By SARAH SALMON
As an adoptive mother, I would like to respond to Amy Stockwell’s November 17 article, “You can’t change poverty one adoption at a time”, in order to portray another side of the story, to highlight the constructive things adoptive parents are doing for their children, so as not to damage the positivity we try to project for our kids.
I agree that you cannot change poverty through adoption but that is not the purpose or intent of adoption. Like many adoptive parents, I chose to adopt my two daughters in order to give them a loving family and a stable environment in which to thrive. My daughters were willingly given up by their Cambodian birth families, who were unable to care for them, as is the case in many developing countries. So we shouldn’t compare internationally adopted children to the Stolen Generation – they are not forced adoptions.
While I recognise that child-trafficking is an important issue, most internationally adopted babies are not stolen or sold; there are government checks in place to prevent that. A lot of children come to their birth families as unwanted additions to an already stressed family unit, not as planned family extensions. They may not be real ‘orphans’, but they are social orphans.
While poverty certainly plays a role in many adoptions, and there is great need to address poverty on a global scale, it will take many years to achieve any lasting results.
What happens to the millions of children in the meantime who are subjected to lives in orphanages?