AFRICA: The ‘new frontier’ in international adoption.
Under this title Dr. Peter Selman, visiting Fellow in the School of Geography, Politics and Sociology at the Newcastle University, UK, presents the statistical data in international adoption over the last ten years.The annual number of international adoptions has fallen by more than 60 per cent since 2004. The number of children adopted from China dropped from more than 14.000 in 2005 to less than 3.500 in 2013 and from Russia from more than 9.000 in 2004 to less than 2.000 in 2013. However the number of African children adopted abroad rose from 2300 in 2003 to 6500 in 2008, Ethiopia being the most important sending country. In 2013 the number of children coming from African countries is 4438, mainly due to the decline of the number of children coming from Ethiopia. The number of children coming from other African countries has risen. In 2013 African countries accounted for 28 per cent of all international adoptions, compared to only 6 per cent in 2003.
Peter Selman ( 12-06-1941) BA, DPSA, PhD, is editor of Intercountry Adoption; Development, trends and perspectives (BAAF, 2000) and has written many articles and chapters on adoption policy. His main research focus in recent years has been on the demography of child adoption with a special emphasis on intercountry adoption. He has acted as research consultant to international organizations such as the UN Population Division, the Hague Conference on Private International Law and the Innocenti Research Centre in Florence.
After leaving University, he worked for three years as a child care officer, specialising in adoption, in Oxfordshire Children’s Department. He has continued to be involved with adoption since then and is currently a member of Newcastle’s Adoption Panel. From 1995 to 2013, he was Chair of NICA (Network for Intercountry Adoption) and from 1999 to 2013 member of the Board of Trustees and the Research Advisory Group of BAAF (British Association for Adoption & Fostering).
In the following article you will find a lot of interesting statistical data about the sending and receiving countries. Dr. Selman expresses his concern about the rising number of adoptions from Africa. About the influence of ‘celebrity adoptions’(by Madonna and Angelina Jolie), the missionary zeal in some American adoption agencies and the fact that there is little understanding of western full adoption by the African parents involved.
Contact: pfselman@yahoo.co.uk
AFRICA: The 'new frontier' in international adoption.
Peter Selman, Newcastle University , UK
pfselman@yahoo.co.uk
PAPER[1] PRESENTED AT 2015 SPA CONFERENCE, BELFAST
Abstract
The annual number of international adoptions has fallen by more than half in the ten years from 2004 to 2013 (Selman 2015). In 2005 more than 14,000 children from China were placed for adoption with families in the USA and other western countries. By 2013 the number had fallen to less than 3,500. Similar declines are found in Russia, which sent over 9,000 children in 2004, but less than 2,000 in 2013. The fall in numbers has been attributed to a combination of factors including economic developments and interest in domestic adoption by childless couples in many states or origin which were sending children overseas, but also concern over irregularities and child trafficking (Smolin 2010).
However, in Africa numbers have been rising in many countries. In 2004 seven per cent of international adoptions were from African countries; by 2013 this had risen to 27 per cent. This has been attributed by some to the growing number of orphans in Africa or the influence of ‘celebrity’ adoptions (Mezmur, 2009, 2010), but others fear that it reflects a market in international adoption and the impact of a missionary zeal in some American adoption agencies. Although Ethiopia sends most children, numbers have risen most sharply in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
This paper examines concerns over this growth in a continent where poverty persists and there is little understanding of western full adoption, drawing on the work of the African Child Policy Forum (2012), which held a conference on the topic in Addis Ababa in 2013 and discussions at the 2015 Special Commission on Intercountry Adoption, held in the Hague in June 2015.
Introduction
Intercountry Adoption is sometimes seen as starting with the aftermath of the Korean War when many thousands of children were air lifted to the USA and Europe, most of them the mixed race offspring of Korean women and allied soldiers, but there were many children adopted from Austria, Germany and Japan to the United States following the ending of World War Two.
From 1960 to 1988 the annual number of such adoptions rose steadily, with a majority of the children coming from Asian countries - notably Korea, India and the Philippines - and later from Latin America, but then numbers began to decline following the Korean decision to reduce the number of adoptions after adverse publicity at the time of the Seoul Olympics. Many predicted that this would lead to an end to transracial placements by the end of the century.
The end of the Ceausecu regime in Romania led toa temporary halt in the decline as thousands of children were adopted from that country following publicity around distressing conditions in overcrowded orphanages.
The Hague Convention of 1993
By the mid 1980s there was growing concern over the outcome of some of these adoptions and clauses were included in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and calls for an international convention focussed on this specific issue. “ It was recognised that intercountry adoption was creating serious and complex human and legal problems and that the absence of existing domestic and international legal instruments indicated the need for a multilateral approach” (HCCH 2015).
