inter-country adoption
18 Nov 2008
These Angels Aren't Telling the Whole Story
Picture appears on the "Orphan Angels" website, courtesy of the Sunday Telegraph
Deborra-Lee Furness wants us to import a lot more children from other countries for the Australian adoption market — but it's an ignorant and selfish approach to the problem of child poverty, writes Ian Robinson
In a recent Weekend Australian Magazine, Deborra-Lee Furness breathlessly told her interviewer that there were "103 million orphaned children in the world". "How can we have two-year-olds walking the streets," she asked, "fending for themselves, looking through rubbish for food?"Indeed, how can such a distressing situation be permitted to exist?
Well, you'll be glad to know it doesn't. Furness is just manipulating the numbers to persuade you to support her campaign to import more third-world children to Australia for childless couples here. By preying on public sympathy for these "103 million" poor alleged orphans she is trying to garner support for her pro-child-procurement lobby, charmingly entitled "Orphan Angels", in their attempts to convince the authorities to make inter-country adoptions much easier and supply the local demand.
The truth is quite different and there is no need to panic.
What Furness didn't mention in her PR spiel is that while it is true that UNICEF does cite a large total of "orphans" in the world, the UNICEF definition, for complex historical reasons, includes children who have lost just one of their parents as well as those who have lost both, thus most of them are not orphans by our Australian definition. The UNICEF estimate for true "orphans", those who have lost both parents, is closer to 13 million.
This is still a lot of kids, but the image of this many toddlers scratching around alone for mouldy crusts in the rubbish dumps of the world is also totally misleading. According to UNICEF, "Evidence clearly shows that the vast majority of orphans are living with a surviving parent, grandparent, or other family member". Nor are they typically helpless two-year-olds: "95 per cent of all orphans are over the age of 5" says UNICEF — still pretty young, but already at the point where they're not really attractive on the Western adoption market.
In fact, UNICEF itself is rightly concerned about people misusing the orphan figures in this way because it "may then lead to responses that focus on providing care for individual children rather than supporting the families and communities that care for orphans and are in need of support."
For anyone genuinely concerned about the plight of children in developing countries there is an enormous variety of programs available that do help the families and communities to support and nurture their children in need and keep them with their own relatives in their own culture. Invitations to contribute to such programs appear in your letterbox often.
Although Furness concedes that "Adoption will only ever be a partial solution for the homeless and abandoned children of the world", and her group mentions some of these other initiatives on their website, it is clear that their main focus is not helping children where they are, but bringing them here to live with relatively well-to-do Australians.
The danger is, as UNICEF warns, that the focus on bringing an infinitesimal proportion of needy children to Australia (one thousandth of one per cent), tends to take attention away from the needs of the majority. The cost to an Australian parent of one inter-country adoption would ensure literally hundreds of children thrived in their own countries.
Moreover, there are significant problems with inter-country adoption that Furness and her group have not addressed in their publicity. The first is that it encourages child kidnapping. This practice is rife anyway in many of the countries the children come from and the presence of rich foreigners looking for "orphans" is an open invitation to unscrupulous criminals to supply their needs. The governments of the countries involved are too poor and often too corrupt to set up adequate protective mechanisms to guard against this.
For example, US professor and inter-country adoption expert David Smolin was horrified to eventually discover, after having taken all possible precautions and working through a seemingly authorised agency, that both the children he and his wife had adopted from India had been stolen from their parents.
He subsequently studied the inter-country adoption system in depth, and concluded "there are systemic vulnerabilities in the current inter-country adoption system that make [such] adoption scandals ... predictable. Further ... there are no actors in the inter-country adoption system with the requisite information, authority, and motivation to prevent abusive or corrupt adoption practices. Under these circumstances, 'reform' of the inter-country adoption system remains elusive and illusory."
It would appear that what is needed is more regulation and monitoring rather than less, but what Furness and her group are lobbying for is easier access and less "red tape", which can only exacerbate these problems.
The second thing Deborra-Lee Furness and her "angels" neglect to mention is that frequently adoption — in particular inter-country adoption — does not have a fairytale ending, but on the contrary can be quite problematic.
The most extensive research has been carried out in Sweden, where the practice has been going on longer, and where it was found that inter-country adoptees had significantly higher rates of suicide than national adoptees and both were higher than their non-adopted peers. Additionally, inter-country adoptees had higher levels of drug and alcohol problems; males had significant rates of ADD, while females had significant rates of depression, anxiety, and schizoid and delinquent behaviour.
The same negative outcomes are also becoming evident in other countries, such as the United States, but not as much hard research has yet been carried out there. One of the few Australian studies, on a group of 102 Vietnamese children adopted in NSW during the 1970s, reported that the majority of children placed between the ages of 4 and 6 had difficulties bonding or establishing family relationships, as did 40 per cent of the children placed at 18 months and above.
The truth is that no adoption, inter-country or local, can ever be an ideal or even an admirable solution to any problem. It is always a last resort and is always the unfortunate consequence and cause of more than one person's loss and pain.
All of this has been known for many years and has been studied in detail by plenty of people who have the best interests of the child at heart. But don't advance "pro-child" views in front of Furness or she'll label you part of the evil "anti-adoption culture" which is trying to prevent her group, and the well-to-do Australians they are lobbying for, from getting their hands on more lovely, cute third-world children.
Furness's heart may be in the right place but her polarising attitude and her refusal to come to grips with the limitations of inter-country adoption and its misuse by wealthy westerners has led her not just to see the world through rose-coloured glasses but even to be selective with her facts in order to convince us her campaign is a good thing.
There is a myth in wealthy countries that just as everyone is entitled to vote, have health care and so on, everyone is entitled to a child. The truth is that no-one has the right to a child and in particular no-one has the right to someone else's child. Children are not commodities to be bartered nor possessions with which to complete the perfect home. Other people's children are real people, not just "cures" for infertility.
The author would like to thank Christine Cole for helping with the research for this article.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
What a poor article! Does the author even stop to think what adopted children will think, and how they will feel, when the see terms like "adoption market" and "import" referring to the process that brought them into Australia. That is just shamefully unthoughtful behaviour - not to mention misleading.
I speak as a adoptive parent - and a person that devotes their work to IT systems for non-profits, including overseas adoption support groups. A person who is not wealthy at all by Australian standards. A person that chose not to have biological offspring in favour of helping a child in Africa rather than increasing the global population.
