The EU and International Adoption from Romania

Abstract

The European Union (EU) has applied an anti-inter-country adoption (ICA) policy in Romania as part of EU accession conditionality, while after 2007 the EU promoted a pro-ICA approach. Romania had to overhaul its child protection system and ban ICA before it could become an EU member, while its current legislation maintains the ban on ICA. However, since 2007 the EU has been demanding that Romanian authorities resume ICA from Romania. This article examines the factors and processes which shaped the EU's 'chameleonic' policy on ICA in relation to Romania. The child protection system in Romania still faces significant shortcomings. However, it is shown that the EU's embrace of a pro-ICA policy after 2007 does not constitute a response to the problems faced by child protection in Romania. On the contrary, the EU's plea for the liberalization of ICA from Romania is the outcome of a combination of endogenous factors, such as the EU's own embrace of a children's rights policy and its biased interpretation of key international instruments on ICA and child rights, and exogenous factors, such as adoption lobbies, which succeeded in getting their grievances onto the agenda of EU institutions. I N T R O D U C T I O NThis article examines how and why the European Union (EU)'s position on the provision of international adoption from Romania radically shifted after 2007. It will be shown that the EU's policy position regarding inter-country adoption (ICA) in Romania changed from a staunch ICA critic during the enlargement process to a supporter of ICA from Romania after 2007. However, what factors explain the EU's 'chameleonic' policy on international adoption from Romania? By drawing on the empirical case of EU intervention in the issue of international adoption in Romania before and after 2007, it will be demonstrated that both exogenous and endogenous factors shaped the EU's radical shift from an anti-ICA stance to an ICA advocate after 2007. As part of EU accession conditionality, the EU demanded that

Making sense of an irregular adoption. Subjective trajectories of four French adoptees born in Romania in the 1980s and 1990s

“…To become a member State, indeed Romania had to reform its CPS and ban ICA. EU's position then was that Romania had to reform its legislation in order to be in line with the European practices on ICA, according to which Member States do not render children available for ICA (Iusmen, 2013). But given that 40% of all Romanian children adopted internationally were adopted in EU member receiving countries, the Commission's position was met with significant resistance.…”

Corruption – A Deviation or an Inherent Part of Human Society? Some Legal Considerations

“…We can separate authors, writing about intercountry adoption, in two groups: a) the first group consists of the authors who define intercountry adoptions as a positive solution for unparented children (Iusmen, 2013;Bartholet, 2010-11;Reitz, 2010;Carlson, 2011;Smolin, 2005;Wardle, 2008); b) the second group is represented by authors who indicate intercountry adoptions as a system filled with documented and on-going patterns of baby stealing, child trafficking, adoption agency corruption, re-homing, coercion of natural parents into giving up their child and legal violations (Dodds, 2009: 76). The possibility of adopting babies from foreign countries decrease the attention and possibility for adoption from the domestic children which are labelled as 'hard-to-place' children (older children, children with mental or physical disabilities, children from ethnic minorities) (Dickens, 2002).…”

“…conditions, protection, help for biological families, family-type childcare services…). After the ban of intercountry adoption, the number of children in residental care dropped from 57.181 in 2000 to 22.742 in 2011 due to de-institutionalization, while the number of children placed in family care solutions doubled, peakink to 43.518 in 2011 (Iusmen, 2013).…”

Who do they think they are: Making sense of self in residential care, foster care, and adoption

“…This entailed improving conditions and reducing the number of children in residential care, introducing foster care, and promoting domestic adoption. Intercountry adoption was restricted and allowed only in exceptional circumstances (Iusmen, 2013;Jerre, 2005). Romania's children in care born around 1990 became adults when Romania joined the European Union (2007).…”