The Hague Conference on Private International Law established a working party to explore this, which led to the passing in May 1993 of the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption [hereafter referred to as the 1993 Hague Convention]
The Convention came into force in 1995 and its 20th anniversary was celebrated at the 4th Special Commission held in the Hague in June 2015.
For the next ten years the number of intercountry adoptions grew steadily from just under 23,000 in 1995 to over 45,000 by 2004. Many receiving countries felt re-assured by the Convention and hope that the difficulties of the past could be contained, but the increase was also due to children becoming available for adoption from China and from Russia and other Eastern European countries following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Europe thus joined Asia and Latin America as a source of children for international adoption. But as late as 2001 the proportion of adoptions from Africa remained below 5 per cent. The rest of this paper will look briefly at the rise and fall of intercountry adoption in the 20 years since the Hague Convention and then examine in greater detail the rise of adoptions from Africa
The Rise in ICA 1998-2004
The annual number of intercountry adoptions increased by over 40 per cent between 1998 and 2004. Table 1 shows changes in nine countries between 1998 and 2004.[2] Eight show rising numbers, but the proportionate change is varied. The number of children entering Spain trebled and those to Ireland more than doubled, while Sweden, Norway, and France saw increases of less than 20 percent, and the number entering Canada fell until 2001 and by 2004 was still below the level recorded for 1998.
Table 1: The rise in numbers: 1998-2004
| 1998 |
2001 |
2004 |
% change |
|
Spain Ireland Netherlands Italy USA |
1,487 147 825 2,233 18,774 |
3,428 179 1,722 1,797 19,237 |
5,541 398 1,307 3,402 22,884 |
+ 273 + 171 + 58 + 52 + 45 |
22 States |
31,710 |
36,391 |
45,383 |
+ 42% |
Sweden Norway France Canada |
928 643 3,777 2,222 |
1,044 713 3,094 1,774 |
1,109 706 4,079 1,949 |
+ 19 + 10 + 8 - 15 |
The next ten years saw a steady decline in annual numbers with global numbers falling by over 60 per cent. Table 2 shows the changing pattern in the seven countries receiving most children in this period, Numbers rose in Italy from 2005 to 2010, but the decline is found in all seven countries from 2010 to 2013 and has continued in 2014 in those for whom 2014 are available.
The pattern for countries of origin is more varied as I discuss later in this paper..
Table 2: Intercountry adoptions to twenty-four receiving countries, 2004 to 2014: top seven ranked by number of children received in 2004 .
| Country |
2004 |
2006 |
2008 |
2010 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
USA (FY) a Spain France Italy Canada Netherlands Sweden |
22,884 5,541 4,079 3,402 1,949 1,307 1,109 |
20,679 4,472 3,977 3,188 1,568 767 793 |
17,438 3,156 3,271 3,977 1,695 682 912 |
12,149 2,891 3,504 4,130 1,660 705 739 |
8,668 1,669 1,569 3,106 1,162 588 466 |
7,094 1,191 1,343 2,825 1,243 401 341 |
6,441 824 1,069 n/a 905 354 345 |
| Total to all states b |
45,383 |
39,586 |
34,539 |
28,843 |
19,431 |
16,156 |
[11,191] |
| No. of states |
23 |
23 |
24 |
24 |
24 |
24 |
20 |
| % to USA |
50% |
52% |
51% |
42% |
45% |
44% |
|
| % to Europe |
43% |
42% |
44% |
51% |
48% |
47% |
a) The U.S. Department of State publishes data each fiscal year (October - September).
b) 17 other countries are included in the overall totals: Australia, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the UK, with the addition of Andorra and Israel from 2001 and Slovenia from 2005
For a listing of all twenty-four countries, which is updated regularly, see http://www.hcch.net/upload/selmanstats33.pdf
Sources: Statistics provided by Central Authorities of the 24 countries
Changes in Countries of Origin
Many countries have been involved in intercountry adoption. Those sending the highest numbers of children have changed over time. Korea has the longest sequence of official statistics available, from 1953-2010, with a total of 170,000+ children adopted by 2010. Between 1992 and 2011, more than 125,000 children were adopted from China and more than 110,000 from Russia.
