AdopTalk

While this is a terrible shame and a disgrace to the USA and UK, I doubt it has anything to do with adoption or secrets. The UK has had open records for years, and I think some of the countries higher on the list do not. Sometimes it is just not about adoption issues.
 

I have to agree with maryanne. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with adoption - the UK opened records for adopted people around 1975.
 

I am well aware that the UK has open records. But what type of adoptions exist in the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden??

I am also not implying it is the ONLY factor. probably far from it. But it certainly might be part of the picture - either as a cause or an effect. It stands to reason that societies who really honor and treat children with respect and care - not just giving lip service about it - would not stand for the type of adoption we have here. It's not just about openness.

How do the top three countries treat birth control and single pregnancies??? Perhaps there is not need for adoption!
 

Basic principles in regard to adoption in Denmark

The basic principle in regard to adoption in Denmark is that the adoption must be in the best interest of the child. This consideration for the child and its future is the superior principle in all adoption activities.

In order to ensure and promote the welfare of the child to be adopted all prospective adoptive parents must be subject to an examination, and for almost all prospective adoptive parents an adoption course is mandatory before adopting a child from abroad.

The basic legislation regarding adoption in Denmark is stipulated in The Danish Act on adoption.

The procedure in regard to approving applicants as prospective adoptive parents is described in the paragraph “Danish rules on approving prospective parents”.

The Danish Ministry of Family and Consumer Affairs, Department of Family Affairs, has authorised two private non-profit organisations to act as adoption placement agencies for adoptive children who are not Danish nationals.

According to Danish law, intercountry adoption should preferably be performed through these adoption placement agencies. However, when somebody wants to adopt a child, to whom the applicant is closely related, or if there are other special reasons, the Danish Ministry of Family and Consumer Affairs, Department of Family Affairs, can allow the adoption to be performed without assistance from an adoption agency.

Denmark has ratified The Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, and the convention entered into force in Denmark on November 1st, 1997.

It should also be noted that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force in Denmark on August 18, 1991.

-------------

Sweden:


All matters concerning adoption are heard by the district courts, which pass a judgment to that effect after seeking an opinion from the social welfare board or the Migration Board if the child comes from an alien country. However, the Swedish National Board for inter-country Adoptions (NIA) must approve an adoption or a decision in favor of an adoption by a Swedish court. Under the newly amended act, which came into force on 1 February 2003, homosexual couples registered in a legally recognized partnership have the same rights as married couples to apply to become adoptive parents. In addition, legally registered partners and cohabitees of the same sex are also eligible to be appointed as special joint custodians of a child.

REQUIREMENTS:

Any man or woman can adopt a child who is

* 25 years of age or more
* The child's biological parents (or legal guardian) must have given their consent to the adoption.
* No consideration has been given or promised for the adoption.
* Has to seek the prior permission of the court for adoption.
* Spouses may not adopt a child unless they adopt jointly.
* For adopting a child separately only incase the other spouse

1. is living in an unknown place or
2. is suffering from a serious mental disturbance

---------

SOOOO....you can see that the BIG difference is government control as opposed to a free market trading in children to the highest bidder!

This might then be IN PART why these nations rate higher in child care outcomes. They REALLY care! They don't just pretend to.
 

Adopttalk,
I question how much adopting actually happens in Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands. I have read that Sweden has a high rate of out of wedlock pregnancy and that very few infants are adopted. They remain with their mothers.

In the Netherlands, I have heard that they do not have the type of adoption system that the USA has at all.
If a country does not promote adoption, and if the country does not encourage practices which lead to infants and parents being separated , then adoption may be an uncommon event.
 

From what I have heard (and this is from international adoptees) there is quite a bit of adoption from Asia in the Scandinavian countries. Check out the website of Tobias Hubbinette, a Korean adoptee raised in Sweden. I met him at a conference, he is very articulate.
http://www.transracialabductees.org/politics/samdolcritique.html

Doesn't sound like Sweden is the Promised Land of no adoption at all. Canada adopts black kids from the USA as do some European countries. Poland exports kids to the West.

No, I do not think that this Unicef list has anything to do with adoption at all. There is so much else that has to do with child welfare that this study measured, it does not follow that adoption practices were even considered.
 