I know poorer working class people who have adopted several children but they soldier on under the imposing government fees. Yes *government* fees, because unlike some programs in other countries, Australian programs to not give up a cent to the orphanages or relinquishing parents. Most of the cost is on the Australian government side, and travel and accommodation, with some on the overseas government side. There is no "market" as it was so callously put.
This article both blatantly exhibits and mischievously implies a number of mis-facts about overseas adoptions in Australia. Let me try to put the record straight, though I fear the damage is already done:
Australia’s overseas adoption program is completely different from the US one. Completely.
Its is a total myth that only wealthy Australians adopt.
Overseas relinquishing parents and orphanages are not paid through Australian programs. This is to avoid child kidnapping. If people were out to make money from that, they wouldn’t do it through an Australian program!
Overseas adoption from countries such as Ethiopia is a last resort is there are no relatives available to support the children. If you think such a situation is unusual, then you don’t understand the full repercussions the current AIDS epidemic. There are a significant number children in places like Ethiopia who have no place to go other than an orphanage, who will spend their entire life up to the age of 15 in such a place and then be turfed out with nothing and the gates locked behind them - literally.
You cannot *buy* such children new parents by donating to a worthy cause. Most of the adoptive parents though do donate, sponsor children and take aid packages overseas (we do all three). A family environment in Australia is preferable to the alternatives. If you think conditions in an Ethiopian orphanage are good then get out of your comfy armchair and go and take a visit. While you’re there go an watch the children begging on the streets, or rummaging in the filth, some of them severely effected by polio.
Thanks for this article. I have been thinking a lot about Deborah-Lee’s campaign and feel very uncomfortable about it. For relatively rich countries to "buy" children from relatively poor countries, something has to be wrong with our thinking. It’s a misnomer to call it "inter-country" adoption as it is only a one way process. There is no debate that poor countries need help to build systems to be able to support their children in their own country, and that rich countries like Australia can contribute inter-country aid to help with this. As you have noted, there are many organisations trying to encourage this. To set up a hierarchy of children where some are "adoptable" and some are "unadoptable" (because they are too old, too sick, or too something), rather than encourage a whole country social welfare infrastructure is the real shameful, unthoughtful behaviour.
"relinquishing parents"??? waddya mean relinquishing parents, sams? I’m disturbed.
Thank you so much Ian for your timely article. The media coverage given to Furness is so blatantly biased that it seems most of the other journos and media outlets are falling over themselves to interview Hugh Jackman’s wife. Anyone who takes the time to research cannot but be appalled by the level of child abduction and child trafficking that goes on under the guise of intercountry adoption. Instead of adoption awareness week we should be having child-trafficking awareness week and think of ways we as a society can work together to end this disgraceful practice. In Australia we have over 30 children, that we know of, kidnapped from their Indian parents and trafficked here. The NSW Law Reform Commission, in two reports, made it clear that the demand for infants by Westerners wanting to adopt was fuelling a black market in children and contributing to child abductions and child trafficking in developing countries. Australia is a pro-family country and I believe most Australians would want to support poor families to stay together and certainly not demand that “waiting times” for infants be speeded up so the wants of a vocal minority are met. I agree with Ian; let’s help communities so their poverty does not place them in the dreadful position of losing a beloved daughter or son, sister or brother, granddaughter or grandson.
I am an intercountry adoptee and I can only applaud people like Ian for having the guts to speak up and tell the "other" side of the story that Orphan Angels in their National Adoption Awareness Week don’t wish to tell. I am appalled at the amount of media coverage Furness gathers and this is a reflection of the Australian media’s lack of education on the topic. Luckily most people involved in the intercountry adoption community know that most of what Furness speaks about is largely highly emotional and lacking substance. If she wants to pretend to represent the "adoption community" ie. local adoption and intercountry / transracial .. one would expect that she would at least educate herself and be more open to listening and incorporating the many complex experiences of ALL those involved. From where I sit, she appears to only want to hear the "feel good" stories that end in happiness for everyone and she glosses over the reality of the complexities like a true movie star! Why doesn’t she try to go and listen and assist the poor birth family in India who are claiming to have had their child stolen and placed into an Australian family in QLD? This would prove to the adoption community that she was far more capable of representing us all .. not just the prospective couples wanting to have a child! This would be far better use of her "celebrity" status than wasting her time lobbying to change Australian Adoption Laws that are not under her control nor under Federal Govt control. What’s needed is a voice to speak up for the birth families who have no voice or power in this whole adoption arena! When we hear their voices and balance that with the voices of adoptive parents, prospective parents, and adoptees .. then we’ll be in a better place to decide whether adoption is a good thing or a bad. My guess is it is far too complex an area to paint it with any simple brush stroke! And it’s a pity the media don’t realise this and have the backbone to push Debora to supply more substance to their interviews and coverage!
Fantastic article Ian and great response "saveinfertilecouples". I too, am fed up with the appalling one sided, biased journalism that allows the emoitional blackmail/manipulation to take place by Furness. So much for free writing, thinking and rigourous debate from all corners. In all that I have read of her stuff, she is full of rhetoric, unresearced comments , lack of awarenes of the myriad affects of adoption and is determined to continue her Lady Bountiful act with no understanding or compassion of the long term affects of removing a child from his culture, heritage and blood family. if she has her own childrens best interests at heart, why as reported by her in the Good Weekend article did her son have to ASK if he was adopted after seeing a movie on TV? If she belevies that adoption was best for him, she owes it to him to tell him his truth. The terrain of adoption is littered with false histories, lies, deception, grief and loss. Adoptees from overseas always will live in the shadow of lack of mirroring in their adoptive family. Sometimes love is not enough. Most people take their family genetic appearance and connection for granted. As a now 59 year old who learned of my adoption at age 40, I can tell you it is with a hungry and yearning heart that I live with the missing pieces of my heritage - jigsaw pieces scattered to the winds.
Thanks for this article. I am fed up with the biased comments and reporting surrounding "orphan angels" . I think the whole idea of "rescueing all these babies that wander the streets in faraway lands"" and even the name "orphan angels" is just one big fantasy. Like some fairytale with a happy ever after ending. Nothing to do with reality at all.
It is well past time the actual ugly truth about adoption was told to the general public. Too much too long has been swept under the carpet and then covered over with sugar coated fairytales.
I am also fed up with the whole notion that it is societies job to provide infertile couples with babies. These babies come from mothers and families, they do not hatch or drop from the sky.
