I get frequent requests from adoptive families asking what the probability is that their child was trafficked. In the very next breath some of these families express confusion over what "trafficked" means with a follow-up question regarding their child's birth family searching for their child, and wanting her back. It soon becomes obvious that in many people's minds, trafficking and kidnapping are the same thing.
Global March defines child trafficking as "any act or transaction whereby a child is transferred by any person or group of persons to another for remuneration or any other consideration". The definition continues that "it refers to the process that puts children in a situation of commercial exploitation." When it comes to China's adoption program, this is the definition that is intended.
When a birth family is paid by another family (say in their neighborhood) to arrange the informal adoption of a child, even if money is paid by the adopting family, this does not constitute trafficking since the adopting family is not using the child for commercial gain. Thus, payments of monies by adoptive families to birth families fall outside the traditional definition of trafficking as usually understood by adoption advocates. However, if money is paid to a birth family by a third party, with the intent that the child will then be transferred again for a higher sum of money, then the transaction is commercial in nature, and thus constitutes trafficking.
It does not matter if only one child is transferred, or dozens -- the criteria is the transfer of a child for money or other remuneration with the intent to transfer that child again for commercial gain.
Under this definition, many orphanages in China are involved in trafficking, since they are engaged in paying money to obtain children for adoption. These children are then transferred again to adoptive families for even larger sums of money, resulting in the transaction being for "commercial gain". But it is important to recognize that in a trafficking situation, the child is willingly relinquished.
Trafficking should be considered separate and distinct from "kidnapping", "stealing", etc. Under this situation, one party (usually the birth family) is an unwilling participant. There is no voluntary relinquishment of the child in a kidnapping case. Thus, while a child may be trafficked from the kidnapper to a third party, kidnapping (stealing) a child and then selling them (trafficking) to another party is a subset of the total "trafficking" pie. The terms "kidnapping" and "trafficking" cannot, and should not, be used interchangeably.
When we look at China's international adoption program, both of the scenarios described above can be seen, but in disproportionate numbers. We have seen cases of kidnapped children entering the orphanages. In those cases, the birth families involuntarily lost custody of their child as a result of that child being kidnapped. In a case from the Dianjiang orphanage, the birth family was able to regain custody of their daughter before the international adoption was completed; in a case from a Hunan orphanage, the Chinese Police discovered that a kidnapped girl had been internationally adopted.
Trafficking of children into the orphanages is much more common, forming the foundation of China's international adoption program. In the most common manifestation of this problem, birth families are offered money or other remuneration to willingly relinquish their child. The "finder" then brings the child to the orphanage, where they are paid a larger sum in a "finder's fee", resulting in a case of trafficking under the above definition. The orphanage then adopts the child for an even larger sum of money, again resulting in trafficking under the above definition. In many cases the birth family is deceived into conducting the transaction with false promises of where their child will end up or what their relationship with the child will be in the future.
From the evidence gathered from many, many orphanages involved in the international adoption program, it appears that "kidnapping" of children for sale to orphanage is much less frequent than the "trafficking" of children into the orphanages. The problem is, of course, that in most cases, the kidnapping is a result of the trafficking. In other words, by offering significant sums of money for individuals to "traffic" children to the orphanage, the orphanage also increases instances of "finders" obtaining the child through kidnapping. Without the payment of money for children, there would be little reason for someone to kidnap a child to bring to the orphanage.
It is, of course, extremely difficult to determine how many children that have been internationally adopted had been kidnapped. Intuitively, one would assume that kidnapped children would be older, since a kidnapper would need to find the child alone in order to take her, and newborn infants seldom are found in this situation. Certainly all of the known cases kidnapped children ending up in an orphanage have been older children. But a general lack of transparency inside China prevents all the cases from being discovered.