There's very little new born infant adoption going on in the UK now. In 1999 it was reportedly only about 500 or so per annum, and that in a population of around 60,000,000 people.
Don't know about Sweden or the Netherlands, but the population of Denmark is about one tenth of that.
 

The Associated Press reporting on the UN report:

"One of the study’s researchers, Jonathan Bradshaw, said children fared worse in the U.S. and Britain — despite high overall levels of national wealth — because of greater economic inequality and poor levels of public support for families."

Again...I said...it may not DIRECTLY be based on adoption RATES and numbers. It is based on the social attitude toward families, children, single mothers etc.

“What they have in common are very high levels of inequality, very high levels of child poverty, which is also associated with inequality, and in rather different ways poorly developed services to families with children,” said Bradshaw, a professor of social policy at the University of York in Britain."

What led to most of our relinquishments: POOR SERVICES for FAMILIES!
 

" It stands to reason that societies who really honor and treat children with respect and care - not just giving lip service about it - would not stand for the type of adoption we have here."
The UK adoption system is quite different from that of the US.

"It's not just about openness."
It was you who brought up the subject of secrecy when you asked "Could it be that the countries that do not make adoption a secret have healthier kids??"

"SOOOO....you can see that the BIG difference is government control as opposed to a free market trading in children to the highest bidder!"
The UK has a free market in infant adoption?


"What led to most of our relinquishments: POOR SERVICES for FAMILIES!"
But the level of infant adoption in the UK is low.
 

Agreeing with Kippa, there is very little infant adoption in the UK. As with most of Europe, there is a large immigrant population from third world and former British Empire countries that strains the social welfare system even further than it is already stretched, lots of unemployment, hence conditions for kids are not great.

This has nothing to do with adoption, as infant adoption is rare and very restricted. And I believe the State also very much controls adoption law in the UK, it is not a "free market" there any more than in Sweden.

Mirah, your logic here does not work. You are stretching too far to try to see a connection where there is none in this case. Countries can be very poor and have little support for families and also have very little adoption, because of cultural norms. There is no real correlation.

Everyone is wrong some of the time, why not just admit you are wrong on this one? It was an interesting idea, but it did not work.
 

I ASKED the question:

"Could it be that the countries that do not make adoption a secret are have healthier kids??"

Even put TWO question marks at the end!

1) I was honestly wondering myself, and
2) Often such controversial questions stir the pot for interesting discussion on issues.

To some extent this is what happened.I saw the report as an opportunity to investigate adoption practices in the top three countries which I did. And there were some interesting comments and thoughts comparing US adoption practices with other countries.

It is sad, however, that there are some who see things in black and white. Right and wrong. Some who, instead of reading a question as a question, see it as a CHALLENGE to PROVE themselves RIGHT!

As usual, the only thing that gets people posting on a blog (who otherwise do not) is an opportunity to be argumentative. What a shame it is we cannot DISCUSS any issue without the need to tear one another apart.

There is so much anger seething in all of us who have been hurt by adoption. How often we use any opportunity to have that anger lash out at one another - at those of us who are on the same side - working for change.

A simple: "I do not think there is a connection" along with an explanation of why would have sufficed far better.

An open ended question requires no admission of being either right or wrong.
 

I ASKED the question:

"Could it be that the countries that do not make adoption a secret are have healthier kids??"

Even put TWO question marks at the end!

(The other comment I added was sarcasm because of the very recent news story about adoptive parents having do much more to offer.)

1) I was honestly wondering myself, and
2) Often such controversial questions stir the pot for interesting discussion on issues.

To some extent this is what happened.I saw the report as an opportunity to investigate adoption practices in the top three countries which I did. And there were some interesting comments and thoughts comparing US adoption practices with other countries.

It is sad, however, that there are some who see things in black and white. Right and wrong. Some who, instead of reading a question as a question, see it as a CHALLENGE to PROVE themselves RIGHT!

As usual, the only thing that gets people posting on a blog (who otherwise do not) is an opportunity to be argumentative. What a shame it is we cannot DISCUSS any issue without the need to tear one another apart.

There is so much anger seething in all of us who have been hurt by adoption. How often we use any opportunity to have that anger lash out at one another - at those of us who are on the same side - working for change.