I disagree with DLF and her simplistic fairytale version of adoption, I personally believe she is fueled by her own unresolved feelings regarding adoption BUT I am very grateful to her for bringing the adoption debate to the forefront for all to discuss. Were it not for her insistent push for public acceptance and support for inter country adoption we would not have such a public platform in which to reveal our all too real stories. As long as all sides to the adoption (I was going to say ‘triad’ but there are so many more family members affected by adoption that it is no longer a triad) are being represented equitably, I can only see greater and greater opportunities to educate the public on the realities of this often very painful experience. There are many many people who will now have the opportunity and perhaps the drive, because DLS is so inflammatory, to finally come forward and tell our stories publicly, perhaps for the first time for some.
Agenda-wise, caring for global orphans is by and large a very different goal than wanting to adopting a handful. I do hope OA are learning to restrain the ‘save the kids’ rhetoric.
I just never know which way to sway - is it better to take the risk of the stolen children and put in all the checks and balances you can to avoid it (because any child/adult trafficking is abhorant) - or to have children without families living in poverty because we cannot police the child trafficking - which is the lesser evil.
When these children grow up, who will be the worse off.
The stolen child that with the correct parents has a chance at a lot of people that will love him/her all over the world - however may have to stuggle with the issues of how they go there (as much as it disgusts me to write that).
or
The child that sat in poverty waiting for someone to hug them, love them, keep them safe.
We talk so much about rules, regulations,adoption, ifs and buts. Do we every truly talk about the human side of the whole issue - the children who ache to be loved by a Mum and a Dad.
a good response to a complex question, and a pertinent response by an adoptee. My professional background includes work in the adoption field more than twenty years ago. Transracial adoption was relatively new then, but not so much that there had not been a lot of thought into the process at policy level. There was, for instance, the principle of carefully assessing the capacity of prospective parents to parent a child whose cultural background differed from their own, and ongoing negotiation with overseas organisations concerned. Such assessments were probably more stringent than for local adoption, although this was under similar scrutiny as adoption legislation and practice was reviewed in the 1980s. It is not altogether surprising though that questions are now being raised from within countries from which many children came, as to the practices there. And, too, not altogether a surprise that the adopted children, now grown up, have something worthwhile to contribute.
A crucial problem, in DLF’s campaign, unfortunately, - apart from a patronising neocolonialist element - is her lack of real appreciation of prospective adoptive childrens’ subjective experiences. What does it mean to have a place - and attachments within one culture, whetherof poverty or indeed contact with the other children in the orphanage and then to suddenly, and abruptly lose all of that? What does it mean to be suddenly parachuted and transplanted into anotherenvironment where the smells, sounds, food tastes and sleeping arrangements that one has known since birth - or indeed one’s experience of mother before birth - are suddenly gone? Such ruptured attachments may be, without sensitive understanding, to the detriment of everyone in the adoption experience of that child, its birth and adoptive parents.
Adoption is always going to one avenue for children,Perhaps the funds of wealthy and concerned benefactors can be utilised to ensure that children and families who do experience adoption do so safely.
This women Debra Lee-Furness disturbs me and I am sure other mothers that have lost children to the horrible illegal practises of adoption between 1950-1980 and had their children (STOLEN) are already still in pain from the way people like this want to take our children and choose what they think is better for us. As this Steeling happened to approx 250 Thousand mothers Australia wide. I have spoken several times to Debra Lee- Furness Janine Weir her president of Debra Lee-Furness website and I have advised them to read our adoption laws that have been in since 2000. It appears that they do not take any notice.
Again I cannot say much more than that as most people know our laws regarding adoption/Intercountry. We already have Intercountry adoption laws. I do not want to live in a country like the states that you can buy a child and MS Furness thinks she can come over here and have our MP’S introduce the same laws as the States. Well if they would have tried to have a child before time ran out. I think they are using the intercountry adoption as a leaver to try and slip in under our radar. I am saying this from past statements that Ms Furness has said before. (QUOTEING) We had to go to the Sates to adopt as there were none in Australia. Us mothers are still suffering from past injustices. Also I don’t want a running scrip from her every time I turn the TV on to hear her. The pain she causes is horrible.
jack03: "waddya mean relinquishing parents, sams? I’m disturbed."
Its the term used for parent giving their children over to an orphanage because for some reason they can no longer look after them. In fact, I should have written ‘relinquishing relatives’ because often is it a grandparent. Are you saying parents should be allowed to relinquish in wealthy countries, but not in developing countries, or that the practice in general should be banned globally? Either choice seems will have fatal outcomes for many children.
Please people also note that not only infertile couples adopt, although it is common.
I think it’s important not to conflate the media bytes from OA representatives with the much more complex views and anxieties that ordinary adoptive parent grapple with. I believe that, for the most part, adoptive parents are increasingly open to learning from adult adoptees and birth mothers who they eventually come to meet.
This is not to say adoption is the right answer. Indeed, according to international conventions it’s a fourth best option at best. However, it is critical to educate those who have adopted so that their children have as much post-adoption support as possible.
Ian Robinson, ‘saveinfertilecouples’ and ‘Nandiisa’ amongst others here have now outlined what OA need to come to grips with starting with a) "to hear the voices of adoptive parents, prospective parents, and adoptees .. [to be] in a better place to decide whether adoption is a good thing or a bad." and b) to understand that "ruptured attachments may be, without sensitive understanding, to the detriment of everyone in the adoption experience of that child, its birth and adoptive parents".
I would also suggest to ‘gizmojo’ that it is good to voice their concerns but they are struggling with good questions but just the wrong way round. We will all get stuck by approaching issues in adoption by posing them as *OK, adoptions unfold within a complex web of politics, emotions and culture but children ache to be held by parents*. It is more helpful for us to move forward and be more accountable by thinking *OK, children can benefit from parents (single, straight, GLQT) but in international adoption this is impossible without doing so within a complex web of politics, emotions and culture*. It’s a matter of taking on the issues as they are and working with them responsibly, reciprocally and respectfully with all parties concerned. Things may not be perfect but they can progress.
Thanks no_agenda_angel for summing up a complex situation so well. Certainly orphan angels do not speak for every adoptive family in this country, nor every prospective adoptive parent. There are many that spend a long time considering the very questions that have been raised here and to listening to all experiences of adoption, even those that challenge the very heart of our families.
