I had the opportunity to attend the Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs’ symposium, “Strengthening Practice for the Future of Intercountry Adoption,” on September 17 and 18 in Washington, D.C.
It was an “historic gathering” of approximately 125 adoption service providers, non-governmental organizations and Congressional staff to discuss policies and best practices for international adoption. The “historic” criteria was met by the inclusion of birth parent/s, adoptive parents and, most important, adult adoptees.
I had been invited to represent the voices of birth parents during the final keynote panel on Tuesday. Our panel, “In Our Own Voices”, had an adoptive parents representative, Karen Holt; an adult adoptee, Lynelle Long of Intercounty Adoptee Voices; myself, and then Chuck Johnson, the President and CEO of the National Council for Adoption(NCFA). I personally was very thrilled that NCFA was on the same level.
As panelists, we had a conference call on the 12th where we discussed that we would each be given seven minutes to make a statement about problems and solutions in international adoption. As I thought about what I would say, I was very conscious of the fact that I was not a birth parent whose child was adopted overseas, not brown, not improvised, and not really an IA expert. So my initial thought was to use this opportunity to discuss what I do know; adoption practices and issues for birth parents, specifically mothers, in the USA and use that as my framework. The idea being that humanity, pain, loss, mothering, etc. is universal and if American birth parents face certain issues and challenges, then our brethren across the seas can only find those same issues magnified.
But then I sat down to get all my ideas out on paper and I changed my mind. Something inside told me that I just had to grab this opportunity by the horns and go for it. So I wrote out my notes and, knowing I was planning on throwing down, packed for DC. There was no plan B.
After the awful Laura Ingram spoke, I was glad my only option was the planned mic drop. She actually recommended that we use #45’s penchant for unregulation to dismantle the current IA protections and “get those kids at the border some nice adoptive parents in the USA”. If I had any doubts, they were thrown out. That horrible woman was so far to the extreme right (wrong end) of decency, that I knew I had to lob hard left just to bring us to center, so I did.
This is pretty much as it was written out, though I have now edited my notes to from the complete sentences as I said them. The unbolded text was left out of my verbal statement due to time. I had a bunch of hard cold dead stares planned in, so that ate some time.
I must first extend my supreme gratitude to the Department of State for the invitation to be here as birth mother sitting equally at this table.
I need to begin with a brief story:
About fifteen years ago, there was a good size group of birth mothers meeting in New York City for a conference. I remember clearly, at one point, we were complaining about how birth mothers were almost never offered a seat at the almost any table regarding the discussion of adoption. Collectively, we voiced our frustrations.
“When? “, we asked, “When will our voices be given equal importance?”
“When? “, we asked, “When will that day come?”
About ten days ago, as I was thinking about this trip, I remembered us asking, “When? When will our voices be equal at the table?”
And I had the answer: Today. That day is today where a birth mother is sitting equally next to the National Council for Adoption. So, thank you on behalf of many.
***
I have been asked to speak about the improvements needed and possible solutions on behalf of birth parents in International Adoption. I realized, when pepping for this talk, that I cannot do that. I have three reasons why:
Number one, I am not a birth parents form an international adoption situation. I am from New York. I relinquished my son in Massachusetts. I have been to London. That is as international as I get.
Number two, I cannot, in good consciousness, help continue the practice of international adoption under the current mindset.
[There was I believe, an audible gasp from the crowd, which I had anticipated, and had the following line written in to address.]
Please hold that thought, I shall return to the why.
Number three, I was told that I had seven minutes to present today. Remember how I just told you that it took me fifteen years to get here? There is NO WAY I am wasting this opportunity. After all, I AM a punk rock loud mouth birth mother blogger from NY. I cannot lie well and I don’t sugar coat the truth. So let’s talk about some of the elephants in the room. Let’s go.
***
I think we are all here today because the adoption service providers are all in revolt against the increased regulations, against the new accrediting agency, against the laws and restrictions, against the increased costs to complete adoptions and against the time and manpower demanded to keep their agency doors open.
We can all see the writing on the wall. International adoption is in a huge decline. Almost 80% since 2004. Countries keep shutting down while more and more agencies are forced to close their doors. In just five more years it is expected that international adoption will be dead. DEAD!
I get it. I live work and breathe adoption, too. Change is scary and meanwhile, all these poor kids need homes. So many orphans, rights?
And it’s not like our own State Department is helping, right? In fact, it’s bad, right? Chuck Johnson is quoted on the national Council for Adoption’s website as saying:
“Relations between the Office of Children’s Issues and the adoption community are at an all-time low.”
