e-mail
Guatemala 900 recently linked a very interesting article entitled International Adoption: Unicef’s and Other Critics’ War Against International Adoption. While it discusses international adoption as a whole, the Guatemala adoption program (generally speaking) is cited specifically in greater detail.
The article makes some fairly strong claims, as shown here:
UNICEF’s tough and effective pressure tactics and lobbying efforts towards developing nations calling for ratification of the Hague Treaty for the Protection of Children and implementation of adoption law and policy models which effectively serve to close programs completely or almost completely to foreign adopters belies a misguided, unrealistic and out of touch policy contrary to the best interests of hundreds of thousands of legitimately orphaned and abandoned children around the world.
The article then goes on to clarify and expound upon the criticisms of the Guatemalan adoption program:
One of the main criticisms of the Guatemalan adoption program prior to its closure was that it was in the hands of private attorneys who depended on sometimes unscrupulous middlemen to procure birthmothers wanting to give up their children and perhaps those not wanting to give up their children. Of course this depiction glosses over the nature of how this practice developed in remote villages in Guatemala, far from the lawyers in Guatemala City who could arrange adoptions by foreign nationals. It was a practical way to connect birthmothers, who were seeking adoption as an option to their usually dire circumstances, to attorneys who could then take the children into custody through the use of foster homes and then place the children with families abroad through adoption proceedings. It is interesting to note that neither UNICEF nor the Guatemalan government could see that there could be a middle ground to solving the problem of unscrupulous middlemen who were supposedly forcing these women to give up their children, paying the women as an inducement, or even, as many reports claimed, kidnapping these children for adoption. Many of these reports glossed over the fact that birth mothers had to relinquish their child to an attorney advising her of her rights, undergo an interview with the Family Court, DNA testing of the birth mother and child, review by the Guatemalan Solicitor General’s office, and once again, the birth mother’s consent to the adoption after the Solicitor General’s approval.
The piece closes while asserting that international adoption should not (and cannot) be the only answer to the world’s problems; overall an interesting read that delves into some of the major criticisms faced by international adoptions. I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter, so as always, please feel free to comment or email me at courtneyo@adoptionblogs.com.