I think both articles need to take a broader approach. I am a ‘waiting parent’and both DLF and IR misrepresent the situation. The fact that DLF has not spoken with the support organisations for adoptive families seems rather odd to me. She has had no contact with them and in fact refuses any contact. She seems to be running her own race and causing more negatives than positives at this stage. With regards to waiting times however DLF is primarily referring to the time it takes to get approval from DOCS (NSW). From the time we lodged our expression of interest to the time our file went overseas was 15 months. This is the waiting time that needs to be improved. The large majority of adoptive parents realise that children are not readily available and are willing to wait for however long it takes for a child to be allocated to their family.
The phrases ‘wealthy families’ and ‘buying children’ are completely out of order in this country. Not one person I have met in the many functions and seminars I have attended on this issue are wealthy and the money they pay is to Governments and for their own expenses. This is not the USA and we are not celebrities that send out agents looking for children. In fact direct contact with any orphanage is strongly discouraged. Adoption is also certainly not a cure for infertility - that pain never goes away but the desire to start a family remains strong.
With regards to suicide rates, drug use etc. A true picture would compare these rates to the children that are institutionalised in orphanages for their entire childhood. By comparison I am sure the rates in adopted children would be a lot less. And what would you prefer; that these children, by virtue of their circumstances, be left in an institution?
Every adoptive family that I have met realises that its not all bliss and hapiness when they adopt a child. DOCS and the support organisations do a great job in educating adoptive families on the potential problems that may be encountered. In fact quite a few don’t go ahead after atttending the compulsory seminars as they feel unable to cope with the potential issues. This is a good thing as only those that are truely committed to the entire process, positives and negataives, should proceed.
The issue with India is truely awful however I know that DOCS and other bodies are working hard to ensure this never happens again. Nothing is fulproof but they are trying.
Please be careful when making your comments as adopted children are reading this to and some of the comments made are unnecessarily biased and hurtful. Please educate yourself on the issue first and don’t believe any one article as most very rarely show both sides of the story.
Finally some sanity! Thankyou Ian Robinson!
I think people are confusing what wealthy means in this context. Because Australian’s (compared to the poverty of the countries from which many of these children are adopted) are very wealthy.
The truth is we have a system of adoption here in Australia which is rigorously concerned with the best interests of the child. If it takes time to ensure that the interests of the child are being met first and foremost then we should accept that and be thankful our country is so careful and stringent. Australia has domestic and international legal obligations with regards to the best interests of children, it must uphold them. Any watering down and speeding up of the process as desired by Ms Furness will ultimately result in those interests not being given the weight of attention that they deserve.
"The truth is that no-one has the right to a child and in particular no-one has the right to someone else’s child. Children are not commodities to be bartered nor possessions with which to complete the perfect home."
This should be emblazoned across every billboard. As a person with direct experience of infertility and the desire to "have" a child at any cost the increasingly parent centric focus of campaigns such as that of Orphan Angels is very worrying.
Society needs to fundamentally change the way it views parenting and having children. With skyrocketing infertility rates it’s about time that along with teaching high school students the dangers of unprotected sex, we also taught them that having children is not to be taken for granted. Children are NOT a right that we all should expect. It is a child’s right first and foremost to remain with their family of origin and within their own culture.
As Mr Robinson states "The cost to an Australian parent of one inter-country adoption would ensure literally hundreds of children thrived in their own countries."
I love the way journalists try to twist and manipulate the articles to suit their own agenda. As an adoptive parent I was disturbed by what Ian had to say and I’m disturbed by the lack of knowledge that the Australian population has in regards to adoption and yet they comment without knowledge. DLF from what I have seen and read is trying to open access to other orphanages around the world not promote easier access for wealthy parents to purchase children. In a perfect world there would be no poverty, there would be no disease and every child would live in a safe and loving family. The reality unfortunately is the complete opposite. The problem with the Australian system of Intercountry adoption is that we have only one agency that deals with it which is Dept of Community Services and in NSW they charge $10,000 for us to put in paper work. The other expenses are travel expenses and the other countries government costs. As Intercountry Adoption is not a priority for DOCs they have a very small list of orphanages and countries that they deal with and this is what leads to the extended wait times. DLF is trying to increase communication between the Australian Government/DOCs and other orphanages already established in these 3rd world countries. The fact remains, whether you like it or not, these orphanages are filled with abandoned or orphaned children. Children that will never have a chance of living with a family. The sad truth is that stopping adoption will not stop child trafficking. The ideal situation, in any country, is that a child grows up with their biological parents, if this is not possible then adoption within their own country and if that is not possible then intercountry adoption. Obviously intercountry adoption is not the 1st choice but for many children in poor orphanages this may be their only chance of life. Once you step inside these orphanages you see how these children live. Many will never have a chance to be part of a family. I remember feeling a sense of loss for our daughter when we were ready to leave her birth country and our guide whose job it is to help adoptive children and families come together said to me, ‘please do not feel guilty. This was your daughters last chance of being part of a family, she would have lived her life in this orphanage with no education, no parent to wipe her tears or give her love or look after her when she is sick. And they would have made her leave once she was 14.’ Whilst the carers may try to do their best in the orphanages with very little money and supplies, our daughters orphanage had a mortality rate of 85%. There were very few older children as many just don’t make it. Yes she may still have issues when she is older, yes its not a perfect world, yes intercountry adoption is not the 1st choice, but atleast intercountry adoption allows many children to have a chance. There are many sad stories about the statistics of intercountry adopted children re: suicide, attachment disorders etc. but there are many, many success stories too. There are also many statistics on suicide etc. from non adopted people. We donate to charities and orphanages but this still does not stop the poverty etc. in these countries. There is no one solution to solve the worlds poverty crisis but opening Australias contact with already established orphanages in 3rd world countries can lead to more children having a family. Part of the regulation of the adoption process now in Australia is the compulsory registration with adoption support groups and seminars. This has come about from obvious floors in the system which adult adoptees have pointed out. Our children frequently attend intercountry playgroups, seminars, cultural days, etc. in the hope that they grow up with other adoptees and not feel so isolated. Before people comment on wealthy people wanting 3rd world children maybe you should step into an orphanage in one of these countries and see what really happens.
i like how sams claims not to be wealthy despite the fact that they were able to be able to pay $10 000 plus (see dknowle2) to adopt their child. i don’t know many people who aren’t wealthy that have a spare 10-15 grand to throw around.
however i think it is important to say that people like sams are not bad people. they have adopted a child with good intentions (let’s not get into the celebrity adoption debate). they certainly aren’t intending to steal children from people.
but these sorts of articles are essential for people who are thinking of adopting children in the future. i too was considering adoption for similar reasons that sams detailed but after some research decided it was not right. sams may not have done the same research or made different conclusions to me. the more we know about these things the better decisions we can make
A couple of comments from the most recent posts.
