Disclaimer: I have a lot of thoughts running through my head, and in an attempt to record them all, I’ve begun writing just to get them out on (cyber-)paper. In writing this post, I struggled with retorting my own arguments, and therefore I do realize the complexity of this topic despite how I may relating it, but its been a month of reading and formulating, and its time to start getting some of it out. 
A social worker friend who knows of my current struggle with the efficacy of adoption ethics recently introduced me to some wonderful conversations about this which are taking place on some forums of adoptive parents of Ethiopian children.
From what I’ve read and understand, it seems that many children in Ethiopia are placed for adoption due to poverty. Oftentimes adoptive parents are able to meet the birth/first family while completing the adoption trip in Ethiopia, and can experience the pauperism of the family for themselves. It would seem then, that many of the Ethiopian adoptions could be avoided and families preserved if they had some type of support, financial or otherwise. Perhaps it is for this reason many prospective parents are now inquire into the humanitarian aid efforts of different adoption agencies, and how or if they are working towards benefitting the families of Ethiopia; not merely the children living in orphanages. Their thoughtfulness does not stop at merely selecting an agency or deciding upon which non-profit aid organization to donate to in Ethiopia, but rather it is reflected in a plethora of discussions on their forums. Besides the basic conversations about raising these children, these families appear to also collectively question the motivations of relinquishing or abandoning a child, the role of adoption agencies, and possible solutions to the struggle to keep things ethical.
I find it curious, and indeed rather disturbing, that many families with children from China or in the process of adopting from China don’t seem to spend time tackling these issues, particularly in their online communities (the family mentioned in the last post was a rare, and appreciated, exception). Perhaps it’s the lack of information about or contact with the child’s birth/first family which allows families in the China program a way to not delve this deep into the issues of the ethics surrounding the adoption of their child(ren).However, it’s more likely the result of how these children come to be abandoned in the first place.
Most adoptive parents of Chinese children know of what the West refers to as the “One-Child Policy,” and have a basic knowledge of this Chinese governmental regulation. It seems as though this population control policy can make adoptive families of Chinese children feel as though their hands are washed clean of any of the ethical conundrums that can plague other programs such as Ethiopia. After all, it is the government’s fault these children are being abandoned, and there’s nothing any prospective adoptive parent could do to stop it because it is the country’s policy. There is no knowledge of the child’s history, birth/first family—nothing. These children are like little Asian blank-slates, and therefore the focus need not be expanded beyond the child since there is nothing else.
This would help explain why most of the non-profit, in-country initiatives supported by adoptive families of Chinese children are to aid orphans and not struggling agricultural families. Like the lens of a telescope, though these families have terrific focus, their aperture is narrow. Therefore, they do not see the wider issues surrounding these children on whom they are concentrated. But absence does not mean non-existence. The issue they overlook, is how even in China there are prospects for family preservation.
Researching the “One-Child Policy” will expose many articles about China’s rich breaching the regulations by having more than one child and paying the fines and fees associated with it, so much so that it’s beginning to be seen by some as an epidemic needing to be curtailed. This could lead one to assume that in fact there are many cases in China, as in Ethiopia, where money may successfully keep a family together, and thus begin questioning what can be done to allow families to successfully stay together in light of the governmental policies. Maybe it will through supporting better education in rural areas, or offering job resources for rural families, or providing better healthcare for villagers (in China the focus may need to be on curbing pregnancies rather than allowing families to keep many children).
I think the China adoption community is sadly deficient and lacking richness as a result of its ignorance to the issues of adoption efficacy and ethics. I also think the great debate around adoption ethics is at a loss without the China community in attendance. By merely focusing on teaching their children China’s traditional culture and the “One-Child Policy,” these families are doing a disservice to adopted Chinese children as well as to the future of adoptions everywhere by not addressing the ethics behind adoption. Since China has been one of the most popular countries to adopt from, the benefits the conversation about adoption ethics would gain from so much more attention, drive, and creativity as a result of the increase in participation would be astounding. I’ve seen first-hand results of the combined influence and voice the China adoption community can have, and let me say it is an awesome sight. The adoption community as a whole has come far since it began, but it is still in need of some fine tuning. Now is the time for the community to take the next step towards benefitting children worldwide by furthering the cause to make adoptions more just. After all, this issue doesn’t just affect some adoptions—it affects them all.