Table 3: Top Seven Countries of Origin: 1980-2012
| 1980-89 a |
1998 |
2004 |
2010 |
2013 |
KOREA INDIA COLOMBIA BRAZIL SRI LANKA CHILE PHILIPPINES |
CHINA RUSSIA VIETNAM KOREA COLOMBIA GUATEMALA INDIA |
CHINA RUSSIA GUATEMALA KOREA UKRAINE COLOMBIA ETHIOPIA |
CHINA ETHIOPIA RUSSIA HAITI COLOMBIA VIETNAM KOREA |
CHINA ETHIOPIA RUSSIA COLOMBIA UKRAINE KOREA VIETNAM |
Table 4 summarizes the annual data for these countries and six others sending more than 8,000 children during this ten year period
Table 4: Top 10a States of origin 2003-2013
| 2003 |
2004 |
2006 |
2008 |
2010 |
2012 |
2013 |
2003-13 |
|
| China |
11,228 |
13,415 |
10,745 |
5,972 |
5,429 |
4,418 |
3,406 |
86,873 |
| Russia |
7,743 |
9,379 |
6,766 |
4,140 |
3,426 |
3,327 |
1,793 |
55,719 |
| Ethiopia |
858 |
1,527 |
2,182 |
3,907 |
4,386 |
3,456 |
2,005 |
30,446 |
| Guatemala |
2,676 |
3,424 |
4,232 |
4,186 |
58 |
40 |
26 |
24,164 |
| Colombia |
1,750 |
1,741 |
1,639 |
1,617 |
1,828 |
1,577 |
566 |
16,152 |
| S Korea |
2,308 |
2,241 |
1,815 |
1,392 |
1,128 |
961 |
227 |
15,623 |
| Ukraine |
2,052 |
2,021 |
1,046 |
1,577 |
1,098 |
1,073 |
642 |
15,325 |
| Vietnam |
936 |
488 |
1,370 |
1,739 |
1,260 |
704 |
295 |
11,379 |
| Haiti |
1,049 |
1,103 |
1,096 |
1,332 |
2,489 b |
195 |
546 |
11,124 |
| India |
1,173 |
1,083 |
847 |
759 |
607 |
615 |
351 |
8,438 |
a) The top 15 countries of origin are listed on the Hague web-site at http://www.hcch.net/upload/selmanstats33.pdf
b) Haiti total includes 1,090 “humanitarian” visas to the USA after earthquake
Sources: The figures presented are based on data provided by the Central Authorities of twenty-three receiving states. Data for Korea provided by the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare give a slightly lower figure, which would place Korea below Colombia in the rank order.
Standardized Rates
As with receiving states, total numbers of children sent for adoption are misleading because countries differ so much in population and in annual number of births. Thus, providing standard rates and ratios creates a common basis for comparison. China has the highest number of children adopted internationally, but other countries send more in relation to their level of births. Table 5 shows changes in adoption ratios (adoptions per 1,000 live births) between 2003 and 2009 for eleven countries. A ratio per 1,000 births is used because age structures vary as a result of differing levels of fertility.
Table 5: Adoption Ratios (per 1,000 live births) in States of Origin, by rank in 2005 (highest year for each country highlighted)
| Country |
2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
| Guatemala |
6.4 |
8.9 |
10.8 |
1.8 |
0.13 |
0.08 |
| Latvia |
3.6 |
5.6 |
4.8 |
6.1 |
5.1 |
5.0 |
| Ukraine |
5.0 |
5.1 |
3.9 |
3.3 |
4.2 |
2.2 |
| Russia |
5.4 |
4.9 |
3.2 |
2.6 |
2.0 |
1.97 |
| Haiti |
4.2. |
3.6 |
2.9 |
4.5 |
9.8 |
0.43 |
| Korea |
4.7 |
3.8 |
2.6 |
3.2 |
2.4 |
2.0 |
| Bulgaria |
15.5 |
2.2 |
1.4 |
3.5 |
3.3 |
4.7 |
| China |
0.6 |
0.84 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
0.33 |
0.27 |
| Ethiopia |
0.3 |
0.56 |
0.95 |
1.5 |
1.7 |
1.3 |
| Belarus |
7.5 |
0.26 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.96 |
1.7 |
| India |
0.02 |
0.03 |
0.04 |
0.03 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
In 2005, the adoption ratio in China was 0.84; in Guatemala, it was ten times higher at 8.8. In Haiti in 2010, the ratio rose to 9.8 (1 per 100 births). Over the whole period, the highest ratio is Bulgaria in 2003 (1.5 children per 100 births). Similar levels are found in Korea in the 1980s, where the ratio was 13.3 in 1985.[3] The ratio for Romania in 1991 may have been even higher. In contrast, India with a similar population size to China and a larger number of births, has relatively few intercountry adoptions and a very low adoption ratio.
The period from 2003-2013 saw a major change in the source of children by continent (see Table 6). In 2003, nearly three-quarters came from Asia and Europe and only 6 per cent from Africa. Eight years later, the percentage from Asia had fallen to 35% - a quarter came from Eastern Europe and the percentage from Africa had risen to 28%.
