2020
DOI: 10.1080/1070289x.2020.1757252
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Parenting, citizenship and belonging in Dutch adoption debates 1900-1995

Abstract: This article tests the use of the concepts 'politics of belonging' and 'intimate citizenship' for explaining (dis)continuities in intercountry adoption. It focusses on the Netherlands in the period 1900-1995. Adopters, adoption agencies and authorities in the countries of origin and settlement were the main actors. This article shows that adopters were claiming a right to a family, receiving states were granting or withholding rights, and adoption agencies were not only voicing moral claims and following a pol… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(37 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are also concerns that adoptees may be subject to abuse in adoptive homes; that decisions to pursue adoption may not be focused on children's best interests; and that adoption may simply be a means of transferring and privatising the costs of out-of-home care, particularly when post-adoption support services are inaccessible or insufficient (Australian Federal Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, 2018;Cashmore, 2000). Similar concerns are also found in countries such as the UK and the USA, where adoption is well established as an integral part of the child protection system (DelBalzo, 2007;Ward and Smeeton, 2017), and in other countries where it is less common (Schrover, 2020). Such concerns must be acknowledged.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…There are also concerns that adoptees may be subject to abuse in adoptive homes; that decisions to pursue adoption may not be focused on children's best interests; and that adoption may simply be a means of transferring and privatising the costs of out-of-home care, particularly when post-adoption support services are inaccessible or insufficient (Australian Federal Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, 2018;Cashmore, 2000). Similar concerns are also found in countries such as the UK and the USA, where adoption is well established as an integral part of the child protection system (DelBalzo, 2007;Ward and Smeeton, 2017), and in other countries where it is less common (Schrover, 2020). Such concerns must be acknowledged.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…From the second half of the 1970s onward, we observe a rapid decline in the number of domestic adoptions, most probably caused by a mix of factors: the easy availability of reliable birth control (for unmarried women, the pill was only available on medical grounds until the early 1970s), more use of single-parent financial funds (1965 General Assistance Law) and changing views on pre-nuptial sexuality, marriage and single parenthood in general, and in specific less stigmatisation of unmarried motherhood. Also, domestic adoptions were replaced by intercountry adoption from countries such as Korea (Schrover, 2020). At the same time, some Dutch adoption parents preferred a child that could be adopted unrecognizable.…”
Section: Toward Adoptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They investigate how immigration policies affect discourses, experiences and strategies of citizenship and belonging of citizens with foreign family members in different national contexts (Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, United Kingdom) within the European Union. We look at different family configurations: citizen women with migrant husbands (Griffiths 2019;De Hart and Besselsen 2020); and citizen families who transnationally adopt children (Schrover 2020). We investigate the interaction of citizens with foreign spouses with migration authorities (De Hart and Besselsen 2020;Block 2020) as well as their collective mobilisation in social movements (Odasso 2020).…”
Section: The Special Issuementioning
confidence: 99%