LA Times: The Root of the Problem
Yesterday's Los Angeles Times investigative piece on Family Planning confiscations has brought a wide-spectrum of responses from those both inside and outside the adoption community.
Over on "Resist Racism" the focus was on the comments of Wendy Mailman, the adoptive mother who began the whole scandal in Zhenyuan by actually seeking the truth about her daughter's history. The author of that blog apparently misunderstood the rhetorical questions Wendy has been asking when contemplating her daughter's "official" story -- Born in September and kept until the dead of Winter, only to be abandoned. Wendy's question is why a birth mother would do such a thing? Because she is cruel and heartless? Or because she was forced to give up Wendy's daughter by a cruel and heartless Family Planning official? After the revelations from Zhenyuan, she now suspects the later.
Few adoptive families are willing to face the consequences of searching for their children's birth families, but Wendy has moved fearlessly from one avenue to the other. Rather than being intent on simply "sending a photograph" to her child's birth family, Wendy plans on doing what growing numbers of adoptive families have decided to do: Keep the birth family informed of their child's progress, but leave the decision of forming a relationship with them to her daughter. I agree with that plan. So many adoptive families either disallow their children a choice by avoiding the investigating, or they push their child's birth family upon their children in spirit or fact. Leaving the decision to her daughter is an appropriate decision.
But the article contained a quote that I feel personifies the entire problem in China:
"They're better off with their adoptive parents than their birth parents," argued Wu Benhua, director of Zhenyuan's civil affairs bureau.
To understand the problems found in China's international adoption program, one must understand the racial and economic prejudice that exists in China. Whether it is orphanages offering incentives to buy babies, or Family Planning abusing families by taking unregistered children, the subtext to all of these activities is that most in China's government feel that these birth families are unable to provide a "prosperous and happy future" to their children. A prominent theme in Chinese culture is the belief that if anything can be done to improve a child's future, it should be done. It is this belief that motivates parents to leave their children with grandparents while they work; it is this belief that motivates families to sell their children to orphanages that promise that their child will be adopted by a rich foreign family; and it is this belief that allows a Family Planning official to steal a child from her birth family in order to adopt her internationally.
As long as the principle players in China's IA program, from the director of the CCAA to the foster families and employees used as recruiting tools by the orphanages believe that the children of poor and uneducated birth parents are "better off with their adoptive parents than their birth parents" corruption will continue.
Over on "Resist Racism" the focus was on the comments of Wendy Mailman, the adoptive mother who began the whole scandal in Zhenyuan by actually seeking the truth about her daughter's history. The author of that blog apparently misunderstood the rhetorical questions Wendy has been asking when contemplating her daughter's "official" story -- Born in September and kept until the dead of Winter, only to be abandoned. Wendy's question is why a birth mother would do such a thing? Because she is cruel and heartless? Or because she was forced to give up Wendy's daughter by a cruel and heartless Family Planning official? After the revelations from Zhenyuan, she now suspects the later.
Few adoptive families are willing to face the consequences of searching for their children's birth families, but Wendy has moved fearlessly from one avenue to the other. Rather than being intent on simply "sending a photograph" to her child's birth family, Wendy plans on doing what growing numbers of adoptive families have decided to do: Keep the birth family informed of their child's progress, but leave the decision of forming a relationship with them to her daughter. I agree with that plan. So many adoptive families either disallow their children a choice by avoiding the investigating, or they push their child's birth family upon their children in spirit or fact. Leaving the decision to her daughter is an appropriate decision.
But the article contained a quote that I feel personifies the entire problem in China:
"They're better off with their adoptive parents than their birth parents," argued Wu Benhua, director of Zhenyuan's civil affairs bureau.
To understand the problems found in China's international adoption program, one must understand the racial and economic prejudice that exists in China. Whether it is orphanages offering incentives to buy babies, or Family Planning abusing families by taking unregistered children, the subtext to all of these activities is that most in China's government feel that these birth families are unable to provide a "prosperous and happy future" to their children. A prominent theme in Chinese culture is the belief that if anything can be done to improve a child's future, it should be done. It is this belief that motivates parents to leave their children with grandparents while they work; it is this belief that motivates families to sell their children to orphanages that promise that their child will be adopted by a rich foreign family; and it is this belief that allows a Family Planning official to steal a child from her birth family in order to adopt her internationally.
As long as the principle players in China's IA program, from the director of the CCAA to the foster families and employees used as recruiting tools by the orphanages believe that the children of poor and uneducated birth parents are "better off with their adoptive parents than their birth parents" corruption will continue.