Table 6: Intercountry Adoptions by Continent: 2003-2013
| 2003 |
2007 |
2010 |
2013 |
|
| ASIA |
43% |
40% |
36% |
35% |
| EUROPE |
32% |
21% |
20% |
24% |
| LATIN AMERICA a |
17% |
23% |
19% |
10% |
| AFRICA |
6% |
13% |
24% |
28% |
| OTHER b |
2% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
b) These are mainly from the USA and a small number from Oceania.
The rise of adoptions from Africa
At one time, intercountry adoptions from Africa were rare, especially prior to 1995. However, the growing number of prospective parents wishing to adopt young infants – and, in the U.S., the publicity surrounding “celebrity adoptions” of children from African nations – has changed that.[4] In 2003, Africa accounted for 5% of all intercountry adoptions; by 2013 this had risen to 28% (Table 6). Table 7 shows the rise in the number of children sent by twelve African countries between 2003 and 2013. Five of these ( asterisked in table below) have ratified the Hague Convention
Table 7: Adoptions from Africa: Twelve countries sending 690+ children between 2003-2013, ranked by total in period. Peak year highlighted.
2003 |
2006 |
2009 |
2011 |
2013 |
2003-13 |
|
| Ethiopia |
859 |
2,184 |
4,553 |
3.455 |
2,005 |
30,498 |
| S. Africa * |
207 |
262 |
311 |
203 |
222 |
2,634 |
| Congo D. R. |
26 |
62 |
156 |
354 |
587 |
2,082 |
| Nigeria |
65 |
106 |
185 |
246 |
243 |
1,889 |
| Madagascar * |
394 |
140 |
40 |
58 |
50 |
1,499 |
| Liberia |
34 |
371 |
38 |
30 |
15 |
1,447 |
| Mali * |
136 |
126 |
195 |
163 |
11 |
1,353 |
| Uganda |
12 |
16 |
74 |
225 |
292 |
1,098 |
| Ghana |
24 |
35 |
121 |
117 |
190 |
1,035 |
| Burkina Faso* |
72 |
113 |
60 |
76 |
73 |
953 |
| Morocco |
49 |
48 |
67 |
104 |
74 |
714 |
| Kenya* |
51 |
29 |
64 |
87 |
105 |
694 |
| All of Africa % Ethiopia |
2,307 37% |
3,905 56% |
6,465 70% |
5,687 61% |
4,438 45% |
51,252 59% |
Source: Data from receiving countries, including adoptions from Austria and Portugal 2005 - 2009 as reported to the Hague Special Commission of 2010.
Much of the rise is attributable to Ethiopia, where the number of children sent rose from 620 in 2000 to 1,527 in 2004 and 4,553 in 2009 (when Ethiopia accounted for 70% of children from Africa) – see Figure 3. From 2009 Ethiopia replaced Russia as the second largest sending country, after China, and the most important source of children adopted by citizens in Belgium, Denmark and Switzerland. The number of children sent from Ethiopia fell from 2011 when the Ministry of Women’s Affairs announced that it would drastically reduce the number of intercountry adoptions being processed after March 10, 2010. While the number of children adopted from Ethiopia has, in fact, already reduced to that of former years, the process is under additional scrutiny after the needed training and hiring of new staff.
From 2003 to 2013, Ethiopia sent over 30,000 children for adoption. Eight other countries – Congo (Kinshasa), Ghana, Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Nigeria, South Africa and Uganda – sent over 1,000. The number of children adopted from Liberia and Madagascar has fallen in recent years, but numbers sent by other African countries have been rising (see Table 20). Nigeria sent more children (268) in 2010 than in any previous year, and similar increases have been noted since 2011 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Kinshasa), Ghana, and Uganda[5] (see tables 7 to 9). In all four countries, adoptions are largely to the U.S. However, there are many concerns about pressure from U.S. agencies linked to the funding of orphanages in some of these .
Although the number of adoptions from African countries has been rising the level of intercountry adoption when these are standardized against the annual number of births remains modest compared with other countries of origin - see ~Table 8 below.
While higher than China - and much higher than India, even `Ethiopia in its peak year (2009) sent fewer in relation to annual births than Guatemala, Korea, Russia and Haiti in the same year - and many fewer than those countries in their peak year.
Table 8 Standardised Rates of Adoption for key African states of origin and eight major sending countries from the rest of the world
Where do the Children go?