$15,000 hardly makes a person wealthy and the money isn’t ‘thrown around’. This money is saved and spent gradually over the time frame that it takes to adopt which can be anywhere from 2 years to many more. This would be absolutley no different to the amount of money spent on a natural born child over a similar time frame.
No-one has the right to a child - of course. We are incredibly grateful and priviliged to be able to welcome these children into a loving family environment and fantastic country. As mentioned above, the alternative doesn’t bear thinking about - ousted at the age of 14 from an orphanage with no education, no money…….nothing. Is this what you would prefer for these children? Adoptive parents do not go into this lightly - every single person I have met takes it very seriously.
The Government does check you out to see if you have enough money to raise that child if money was not a problem then why take them from there birth mothers, in some points apart from the ones that are bought from overseas adoption. That was thumped into us you can not afford to keep this child. They classed a baby as a commodity
Let it go to a home that two parents can bring it up and give it the things that you cannot.
I heard not so long ago that an adoptee said to me that as she was now seeing her BIRTH mother the adopted parents took her to court to have the adoption reversed. DISCUSSING BEHAVIOUR by an adopted parent and I will never like them or think they are better for my child. Also my child was adopted twice don’t tell me that was in my daughters best interest after they stole her.
i’m sorry LeanneB i totally disagree. $15000 is a whole lot of money! i have 2 children, conceived naturally, and thanks to medicare it cost us nothing outside of some vitamins for my partner. i consider myself comfortable financially (i have a professional job i live in a wealthy area, i drive a nice car etc etc) and i know that there is absolutely no way i could afford $15000. by throw around i mean spend it on something that is not my normal day to day living and i’m afraid anyone who can spare $15000 over a period of a couple of years is not poor.
I had already written my response on my blog, after Hearing DLF discuss the new Adoption time line she thought appropriate on our local radio station here in Perth.
You can read my views here http://adoptedjane.blogspot.com/2008/11/nine-months-should-be-how-long-i…
I’ve previously also written about DLF’s push to make adoption bigger here in Australia on my blog as well.
Its a pity she’s using her voice in this way.
and yes LeanneB everyone is exactly suggesting that we leave these children in an orphanage with no education etc. Do me a favour!
obviously if you want to genuinely help these children you could give money to charities that support them to be adopted in their own countries and culture.
The New South Law Reform Commission (1994, 1997) stated unequivocally that there are not enough infants to supply the needs of Western adopters. Demanding infants from developing countries creates trafficking. A social worker from a sending country, quoted in the Report 34 (1994), stated that intercountry adoption fractured families and took the incentive away from poorer countries to develop adequate social welfare infrastructure. The Catholic Social Welfare Commission, in an inquiry it did into intercountry adoption in 1991, stated that wealthier countries were taking advantage of the plight of impoverished families and receiving countries, such as Australia, were not giving enough aid to the developing world to ensure families stayed in tact. Further, evidence was given to the Law Commission that intercountry adoption created orphans. This has been backed up recently by 12 months of investigative journalism conducted by the Schuster Institute. In an article on the corruption inherent in intercountry adoption in Cambodia for instance, (didn’t Furness and Jackman just return from there?) it stated that once the demand for infants stopped so did the supply. In fact there were only a hundred plus infants under two in Cambodian institutions when reporters investigated whereas prior to the moratorium on intercountry adoption (because of corruption), that many infants were taken for adoption from orphanages every two months. Rather than saving orphans they are being created to satisfy demand.
http://www.brandeis.edu/investigate/gender/adoption/index.html
The Lie we Love is an article that exposes the truth: there are not millions of orphans in institutions. Apparently this is a lie perpetrated by the intercountry adoption lobby to justify the transporting of thousands of children across borders. The orphan myth also takes attention away from the fact that there are “serious irregularities in international adoption such as buying, defrauding, coercing and kidnapping children away from their families.” The NSW Law Reform Commission stated that the orphan myth was a tactic used by those who wanted to adopt to garner support for bringing more children into Australia. Professor David Smolin, an academic who found his two adopted Indian daughters were both stolen, claims that adoptive parents want to believe the orphan myth because any number of egregious acts are either completely excused or minimized under the banner of ‘orphan saving’. Additionally when children are found to be trafficked their parents cannot regain them because it is considered to be in their best interests to stay in a wealthier country. So it seems in intercountry adoption kidnapping a child is excused and parental rights effectively extinguished. Western media commentators justify these despicable acts because “children are moved from third world poverty to first world luxury’. Apparently luxury outranks familiar ties, culture and identity. When Furness claims that she and her supporters need wait no longer than the ‘gestation’ period for a child, the truth of her campaign is exposed. Adoption is once again a service for adults, children a commodity Fortunately women in this country are no longer drugged, tied to beds, have pillows shoved in their faces so they cannot see their infants at the birth, to facilitate the adoption process. Hence the supply of adoptable newborns dried up. Having experienced this and heard many mothers reiterate the same all of which was substantiated at a NSW Inquiry in past practices in adoption (1998-2000) I can only imagine what poor mothers must be put through in developing countries where women’s rights are not a consideration. And don’t talk about the Hague Convention safeguarding the rights of birth families, the Adoption of Children Act was supposed to protect my rights, it did not, it was used to neutralize any common law rights I had to parent my own child. I believe this is National Adoption Awareness Week – (an initiative of Furness to celebrate adoption loss) what about instead we have a National Child-trafficking Awareness Week - to determine how we can stop this appalling trade in infant lives.
ryans: "i like how sams claims not to be wealthy despite the fact that they were able to be able to pay $10 000 plus (see dknowle2) to adopt their child. i don’t know many people who aren’t wealthy that have a spare 10-15 grand to throw around."