Or, as I read on SaveAdoption.org:
“The Department of State needs to replace the Chief of the Adoption Division in the Office of Children’s Issues….. with a …..person who actually believes that the best interest of a child is served in a permanent, loving family .. in intercountry adoption”
A person who actually believes that the best interest of a child? Because it is all about the “best interest of the child”, right?
***
And that is my problem. I don’t believe it. Oh, you can say that and think you actually believe it, but deep down it’s also about keeping your doors open to satisfy 85 million Americans who have considered adoption; your clients who pay your bills.
Dave Thomas puts it so simply:
“Adoption should have fewer barriers and be less complex and less expensive.”
That is will make it easier for the hopeful adoptive parents and increase the numbers of adoptions completed. Because THAT is the true goal of all the ASPs that have signed on. Your goal is simply to increase the numbers of adoptions in the US.
But until we stop functioning and practicing International Adoption as some wonderful, beautiful, family building, philanthropic act of God and County, I do NOT want to help save it nor increase it.
***
You know how we can improve the lives of birth parents in International Adoptions?
Stop taking their children across the ocean to the United States.
Let me make this statement very clear: On behalf of birth parents around the world, adoption hurts us. Relinquishment hurts us. Being separated from our children hurts us.
No normal functioning human being is designed to be separated from their child. We might believe we are doing the best thing we can and you might even be so naive to believe that most of us actually had actual viable, realistic choices, but bottom line – and the research proves it- we don’t fare well and all too often it seems, neither do our children.
We have got to stop with all these false promises of better lives. Just stop. No one here has a crystal ball and the facts dispute your claims.
[ At this point I was gently reminded that I was almost out of time, so I actually skipped over most of the rest until the final bit, which is in bold]In 2013, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated “Assume There is Adoption Trauma in Adoptees”; not some adoptees, not a few, but all adoptees have trauma.
Meanwhile our country is literally deporting adoptees and ICE is holding them in cells.
And let’s talk racism. There is no pretending we live in a color-blind country anymore. It’s actually not OK to keep bringing black or brown children into this environment
Then, there is four times the risk of attempted suicide for adoptees. FOUR TIMES THE RISK. Who here knows of an adopted person who took their own life., Three degrees of separation or closer? Raise your hand.
I have to tell you, as agencies, you did a lousy job of prepping many adoptive parents. Granted I know that we know more than we did even ten years ago, but I hear the calls we get at my office. The Adoptive and Foster Family Coalition has pushed hard in New York State for Post adoption programs because these parents were not prepared for the reality either and the kids suffer because they are expected to be happy and grateful. It’s all fine and dandy until that nice international adoptee hits the teens years, then we get the phone calls.
Dare I say the word rehoming?
And before we go any further, if anyone feels the need to find me later and tell me how I am citing the extreme cases and not the norm and you find the need to “educate” me about the “one bad apple” or “bad characters”, please just don’t. I don’t find it acceptable that one single adoptee gets deported or rehomed or dies; not a single one.
Anyway. I’m sure my times up. I can’t offer solutions to your problem. I just can’t share the same view point. I cannot find the desire in my heart to increases the numbers of international adoptions. I have listened to all too many adoptees.
Bottom line: you can’t take a life’s tragedy and spin it into a fairy tale. It is always a tragedy for the child when his or her parents cannot care for them. We should not be adding on, but avoiding at all costs, the way we pretend that international adoption is actually practiced. Isn’t the accepted policy now that international adoption is a solution for children only if all other possible options have been exhausted?
Wait! I got it!
If a child is truly an orphan and truly has no other extend family that can care for him or her and a home cannot be found in country and only international adoption can provide that child with the loving care they deserve, then you don’t need my voice here anyway. I actually have no place at this table.
Because the child is an orphan.
The birth parents are dead.
There actually shouldn’t be a birth parent voice at all if international adoption was practiced the way we pretend it is.
Perhaps we should just start listening better to the adoptees.
I wish I was not the only birth mother on a panel. I wish that I was not the only birth mother present at all as it is exhausting. Sadly, the DOS did invite other birth parents and advocates from other organizations, but they did not attend. I firmly believe that I was there to do a job and I took that very seriously; I didn’t ask to speak for every birth parent in the world, but if I must, I will. But again, I’d rather not.
I am proud to say that my words upset people. Apparently, there were even some complaints. I am more than OK with that.
I was also told that NFCA’s Chuck, seemed visibly flustered afterwards. That delights me to no end.
I don’t know what will come of this all. International adoption is still on the decline and I see that as a good thing, yet there is still a strong push to continue the practice. However, the “other” voices were strong. I can’t say we were even the minority anymore.
So I’m just going to hang on to that tiny bit of hope and push on.