For many African states of origin the main country of destination is the USA, especially in recent years. Overall 47 per cent of adoptions from the African continent in 2013 were to the United States - in 2003 only 17 % were to the USA with 42 % to France. Even in 2003 the USA was the main receiving country for adoptions from Nigeria and Liberia, the latter a country with clear historical links to the USA, where the number od adoptions peaked in 2007 but have subsequently fallen (to 15 in 2013, following concern over irregularities.
Since 2003 about 60 per cent of international adoptions have been to Ethiopia and for this period 45 per cent of these were to the USA, rising from 16 per cent in 2003 to a peak of 57 per cent in 2010, falling back to 49 per cent in 2013.
Since 2009 the total number of adoptions from Ethiopia has fallen by more than 50 per cent in most countries.
Table 9: Adoptions from Ethiopia: 2003-2013 – Countries ranked by number of children received in 2007-2009. Peak year highlighted.
COUNTRY |
2003 |
2004 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2011 |
2013 |
2014 |
USA FY |
135 |
289 |
732 |
1,255 |
1,725 |
2,277 |
1,727 |
993 |
716 |
Spain |
107 |
220 |
304 |
481 |
629 |
722 |
442 |
260 |
79 |
France |
217 |
390 |
408 |
417 |
484 |
445 |
288 |
140 |
27 |
Italy |
47 |
193 |
227 |
256 |
338 |
346 |
296 |
293 |
n/a |
Canada |
18 |
31 |
65 |
137 |
177 |
145 |
143 |
39 |
27 |
Belgium |
52 |
62 |
88 |
124 |
137 |
142 |
144 |
57 |
28 |
Denmark |
40 |
41 |
38 |
39 |
92 |
125 |
90 |
47 |
n/a |
TOTAL to all states |
859 |
1,539 |
2,184 |
3,042 |
3,911 |
4,543 |
3,455 |
2,005 |
[964] to 10 states |
Sources: Statistics provided by Central Authorities of twenty-five receiving countries.
In the three countries cited as experiencing an exceptional increase in recent years the dominance of adoptions to the USA is even more striking - see tables 10-12 below. Adoptions from Uganda rose from 12 in 2003 to 292 in 2013, in which year 95 % were to the USA, but numbers fell in 2014.
Table 10; UGANDA 2003-14
| 2003 |
2006 |
2007 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
|
| USA |
3 |
12 |
54 |
62 |
207 |
238 |
276 |
201 |
| Canada |
6 |
1 |
2 |
12 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
| Netherlands |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
12 |
8 |
10 |
2 |
| Sweden |
3 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Germany |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
| Switzerland |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
12 |
15 |
57 |
82 |
225 |
248 |
292 |
[203] |
The number of adoptions also rose sharply in Ghana - from 24 in 2003 to 190 in 2013,- when 90 per cent were to the USA (Tale 11), but is now falling
Table 11: GHANA 2003-14
| 2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
|
| USA |
6 |
21 |
38 |
103 |
100 |
171 |
170 |
124 |
| Canada |
13 |
13 |
16 |
7 |
11 |
3 |
15 |
1 |
| Germany |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
| France |
0 |
9 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
| Netherlands |
0 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
24 |
41 |
60 |
121 |
117 |
186 |
190 |
[130] |
The largest increase over the period 2003-2013 is found in the Democratic Republic of Congo - from 26 in 2003 to 586 in 2013. A majority of these were to the USA - 53 per cent - but there were also substantial numbers to Italy and France. Concern over irregularities led to the Congolese government suspending visas for children destined for the United States from 2014 and adoptions to France, the Netherlands and Canada have ended. None of these three countries have ratified the Hague Convention.
Table 12: Democratic Republic of CONGO (Kinshasa) 2003-14
| 2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
|
| USA |
7 |
11 |
10 |
21 |
133 |
240 |
313 |
230 |
| Italy |
2 |
5 |
17 |
67 |
123 |
138 |
159 |
n/a |
| France |
6 |
5 |
5 |
42 |
40 |
84 |
62 |
2 |
| Netherlands |
0 |
0 |
2 |
10 |
24 |
28 |
26 |
0 |
| Canada |
2 |
10 |
3 |
4 |
26 |
20 |
20 |
1 |
| Spain |
8 |
12 |
29 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
26 |
45 |
69 |
156 |
354 |
518 |
587 |
[240] |
As indicated earlier, a decade ago France was a more important destination for intercountry adoption fro Africa. - this was largely due to adoptions from Ethiopia, Madagascar and Mali. The latter two are francophone countries and former French colonies. In 2003 there were 394 adoptions from Madagascar (82% to France), but numbers have fallen steadily since then to about 50 a year from 2010-3, with over 60 % to France.
