Openness in International Adoption

Abstract

After a long history of secrecy in domestic adoption in the United States, there is a robust trend toward openness. That is, however, not the case with international adoption.

Narrating connection in intercountry adoption: Complexities of openness in Taiwan‒Australia adoptions

“…Towards the turn of the millennium, intercountry adult adoptees started to voice their concerns about the practice of intercountry and transracial adoption, highlighting a range of issues, particularly their struggles with identity and belonging (Trenka, Oparah, & Shin, 2006). To date, consideration about the importance of connection in transnational adoption practices has been neglected, or even conveniently forgotten to suit preferences to avoid contact with birth mother by prospective adopters in western countries (Seymore, 2014). A recent article on risks and benefits for children in open adoption arrangements included only national (domestic) adoptions (Smith, González-Pasarín, Salas, & Bernedo, 2020).…”

“…Following the trend towards open adoptions that started a few decades ago in the domestic space (Grotevant & McRoy, 1998; Yngvesson, 1997), there is now a push internationally towards openness and connection in intercountry adoption (Seymore, 2014; van Wichelen, 2018). This development is linked first to a human rights framework, in which international law ‒ in this case the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Hague Adoption Convention ‒ stipulates what has been termed the ‘right to know’, including the right to know one’s birth family and culture (heritage) and the right to information (often meaning medical history).…”

“…In this article, we aim to shed light on the complexities of connection and openness in intercountry adoption. Much of the scholarship on intercountry adoption has focused on the normative importance of open adoption; emphasising the need to change the closed culture of the global practice and formulating legal and normative principles to do so (Besson, 2005(Besson, , 2007Seymore, 2014). Yet, empirical research describing how openness and connection is deliberated, attempted, and practiced among adoptees, birth families, adoptive families and professionals themselves is still scarce.…”