions in China. In the US too, adoptions have declined in the last two decades, as source countries have tightened restrictions. However, the focus on domestic adoption has also been criticised, given the improved quality of life such children could enjoy in higher-income countries.
The GT article acknowledged this, saying that, during the early period of economic reform beginning in 1978, “China’s economy was weak… The living conditions of ordinary families were significantly behind those in Western countries, and the social welfare system was insufficient to support all orphans…”
In this regard, “Cross-border adoption provided a practical solution for some orphans to change their living conditions… However, at the same time, some international adoption cases have unfortunately involved abuse, exploitation, and violence, which is deeply troubling,” it said.
Advocates of intercountry adoptions have said such cases are exceptions rather than the norm. Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote about how many children (especially those with special needs) continue to need caring homes in China, or have been abandoned.
He said many Chinese people criticised the decision online, “questioning its impact on China’s international image”. Some also linked it to “a desire to avoid perceived “shame” associated with the international adoption program or concerns about the projection of U.S. soft power in China. Others believe this decision is linked to the deteriorating relationship between China and Western countries, especially the United States.”