Table 13: Madagascar 2003-2013
| 2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
|
| France |
325 |
245 |
62 |
26 |
32 |
31 |
33 |
| Spain |
24 |
24 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
| Switzerland |
21 |
7 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
| Italy |
6 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
7 |
2 |
n/a |
| Belgium |
13 |
9 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| Other |
5 |
6 |
8 |
7 |
13 |
11 |
14 |
| TOTAL |
394 |
291 |
77 |
40 |
58 |
52 |
50 |
Table 14 below shows the pattern of adoptions from Mali who ratified the Hague Convention in 2006 .Annual numbers ranged from 90 to 223 over the next five years but fell sharply in 2013 to only 13.. In 2011 and 2012 there were more children adopted to Spain than in France, but in 2014 children went only to France.
Table 14: Mali 2003-2013
| 2003 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
|
| France |
132 |
135 |
117 |
61 |
33 |
2 |
36 |
| Spain |
1 |
0 |
39 |
77 |
66 |
4 |
0 |
| Italy |
1 |
12 |
13 |
16 |
19 |
7 |
0 |
| Belgium |
2 |
7 |
17 |
2 |
15 |
0 |
0 |
| Germany |
0 |
0 |
27 |
14 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
| Canada |
0 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
| USA |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Denmark |
0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
| Switzerland |
0 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
| Other |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
| TOTAL |
136 |
158 |
223 |
177 |
154 |
13 |
[36] |
Another francophone African country where a majority of adoptions have been to France is Burkina Faso - formerly Upper Volta - but here since 2010 a majority of the children adopted have gone to Italy. Burkina Faso has experienced none of the rise and fall of adoptions noted in so many African states and was the first African country to ratify the Hague Convention (with entry into force in 1996). One of its top lawyers was an invited expert at the 2015 Special Commission.
Table 15: Burkina Faso 2003-2013
| |
2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
| France |
60 |
62 |
66 |
25 |
20 |
20 |
14 |
21 |
| Spain |
3 |
13 |
25 |
20 |
30 |
52 |
37 |
1 |
| Italy |
0 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
n/a |
| Belgium |
4 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
11 |
10 |
10 |
5 |
| Germany |
0 |
0 |
9 |
2 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
8 |
| TOTAL |
72 |
82 |
108 |
60 |
76 |
94 |
73 |
40 |
One African country has a rather different pattern of adoption. This is South Africa , where the top seven receiving countries are all European - four being relatively small Nordic states - and a majority of adoptions are through EurAdopt agencies. South Africa ratified the Hague Convention in 2003.
Table 15: South Africa 2003-2014 – ranked by number sent in 2009
| 2003 |
2005 |
2007 |
2009 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
|
| Denmark |
13 |
13 |
42 |
78 |
49 |
32 |
41 |
n/a |
| Sweden |
54 |
54 |
44 |
41 |
30 |
22 |
25 |
24 |
| Finland |
23 |
23 |
25 |
41 |
45 |
32 |
37 |
37 |
| Canada |
2 |
2 |
16 |
32 |
2 |
3 |
21 |
18 |
| Netherlands |
43 |
43 |
34 |
30 |
23 |
21 |
26 |
23 |
| Norway |
2 |
2 |
16 |
28 |
15 |
13 |
13 |
16 |
| Belgium |
13 |
13 |
12 |
22 |
22 |
23 |
22 |
16 |
| Germany |
24 |
24 |
43 |
19 |
14 |
8 |
10 |
12 |
| USA |
27 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
3 |
7 |
17 |
24 |
| Other |
6 |
14 |
16 |
15 |
0 |
12 |
10 |
15 |
| TOTAL |
207 |
268 |
255 |
311 |
203 |
173 |
222 |
185 |
DISCUSSION
In 2012 the African Child Policy Forum held a major conference on intercountry adoption in Addis Ababa, capital city of Ethiopia. Many Government officials and ministers attended as well as key figures from several receiving countries including the United States and the Netherlands. The meeting passed a resolution highly critical of current practices and calling for and end to irregularities inintercountry adoption from the continent.
Understanding Adoption in Africa
One of the main themes of the Addis conference was that the western concept of adoption was not understood in Africa, where there has been a long tradition of children being shared across the extended family. Likewise the concept or “orphan” was alien.
This is of course especially true of countries which are predominantly Muslim – such as Nigeria - where adoption is seen as unacceptable but there is a long tradition of children being cared for by other than their parents under kafala.
In poorer countries of Africa children may be placed in “orphanages”, especially those funded by outside charities, to gain a better education.
Stories abound concerning foreigners from US adoption agencies wearing badges saying “I love orphans” - or of orphanage directors who are expected to send some children for adoption in return for continued charitable funding.
