In thinking about the adoption tax credit issue, and whether the money is being spent appropriately helping adoptive families or instead allocating it towards helping keep birth families together, I start to investigate the causes of abandonment and relinquishment. One such cause that I find particularly interesting is that of society’s values, and in particular, that of individuality.
It’s easier (at least for me) to tackle this issue by looking at its opposite. Take, for example, the Middle East, where individuality is not stressed within society. Instead, it is the family and community which are supreme in importance. Here, in these countries, one does not make decisions thinking they will only affect oneself, rather they are always conscious of the family’s honor and reputation. This focus on family is not just on the nuclear family either. It extends to aunts, uncles, cousins, second-cousins, great-aunts, one’s brother’s wife’s sister’s husband. Furthermore, children generally live at home until they marry, and even then they do not often move outside of their village or hometown. Each weekend, they will go visit family, further keeping those ties. If one person or family within the greater ‘clan,’ other family members will help however they can. This includes caring for children. If a family has a child which they cannot care for, or if both birth parents are deceased, other family members will take the child in and care for it. This is what family does because this is the responsibility of family.
If we look at places such as the United States as a counter-example, we see that this society values individuality far greater than community. Just look at our families themselves. I have family in California, New York, Minnesota, Illinois, and Virginia. Being this spread apart, we cannot simply get together regularly to keep in good contact with each other. In fact, I’d say I am closer to some of my friends than I am to some of my family; something that just wouldn’t happen in the Middle East as readily. Here in the U.S. children typically leave their parents’ homes when they turn 18, and they’re often required to provide for themselves. Family support systems are often not as strong because of the stress on individuality. Therefore, if a young couple here has a child which they cannot care for, giving this child to strangers to raise is an option.
I do want to stress that I am simplifying the problem somewhat. I understand that there are other causes and reasons for why a child is offered for adoption. I just feel that when thinking about the adoption tax credit or similar issues of supporting birth families, money isn’t always the answer for giving a birth family a chance at success. What we need in conjunction to this is also a change in society’s values which is much more difficult yet vital to decreasing the number of children separated from their birth families.
2 responses so far ↓
Jen // May 3, 2007 at 1:49 am
I agree with many of your points. It seems that the key point is changing cultural expectations….if we in the US were more family oriented, maybe fewer children would be given up for adoption. However I believe the number of relinquished children in the US is 2% of all births. I would hazard a guess that it’s much higher in China. And in Muslim countries, families do take care of their relatives’ children, but adoption under Muslim law is quite different than what we’re used to here. Children retain their birth surnames, and have different inheritance rights, which are more restrictive than those afforded to biological children.
I agree that money alone is seldom the reason for relinquishment, and if it is, that is abhorrent to me here in the US. There are safety nets for women who want to keep their children, safety nets that don’t exist in most places on the globe.
And in contrast, throwing money at someone does not a good parent make. That goes for bio and adoptive parents.
And if you’ll let me backtrack a little, I think it’s the diversity and individuality of the US which is the reason that IA is so popular here. Many “family oriented” societies look down on the adoption of children who aren’t of their own blood. I am kind of happy that I live in a society where I can celebrate the ways my family was created, rather than feel like a social outcast.
Jen2 // June 13, 2007 at 4:52 pm
I’m not absolutely certain about how the tax credit works. I assume that there is actually no money going into a pot to be spent on keeping birthfamilies together. It’s merely a subtraction on a tax form. The money has gone to the agency that facilitated the adoption, not a government body.
Leave a Comment