Perhaps you would be amazed what you can do without in return for saving a child who would otherwise be unlikely to survive to adulthood. You need to be aware that these fees are spent over a period of years, and include international air travel (economy). If you can’t afford $10,000 to spend on a child over a few years, or even over a single year, then how do you expect to bring them up? I take it someone else does the household bills in your family!?
ryans: "obviously if you want to genuinely help these children you could give money to charities that support them to be adopted in their own countries and culture"
Eventually we hope that the countries will develop to a point where they can adopt their own, as has happening in some cases. I think we all agree that that is the ideal situation. However, it is not going to happen for a while and so unless you have a spare $15 billion or so to donate (and realisticly even then it would take decades, if you could ensure the money got to the right places, which you can’t in these countries), kids are going to be stuck in orphanages. As someone here mentioned, the mortality rates in developing country orphanages are atrocious, and then they are ejected at the age of 14 or 15, and the odds are not very good then either.
It is worth seeking out and speaking to other adoptive parents and their children, especially within the Australian support groups. Go to international days and see what is happening there. Their stories are varied but mostly very positive.
I forgot to mention that the author of the article brings up some (inadequately referenced) statistics about inter-country adoption outcomes, including anxiety, suicide, drug abuse, and attachment disorder (the latter we were taught about in pre-adoption workshops).
What did you expect? Perhaps people are not aware of the conditions that have brought these children to orphanages. For example: memories of their family members dying or being killed; being displaced and living in refugee camps; sexual abuse (it is common - a friend’s child was diagnosed at their first check-up in Australia).
Attachment disorder is something that adoptive parents have to be on the lookout for and we follow strategies to avoid it. However, children that spend their entire lives in orphanages really don’t have a chance of avoiding it.
i’ve had a bit of experience with intercountry adoption being the dad of two biological & two adopted children.In an ideal world everyone would be able to have children & every child would be able to have two biological loving parents its just a shame we don’t live in an ideal world.
Orphaned & abandonned children do exist & do live in poverty in third world countries its not a fallacy 13 million,half a dozen,one is too many & although inter-country adoption is not the complete answer it is part of the maze.Inter-country adoption is about making families & being loving parents for your own sake as well as the childs sake & if your doing it to take a child away from poverty you won’t last the distance as adopted children are the same as any other child they will push the boundaries & punch your buttons as any parent knows.
As far as cost go I’ve worked hard all my life as a self employed tradesman & you find the money but it has in the last ten years gotten more & more expensive mainly from goverment charges.
I’ve been to the orphanages & the streets where children beg & troll garbage for pickings which are nothing like what you’d find in Australian garbages.Don’t fool yourself that only rich people adopt & don’t kid yourself that there isn’t a need for it sponsoring children in their own homes is great & our family do a lot of that but those children have got families.
sams, my point about the money is if you are adopting internationally you are obviously, to some degree, wealthy. why fight it, if you’ve worked hard and earned your money you should be proud of it.
the $10 000 figure did not include airfares it was for fees from DOCS alone (according to another poster). i think my point is if you spent 10 to 15 grand over a few yeard giving to charities in these countries your dollars would go a whole lot further. this is not to mention the money you will spend raising your adopted child.
now i’m not going to crucify people for adopting internationally, as i said it is clearly done out of good intention and i also personally know people who have done it and i’m sure sams, being so passionate, you are a lovely person. My point, and the point of many others who have cited multiple academic studies into the matter, is that it is not necessarilly the best thing you could do for people in these countries and alot of times (present company possibly excluded) people get seduced by misinformation coming from people like Deborah and Madonna and Angelina.
if you want/need to adopt for other reasons and you feel international adoption is a better way to help than local, and you’re certain you are helping the child then great! but people need to know the whole truth.
ryans you obviously don’t know the whole truth yes you might or might not be well read on the subject .Money is not the issue all working australians are wealthy in comparison to third world countries. What you don’t have a beer,see a movie,go out for dinner people who adopt generally sacrifice to save but bottom line they earn the money what you’ve got to realize is when you have a child who has spent the first 14 months of their life in a cot in a nursery with 30-40 occupied cots & one carer per nursery that child struggles to bond & accept cuddles,they learn to hide their bottle in the cot so they can take some comfort from it they learn to survive it takes you 12 months plus to earn their trust & affection you just don’t know the half of it .its not about money & its definetly not about deborah ,Angelins & Madonna
Hi sams,
You wrote that you thought Ian’s article was inadequately referenced - he actually did provide us with extra details for the published studies he references but they are not available online, so we didn’t include them in our usual embedded links.
Here they are below:
- For suicide rates among inter-country adoptees in Sweden (mentioned in paragraph 16), see:
von Borczyskowski, Annika, Hjern, Anders, Lindblad, Frank, & Vinnerljung, Bo. Suicidal behavior in national and international adult adoptees: a Swedish cohort study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol (2006) 41: 95-102.
See also:
Bimmmel, N., Juffer, F., van IJzendoorn M. H and Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Problem behaviour of internationally adopted adolescents: a review and meta-analysis. Har Rev Psychiatry, 2003 11(2): p. 64-77
Elmund, A. M R., Overrepresentation of Internationally Adopted Adolescents in Swedish institutions p. 15 Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine Uppsala Universitet 2007 www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_uu_diva-7423-1__fulltext…
Hjern, A, Lindblad, F & Vinnerljung, B ‘Suicide, psychiatric illness and social maladjustment in intercountry adoptees in Sweden: a cohort study’ The Lancet 360. 9331 Aug 10 2002, p. 443; Suicide in first and second generation immigrants: a comparative study Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epideminol 37, 2002 p. 423-429
- For drug, alcohol and mental problems (mentioned in paragraph16), see:
Berg-Kelly, K and J. Eriksson, Adaptation of adopted foreign children at mid-adolescence as indicated by aspects of health and risk taking-a population study. Eur child Adolesc Psychiatry, 1997. 6(4): p. 199-206
Collinshaw, S, Maughan, B and Pickles, A., Infant adoption: psychosocial outcomes in adulthood. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol, 1998, 33(2): p. 57-65; Verhulst, F. C., Althaus, M. and Versluis-den Bieman, H. J., Problem behaviour in international adoptees: I. An epidemiological study. J A, Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 1990a. 29(1): pp. 94-103
Bimmel, N., Juffer, F., van IJzendoorn M. HY. and BakermansKraneneburg, M. J., Problem behaviour of internationally adopted adolescents: a review and meta-analysis. Har Rev Psychiatry, 2003. 11(2): pp. 64-77
- For negative outcomes in the USA (mentioned in paragraph 17), see:
Nancy Verrier and Joe Soll in private communications. To view their work go to Nancy Verrier: nancyverrier.com and Jo Soll: adoptioncrossraods.com
- For the Australian study of Vietnamese adoptees (mentioned in paragraph 17), see:
The Australian Catholic Social Welfare Commission (1991) Intercountry Adoption: Discussion Paper August 1991, p. 14, 3.9.