Celebrity Adoptions - the Madonna effect
The rise in adoptions from Africa is sometimes attributed to publicity surrounding the adoption of African children by celebrities, notably Angelina Jolie who has adopted two children from Ethiopia and Madonna, who adopted from Malawi, a country which had little experience of adoption but where the singer had made huge donations for the support of orphans. The Ethiopian scholar Benyam Mezmur (2009a, 2009b) has written trenchantly about this and other worrying aspects of intercountry adoption from Africa
The impact of Evangelical Christians from the USA
In her excellent book The Child Catchers, New York journalist Kathryn Joyce (2013) argues that adoption in the United States has become mote and more entangled in the conservative Christian agenda and that in recent years this has been especially true of international adoption from Africa. She paints a frightening picture of the activities of Christian adoption agencies in Ethiopia and Liberia.
Is Child Trafficking and other illicit activities increasing?
David Smolin a law professor from the United States, who discovered that the two children he had adopted from India had been stolen and sold for adoption, has written a number of articles arguing that some intercountry adoptions are akin to child trafficking – coining the term “child laundering” to describe the way in which children who were not legally free for adoption had nevertheless been placed through apparently legitimate channels (Smolin, 2006, 2010a)
In 2010 the Hague Special Commission was preceded by a day on trafficking funded by the Australian government. There were keynote presentations by Smolin (2010b) and Benyam Mezmur (2010), a leading Ethiopian lawyer and a showing of the ISS film, Paper Orphans, about children adopted from Nepal.
Two years later at a conference in Malibu organised by the Pepperdine University Law School was entitled “Intercountry Adoption; Child Rescue or Child Trafficking?”. This featured a debate between Smolin and Elisabeth Bartholet, a leading advocate of increasing the number of children placed for intercountry adoption, and a series of presentations on problems in Uganda.
The theme of illicit adoptions was also central at the 4th Special Commission held in June at the Peace Palace in Den Haag, when special concern was expressed about intercountry adoption from Africa.
The Changing Profile of Intercountry Adoption : the rise of Special Needs Adoption
The declining number of intercountry adoptions since 2004 has been accompanied by a change in the profile of children adopted. For many years adoption from overseas had been attractive to many Americans because the children were younger than those available for domestic adoption from the care system. But in recent years many such children have been adopted within their birth country and intercountry adoption has been about older children, sibling groups and children with “special needs”. In many Latin American countries such as Brazil and Chile, only older children and those with special needs are available for adoption overseas. This is also true of several Eastern European such as Latvia and Lithuania. The biggest change has been found in china where children placed are now predominantly older children or those with special needs and an increasing proportion are boys - in contrast to early years when most available children were young girls adopted after being “abandoned” ss a consequence of the one-child policy.
The changing profile is less evident on Africa (Dambach & Selman 2010). In Ethiopia and South Africa a majority of intercountry adoptions still involve children under age 2 - 76% of adoptions from Ethiopia and 61% of those from South Africa to EurAdopt countries in 2013, with only 5 per cent aged over 5. This was in contrast with 29% for China; 27% from Columbia; and none from Brazil, Bulgaria and Chile, where the proportions over 5 were 90%, 49% and 73% respectively.
This was not true of all African countries. 53% of children adopted from the Democratic Republic of the Congo were over age 5 - the proportion of those going to the US was unknown. Many adoptions from Africa to Italy are of older children. French records indicate that a majority of children adopted from Mali in 2011 were under age 1 and a majority of those adopted from Ethiopia and Tunisia were under age 2, while adoptions from Congo were primarily of older children and a majority of those adopted from Cameroon were over age 7.
Ethiopia and Beyond: the future of intercountry adoption from Africa.
Early indications are that the number of intercountry adoptions worldwide continue to fall in 2014 and 2015 and that this will be true for most African countries, although the proportion of all ICA from Africa is likely to remain similar. Some countries have already announced measures to strictly limit the number of such adoptions [6] and more may follow this path despite the financial incentives from the market aspects of intercountry adoption. The number of African countries ratifying the Hague Convention remains low – 17 out of 52 in June 2015 - and those not joining include Ethiopia, Congo RD, Nigeria and Uganda, where many of the reported irregularities have occurred.
Will this lead to an end to Intercountry Adoption?
The prediction of a final end to intercountry adoption as poorer countries react against the corruption and distortion engendered by market forces may be premature. In a longer historical view, intercountry adoption on the scale experienced in the mid-2000s may be viewed as mistaken, like the now repudiated imperial child migrant schemes from the UK (Parker, 2008). If this proves to be the case, one can only hope that intercountry adoption is replaced by a wider use of adoption and fostering within poorer countries so that the twenty-first century does not see a growth in the number of children trapped in institutions with all the negative consequences we now understand all too well. What is clear is that the future of intercountry adoption will depend on what happens in Africa - and that will be decided by African countries.
