Statement of Information Sharing Relative to Birth Parents & Adoptees and Their Families
In the course of researching the origins and birth families for adoptees, information is often found about adoptees that may conflict with what they have been provided by the orphanage. Additionally, sometimes relatives of adoptees from China will be located without knowledge or consent being provided by the adoptee or their adoptive parents. Research-China.org/DNAConnect.org’s (RC/DNA) policy regarding the sharing of such information for these discoveries are based on the following overarching beliefs:
1) China is a country evolving at an almost incomprehensible pace. These changes involve the relocation of birth families, finders, care givers, foster families, and others who share and possess knowledge of an adoptee’s history and birth family. Due to these risks of loss of potential information, RC/DNA believes that making contact as soon as possible is in the best interest of all parties involved.
2) Because some children entered the orphanages in China unethically, and were not freely relinquished by their birth parents, RC/DNA also believes that there is a burden on the part of adoptive families and adoptees to allow these birth families to have closure and peace regarding their biological children. For that reason, RC/DNA encourages the location and contact of adoptees and their families in order to provide the option of making contact with birth families inside China.
RC/DNA believes that all participants in the adoption triad (adoptees/adoptive parents/birth parents) have rights to privacy, but also to peace and happiness. It occasionally will arise that these needs between members are contradictory – an adoptee may wish to make contact with a birth parent when no such contact is desired, as an example. In these limited cases, only an offer to provide information will be made to the party. In other words, the birth parent will be contacted and alerted that their child desires contact. No contact information for the adoptee will be provided unless the adoptee has provided explicit approval. The contra is similar: If a birth parent seeks contact with an adoptee, that adoptee or their family will be alerted that such information is available. It will be up to the adoptee to accept the offer and obtain the information.
RC/DNA understands that being offered information can be disruptive, and sometimes unwanted by any of the triad members. We strongly feel that whenever an adoptive family, adoptee or birth parent, takes actions to obtain more information, such as Baidu or Google searches relating to orphanages, orphanage names, or by joining Facebook, Yahoo, and other groups serving the adoption community in general (we make no distinction between groups serving general purposes and those designed for searching for birth parents, etc.), that the very real risk of discovering unknown and possibly unwanted information exists. RC/DNA believes that the searching party has the responsibility to undertake such searches with the awareness that such information may be available, and that such a search constitutes assumption of those risks of discovery. The vast majority of triad members seek this information, and to obscure or hide such information under the assumption that a rare few will be non-desirous of such information constitutes a very real harm to the adoption community as a whole.
Thus, if a birth family, for example, contacts RC/DNA asking for assistance in locating their biological child, and the birth date, orphanage name, or other identifying information is provided to assist in that search, we will freely publicize such provided information. This is crucial to allowing the adoptee, in this example, the clear opportunity to receive the information and to make their own decision to pursue contact. We don’t believe that publicizing information provided by birth families searching adoptees, or information provided by adoptees in searching for birth families in China constitutes a violation of privacy – all parties are able to respond or ignore the receipt of such knowledge. Moderators and owners of specific China-related groups are, of course, free to deny or remove posts that violate rules for their own groups.
Since the majority of adoptees and birth families do not actively refuse knowing more about other members of the adoption triad, this stance, we believe, serves the adoption community most efficiently. We believe the risk in hiding, obfuscating, or otherwise preventing adoptees and birth families from gaining such information poses the very real risk that such information will not be available at a later date. Hiding such information removes the option from the adoptee or birth family to make contact now or at any time down the road.
1) China is a country evolving at an almost incomprehensible pace. These changes involve the relocation of birth families, finders, care givers, foster families, and others who share and possess knowledge of an adoptee’s history and birth family. Due to these risks of loss of potential information, RC/DNA believes that making contact as soon as possible is in the best interest of all parties involved.
2) Because some children entered the orphanages in China unethically, and were not freely relinquished by their birth parents, RC/DNA also believes that there is a burden on the part of adoptive families and adoptees to allow these birth families to have closure and peace regarding their biological children. For that reason, RC/DNA encourages the location and contact of adoptees and their families in order to provide the option of making contact with birth families inside China.
RC/DNA believes that all participants in the adoption triad (adoptees/adoptive parents/birth parents) have rights to privacy, but also to peace and happiness. It occasionally will arise that these needs between members are contradictory – an adoptee may wish to make contact with a birth parent when no such contact is desired, as an example. In these limited cases, only an offer to provide information will be made to the party. In other words, the birth parent will be contacted and alerted that their child desires contact. No contact information for the adoptee will be provided unless the adoptee has provided explicit approval. The contra is similar: If a birth parent seeks contact with an adoptee, that adoptee or their family will be alerted that such information is available. It will be up to the adoptee to accept the offer and obtain the information.
RC/DNA understands that being offered information can be disruptive, and sometimes unwanted by any of the triad members. We strongly feel that whenever an adoptive family, adoptee or birth parent, takes actions to obtain more information, such as Baidu or Google searches relating to orphanages, orphanage names, or by joining Facebook, Yahoo, and other groups serving the adoption community in general (we make no distinction between groups serving general purposes and those designed for searching for birth parents, etc.), that the very real risk of discovering unknown and possibly unwanted information exists. RC/DNA believes that the searching party has the responsibility to undertake such searches with the awareness that such information may be available, and that such a search constitutes assumption of those risks of discovery. The vast majority of triad members seek this information, and to obscure or hide such information under the assumption that a rare few will be non-desirous of such information constitutes a very real harm to the adoption community as a whole.
Thus, if a birth family, for example, contacts RC/DNA asking for assistance in locating their biological child, and the birth date, orphanage name, or other identifying information is provided to assist in that search, we will freely publicize such provided information. This is crucial to allowing the adoptee, in this example, the clear opportunity to receive the information and to make their own decision to pursue contact. We don’t believe that publicizing information provided by birth families searching adoptees, or information provided by adoptees in searching for birth families in China constitutes a violation of privacy – all parties are able to respond or ignore the receipt of such knowledge. Moderators and owners of specific China-related groups are, of course, free to deny or remove posts that violate rules for their own groups.
Since the majority of adoptees and birth families do not actively refuse knowing more about other members of the adoption triad, this stance, we believe, serves the adoption community most efficiently. We believe the risk in hiding, obfuscating, or otherwise preventing adoptees and birth families from gaining such information poses the very real risk that such information will not be available at a later date. Hiding such information removes the option from the adoptee or birth family to make contact now or at any time down the road.