Hope that helps!
Brendan
Wow! What venom people spew forth when we get on the adoption topic.
Understandably the above comments from adoptees and birth mothers are to be aprreciated and validated as ‘their’ experiences. Being adopted and having a child taken from you or feeling no other choice but to give up your cihld for adoption can be a terribly hurtful experience.
Australia made a lot of mistakes over the years in trying to get the adoption program right. Mistakes were made but now we need to learn from them.
I am sorry to disagree with you Ian but Australia does have a ANTI adoption culture. I worked for DoCS for 12 months and I can tell you that they will choose to foster a child out everytime over adopting them out. What’s wrong with this you say? That child at a base level knows and fears the fact that they do not ‘belong’ to that family. At any time they can be taken from that home and moved to another. Every child has the right to belong to a family.
The emotional and mental stress fostering puts on a child can be enormous.
It just makes me sad that people don’t want to see past the ‘bagging out’ of celebrities and see the real needs of children needing families.
Whether 130 million or 13 million orphans whatever age, why are we arguing about this?
Ian have you ever lived in a 3rd world country? I lived on Bhola Island in Bangladesh from age 13 to 15. I watched everyday as a 3 year old girl called Bhuti came up the road to the Char Fassion Orphanage my parents ran and got bathed and fed by my mother and then wandered back out into the street begging and to spend the night under a tree. She was not allowed to stay at the orphanage because she was a girl. But ironically probably the only oprhan on the island. The orphanage was for boys only and their parents to poor to care for them would lie and say the child had no parents so that they could be taken care of there.
I lived in Kisi Kenya for 8 months where I saw children left outside to die when parents could not or owuld not care for them.
Honestly these kids could not give a toss about your definition of an orphan. They had no one to love them or hold them at night. Is that not a greater enough need for you do gooders?
What qualifications must a child possess to meet your requirements for a family?
I am infertile and can not have a biological child. This does not make me a lesser person to you Ian. I am not emotionally dependent on my adopted daughter. She needed a family as she was left in a box to die. I had a home and love to give. Therefore a match was made. I doubt very much that she will be pissed at me when she is 18 and tell me that I stole her.
DLF and the OA supporters (I am one of them) are not ANGELS. You probably should have researched that better and found out who the angels were. It’s the kids without families.
Please Ian and your readers think about the children. Think about those kids whether 2 or 16 who are living around the world without the support of a family. They may not be orphans in the ‘my parents and family are dead’ sense of the word. But they are orphans in the sense that they are alone in the world.
Families whether infertile or not can still provide a home for these special angels who live everyday alone and unloved.
Please do not spread hatred and dissention about people who are trying to do the best they can.
Rachel
www.roguequeen.wordpress.com
How misguided you are Ian Robinson!!! My husband and I have been on the adoption journey for 4 years and are yet to be allocated a child.
The majority of our waiting time has been due to the Australian Government and this same Government will receive most of the overall cost of us adopting a child overseas. We would prefere this money to be sent over to the third world countries to help their orphanages, but the red tape that Deborah is so hard working on breaking down is being destroyed by someone like yourself{a dogooder} who has just had a dream about this issue, rather than doing an indepth study on the adoption process. We, as adoptive parents in waiting ,hope that the children that are reliquished/ abandoned for adoption have had every avenue explored in their country to ensure that there are no family members or local adoptive parents available that will provide a loving home to them within their birth country, before we are allocated. My husband and I are hard working people who are struggling to meet the cost involved. So yet again you haven’t done your research properly, as all the waiting parents we know are in the same financial position as us. We are only interested in adoption as we can not have children of our own natually, therefore we decided to adopt a child from an orphanage. Should you wish to talk about studies, then lets go down the path regarding children who are instutionalised for their whole adolescent life. Do you think it is better to allow these children not to develope into the people that they can become from a loving family? How naive are you!!
From a proud waiting parent.
Wow! What venom people spew forth when we get on the adoption topic.
Understandably the above comments from adoptees and birth mothers are to be aprreciated and validated as ‘their’ experiences. Being adopted and having a child taken from you or feeling no other choice but to give up your cihld for adoption can be a terribly hurtful experience.
Australia made a lot of mistakes over the years in trying to get the adoption program right. Mistakes were made but now we need to learn from them.
Venomous are we? Let us see how gracious you are when the family of your adopted child resurfaces. Mistakes – how dare you minimize the theft of my child to being merely a mistake. My son was kidnapped at birth – and you are so cruel to reduce that to a mistake. I was drugged and transported miles away from the hospital in which I gave birth. My baby was hidden from me in order to provide an infertile woman like yourself with a baby. But he was and always will be my baby. I know of other mothers tied to beds, drugged who then had their babies hidden from them – why were we treated in such a barbaric way, why were our human and civil rights destroyed – because infertile couples like yourself demanded babies. Anybody’s baby would do – as long as it was healthy and near enough white. You reduce the total violation of my civil and human rights to a mistake. And you call me venomous. I know of mothers who were told their child died only to have them reappear 40 years later and then blame their mothers for having abandoned them - you reduce this level of misery and trauma to a mistake? Venom – I think you could teach us all something about that.. And did you really need to put “their” in quotes. Yes our experience is one of loss. A loss that fortunately you will never know because you will never give birth. When I was separated from my newborn I experienced it not only as a loss of my baby but of part of myself. This is because I bonded in-utero. No forced attachment, I bonded the way mother nature intended.
I am sorry to disagree with you Ian but Australia does have a ANTI adoption culture. I worked for DoCS for 12 months and I can tell you that they will choose to foster a child out everytime over adopting them out. What’s wrong with this you say? That child at a base level knows and fears the fact that they do not ‘belong’ to that family. At any time they can be taken from that home and moved to another. Every child has the right to belong to a family.
The emotional and mental stress fostering puts on a child can be enormous.