REFERENCES
African Child Policy Forum (2012) Africa: The New Frontier for Intercountry Adoption. Addis Ababa:The African Child Policy Forum
Dambach, M & Selman P (2011) “Figures reveal alarming augmentation in children adopted from Africa , whilst the number of those with disabilities remains disappointingly low”. In “AFRICA: Terra Incognita”, ISS Monthly Review 3-4, March-April 2011,
Hague Conference on Private International Law (2015) The 1993 Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. Information Brochure. The Hague: HCCH
Joyce, K. The Child Catchers;Rescue, Trafficking and the New Gospel of Adoption
M ezmur, B. (2009a) ‘From Angelina (to Madonna) to Zoe’s Ark: what are the “A–Z” lessons for intercountry adoptions in Africa’, International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 23, 145–73.
Mezmur, B. (2009b) ‘Intercountry adoption as a measure of last resort in Africa: advancing the rights of child rather than a right to a child’, Sur – International Journal on Human Rights, 6, 3, 83–104.
Mezmur, B. (2010) ‘The sins of the saviours: trafficking in the context of intercountry adoption from Africa’, paper presented at the Special Commission of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, The Hague, Netherlands, 17–25 June 2010, Information Document no. 2, http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/adop2010id02e.pdf
Parker, R. (2008) Uprooted: The Shipment of Poor Children to Canada, 1867–1907, Bristol: Policy Press.
Rotabi, K. (2010) ‘From Guatemala to Ethiopia: shifts in intercountry adoption leaves Ethiopia vulnerable for child sales and other unethical practices’, The Social Work and Society Online News Magazine, http://www.socmag.net/?p=615 [accessed 09.09.2011].
Selman P. (2002) “Intercountry Adoption in the new millennium: the ‘quiet migration’ revisited” Population Research & Policy Review 21: 205-225
Selman P (2006) “Trends in Intercountry Adoption 1998-2004: A demographic analysis of data from 20 receiving States” Journal of Population
Research 23-2: 183-204
Selman, P. (2012a) ‘The rise and fall of intercountry adoption in the 21st century: global trends from 2001 to 2010’, in J. Gibbons and K. Rotabi (eds.), Intercountry Adoption: Policies, Practices, and Outcomes, Farnham: Ashgate.
Selman, P. (2015a) “Global Trends in Intercountry Adoption 2003-2013” In Bert Ballard (ed) The Intercountry Adoption Debate, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Selman, P. (2015b) Global Statistics 2003-2013 and International Adoptions from African Countries 2003 – 2013, available at: http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=publications.details&pid=5891&dtid=32
Smolin, D. (2006) ‘Child laundering: how the intercountry adoption system legitimizes and incentivizes the practices of buying, trafficking, kidnapping, and stealing children’, Wayne Law Review, 52, 1, 113–200, http://works.bepress.com/david_smolin/1.
Smolin, D. (2010a) ‘Child laundering and the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption: the future and past of intercountry adoption’, University of Louisville Law Review, 48, 441–98, http://works.bepress.com/david_smolin/8 [accessed 06.09.2011].
Smolin, D. (2010b) “Abduction, sale and traffic in children in the context of intercountry adoption”, paper presented at the Special Commission of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, The Hague, Netherlands.
[1]This paper is based on a chapter by the author in Ballard et al (2015a) with data updated and extended using statistics posted on the HCCH web-site (Selman 2015b) and a more focused presentation at the ACPF conference in Addis Ababa .
[2].P. Selman, “Trends in Intercountry Adoption: Analysis of data from 20 receiving countries,” Journal of Population Research 23, no. 2 (2006): 183-204.
[3].P. Selman, “The UK’s Experience and Status on the Rights of Children,” in J. Pati, Adoption: Global Perspectives and Ethical Issues (New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company, 2007): 59.
[4].B. Mezmur, “Intercountry adoption as a measure of last resort in Africa: Advancing the rights of a child rather than a right to a child,” International Journal of Human Rights 6, no. 10 (2009): 83-104.
[5]. M. Dambach and P. Selman, “Figures reveal alarming augmentation in children adopted from Africa, whilst the numbers of those with disabilities remain disappointingly low,” in “AFRICA: Terra Incognita,” ISS Monthly Review 3-4, (March to April 2011)
[6]See discussion of Congo earlier in this article. Intercountry adoptions have been halted or reduced in Mali and Rwanda, two countries who have acceded to the Convention