A simple: "I do not think there is a connection" along with an explanation of why would have sufficed far better.

An open ended question requires no admission of being either right or wrong.

I cannot help but wonder, as I look at the history of this blog - where are all these people when I post something nice? Did anyone say "What a nice bumper sticker"? Not one. When I posted a cartoon recently - did anyone say it was cute, or funny or very true? No.

Sad, that we cannot lighten up with one another...
 

IMO, I think it has less to do with argument, and more to do with people having different logic and wanting to relay that logic on an issue, and on the other hand how some of us make associations that others cannot relate to.

I wanted to post something last night, but didn't, as I didn't want to get into the middle of anything. But I'll go ahead. This is what I associated with with the topic at hand:

"The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children."
- Dietrich Bonhoeffer


Or one could also say, 'The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children and young families', because what hardships befall a family, befall the children of that family.

Children taken into other families through adoption are not unaffected, as we've seen by reading what many have to say. They may have better access to healthcare and be materially better off, but can be affected in many other ways.
 

PS: I LOVED the cartoon! ... and my car is proudly 'wearing' one of those marvelous Equal Access bumper stickers.
 

Adopttalk,
I think your question was completely valid. And I confess that I do not know too much about other countries' practices when it comes to child welfare. So much depends on the culture inolved that it is hard to make a judgement, regarding the effect that open records would have.In addition, since some adopters(Swedish for example) are finding children in Asian countries to adopt, the access to records would depend on the 'sending country" I believe.

But I have researched the state of Kansas. And I know quite a few adoption-affected people from Kansas.From what they have told me, open records(at age 18) have no effect on adopted children while they are growing up.Kansas adoptees have the same issues growing up that other adoptees may have(not all of them of course,but definitely some of them).

Open records enable adopted adults to find their missing relatives and other missing identity factors. But many adopted children grow up feeling rejected and alienated because of relinquishment and adoption itself, and opening records at age 18 doesn't fix the first 18 or so years.

another point that has been made, I think by you, is the fact that there is no law that requires adoptive parents to even tell their children that they are adopted.So, even with "open records" that can still be an issue as well.
 

Mirah, the way I see it you presented a hypothesis for discussion with the question "Could it be that the countries that do not make adoption a secret have healthier kids??" This was followed by two responses that disagreed and some that agreed in general. In asking a question, you were opening the door for two kinds of responses, agreement and disagreement.When you ask people to reply to a blog, you have to expect both kinds of response and a disagreeing response is not always a personal attack.

Not everything is black and white, of course not, but the statement you made is either a true correlation or it is not, and two of us pointed out ways that the statement "countries that do not make adoption a secret have healthier kids" according to the Unicef rankings of child welfare in 21 countries is not a true statement; there is not a demonstrable correlation. That's all.
 

Maryanne,did not qualify her point, U.K. having open records for years.Theses open records apply ONLY TO ADOPTEES. as a parent of loss to adoption, there is no contact register for the natural parents. We all need to take a leaf out of Eire book, they have a national contact register, that all public is aware of and it is managed in total confidentiality for all parties,

Marion
 

Marion, registries often do not work, and are not fair to all. If the person you are seeking is dead, never heard of the registry, or forbids contact, you are out of luck. Registries are NOT open records and they do not restore civil rights.

Ireland is hardly a good example of liberal adoption policy. They are the home of the infamous Magdalene Laundries, where some women were incarcerated their entire lives, not just during their pregnancy, and they shipped out countless babies to America from the 50s to the 70s. Look up Mari Steed's page on google for more info on adoption in Ireland.
 

Marion, is the registry in Ireland a passive registry or an active one?
In an active one, a search can be conducted at the request of the registrant.With passive registries, both parties must register voluntarily. They don't work very well.many people do not know about them, dead people of course cannot register, and other relatives may not even know that someone would like to find them...or be found by them.

and I have heard from some people who both registered and 'sat' on the registry for months or even years before anyone in the government noticed.
 

Ireland's registry is a passive one. Both parties would need to have registered with the NACPR before the Adoption Authority will act on the "match". However, most of the registered agencies and health authorities in Ireland will conduct a trace at the behest of either party.