Anti-adoption culture? The Inter-country adoption lobby has been calling any country, organization or person who does not conform to their agenda as anti- adoption. Read the EU Special Rapportuer, Emma Nicholson’s, report on how the Bucharest News was used by the ICA lobby to run ‘horror stories’ about how adoptive parents were being stymied in their attempts to adopt when Romania closed down its intercountry adoption program. Why was it closed down? Because of corruption, they could not account for up to 30,000 children that had left the country. Did the ICA lobby care, no they wanted to keep the pipeline of babies open for adopters like yourself. The adoption industry in the US is a multibillion dollar industry and it does not care about the feelings or trauma of adoptees and “birthmothers” as people like you label us. By the way calling us ‘birthmothers’ is as disrespectful as when the whites labeled the blacks niggers.
What about kinship care or guardianship for children who cannot be with their family of origin? That way the child does not have to lose its original identity. I know it seems a lot less like ownership for the adopters but it is more child orientated, where the guardians and extended family members can collectively work together for the child’s good. Isn’t that what families have being doing forever, working communally to bring up a child. What is it that Oprah Winfey repeats, it takes a village to bring up a child.
It just makes me sad that people don’t want to see past the ‘bagging out’ of celebrities and see the real needs of children needing families.
Whether 130 million or 13 million orphans whatever age, why are we arguing about this?
Again lets be clear. The 13 million or whatever is just NOT TRUE. They are not orphans, these children have families, poor families who need assistance to stay together . Please stop perpetuating the orphan myth for your own benefit.
Ian have you ever lived in a 3rd world country? I lived on Bhola Island in Bangladesh from age 13 to 15. I watched everyday as a 3 year old girl called Bhuti came up the road to the Char Fassion Orphanage my parents ran and got bathed and fed by my mother and then wandered back out into the street begging and to spend the night under a tree. She was not allowed to stay at the orphanage because she was a girl. But ironically probably the only oprhan on the island. The orphanage was for boys only and their parents to poor to care for them would lie and say the child had no parents so that they could be taken care of there.
See your own experience bares out what I am saying. These children WERE NOT ORPHANS they had parents, poor parents who put their children in the orphanage presumably so they did not starve. One real orphan, well that is probably more reflective of the number of orphans available
I lived in Kisi Kenya for 8 months where I saw children left outside to die when parents could not or owuld not care for them.
Honestly these kids could not give a toss about your definition of an orphan. They had no one to love them or hold them at night. Is that not a greater enough need for you do gooders?
What qualifications must a child possess to meet your requirements for a family?
We are not the ones that need a child to qualify for anything. You spoke in your first paragraph about venomous adoptees – are they the ones your now suggesting ‘don’t give a toss?’ Are their different categories of orphans/adoptees, grateful, ungrateful or ??? Why don’t you listen to what intercountry adoptees are saying rather than dismissing them as venomous? Why don’t you listen to them and see how they feel about the loss of their parents, culture and homeland. They do care. It’s a shame that someone did not assist their parents. You make the accusation that some of the parents ‘would not care for them’ - I guess there is always going to be some nutter who do not care for their children but its less likely to be the biological parent that a stranger. You need to do a bit more research and see the statistics of the abuse in households where one or both parents are not related. Its horrific.
I am infertile and can not have a biological child. This does not make me a lesser person to you Ian. I am not emotionally dependent on my adopted daughter. She needed a family as she was left in a box to die. I had a home and love to give. Therefore a match was made. I doubt very much that she will be pissed at me when she is 18 and tell me that I stole her.
You had a lot of love to give and you needed to receive a lot more. How she feels at 18 is anybody’s guess.
DLF and the OA supporters (I am one of them) are not ANGELS. You probably should have researched that better and found out who the angels were. It’s the kids without families.
Did you read the comments of the intercountry adoptees themselves about the inappropriateness of these terms. They did try and tell DLF but she only got irate and abused them for raining on her parade.
Please Ian and your readers think about the children. Think about those kids whether 2 or 16 who are living around the world without the support of a family. They may not be orphans in the ‘my parents and family are dead’ sense of the word. But they are orphans in the sense that they are alone in the world.
Well now were admitting their not really orphans. They need aid, their families need aid, and with the money spent on ‘saving’ one or two you could have supported an entire village.
Families whether infertile or not can still provide a home for these special angels who live everyday alone and unloved.
Please do not spread hatred and dissention about people who are trying to do the best they can.
No we are not spreading anything, just survived the theft of our children and can’t stand by silently and see it happen to some other mother or grandmother.
Familypreservation
What happened to you is out and out wrong. It can’t be condoned.
Obviously it has caused deep pain and affected you in ways I can not even imagine.
Maybe you need to seek counselling to help you deal with the bitterness and pain in your heart.
rynas: "sams, my point about the money is if you are adopting internationally you are obviously, to some degree, wealthy. why fight it, if you’ve worked hard and earned your money you should be proud of it."
Mate, I know of a school janitor who has adopted multiple children from Africa. I know of people that have taken out loans to afford the process. How much does a house costs theses days? If your child needed $15k in medical bills to survive, I reckon you could come up with it if you put your mind to it.
Ryans: "i think my point is if you spent 10 to 15 grand over a few yeard giving to charities in these countries your dollars would go a whole lot further."
… and that point has been more than adequately disproved. Repeating it isn’t going to make it true. You are talking to people who deliberated over this question for years while going through the process. You clearly cannot fathom the importance of getting the children out of the orphanages right now - the importance of close bonding relationship for each child. Money will not buy that. Tell me - what is your policy here - to pay Ethiopians couples to adopt from orphanages? I don’t think you want to be going down that path. Tell me exactly how the money should be given to a country like Ethiopia so that this problem is solved for the current generation of orphaned kids, and how you are going to get hold the requisite billions of dollars, and get it to the right place?
The problem here as far as I see it lies with the definition of “relinquishing parents”. If the child comes from a country where slavery prevails or war is rampant then what is to stop the farming of babies? I think the ABC did a documentary on child trafficking in China recently. It showed that if Westerners are willing to pay high prices for new born babies a market will spring to life. A name like Orphan Angels smacks of a marketing savvy Western corporation. Ian Robinson tells us the position the United Nations Children’s Fund on this company. They appear to be against it. I sponsor a child through the ChildFund group. This, I believe, gives her the opportunity to go to school and one meal a day outside the family home. She lives with her family and importantly, her brothers and sisters. The cost is negligible. I have friends who sponsor multiple children. I understand the desire of infertile people to want to raise their own children. It is ironically a purely selfish act of s