It is much easier to assess how common trafficking is. "On-the-ground" interviews with finders, orphanage workers, area doctors, etc. provide easy access to trafficking information because these programs are by nature very public and well-known. Additionally, trafficking orphanages display characteristics that betray their programs such as finding location "clusters", unusual demographic characteristics, etc. From this evidence it is clear that a substantial majority of orphanages are involved in child trafficking.
Adoptive families should speak and write clearly when it comes to these issues. The willing relinquishment of a child by her birth parents for money or other remuneration by an individual intending to engage in a commercial transaction with another party for that child constitutes trafficking. The taking of a child from unwilling birth parents constitutes kidnapping. The two terms cannot be used interchangeably.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Using the Web to Find Birth Families
The exciting story of a Chinese father's reunion with his kidnapped son, accomplished through various social media inside China, has adoptive families understandably excited about how they also might be able to leverage internet databases, etc. in their own search for the birth families of their children.
It seems, from a perusal of many birth parent search groups, that most adoptive families are still working under the assumption that the orphanages have been forthright in presenting information, and continue to believe that abandonments are the usual means by which children come into the orphanages. Such an assumption, if in fact untrue, will cause the adoptive families to utilize means of investigation that will almost always lead to failure. For example, if one assumes that a birth family left a child at the gate of the orphanage, one might also expect that the birth family might be curious enough to add their names to a database. This would be a natural assumption to make if one assumes a child was in fact abandoned as we are so often told.
But the growing realization is that such true abandonments are, in fact, very rare. It is important for adoptive families, when they are starting a search, to realize that everything they know about their child may, in fact, be a fiction. This statement will offend some adoptive families, who have invested their adoption story with emotional baggage that in large part makes it difficult for them to search with an open mind. They fiercely seek to cling to the "China myth", the idea that their child was wanted, even loved, and that cruel circumstances prevented the birth family from keeping their child. While this may sometimes be true, adoptive families must realize that the probability is that their child was relinquished for other reasons, including for money, promises, through deception, and a myriad other reasons. It is important for adoptive families to start a search realizing that any of these reasons may play a role in their child's history. To emotionally refuse to accept any one of these possibilities will impose artificial limitations, which will almost always significantly reduce the probabilities of success.
It is probable that between 2000 and the present, in excess of 80% of the healthy infant children adopted came into the orphanages through incentive programs. An adoptive family may scoff at this figure, refuse to accept or believe it, and continue their search assuming that their child was truly found abandoned. That is certainly their right, but they should realize that by such thinking their search will, in most instances, be doomed to fail. They will employ means of searching that are inefficient, will not adequately target the birth family of their child. These families will "go through the hoops" of a search, not realizing, or perhaps in fact hoping, that the search will not be successful.
If one allows for the possibility that a child was trafficked into an orphanage, one can readily see how ineffective certain search methods such as databases, market fliers, and other "top-down, shotgun" approaches would be. One of the peculiar aspects of most stories dealing with trafficked children inside China is that even with substantial and sustained publicity, the birth families for the children retrieved from trafficking rings rarely come forward. Certainly most adoptive families would feel that having their child on TV all across China would be an effective way to locate a birth family, yet time and time again it has been shown to be very ineffective. Why? Because the children captured in trafficking rings were almost always willingly sold by the birth families to traffickers, and they have little interest in coming forward and reclaiming that child.
The idea that instituting a database that can be used to "match" with searching birth families is, from the outset, fatally flawed for this simple reason. Most birth families will not be interested in coming forward. This reluctance will be partially emotional, partially legal, and partially out of ignorance. Many of the birth families that we have located had no idea that their child even ended up in an orphanage, but were told the child was being adopted locally. Thus, even if a birth family had an interest in reuniting, many would not suspect that their child ended up in a foreign family.
If one assumes that a child was truly abandoned, one would expect that the birth and finding information would be as accurate as possible, and that this information would allow a birth family to "search" a database and find their child. But evidence shows that this assumption is often misplaced. One adoptive father of a child from the Qichun orphanage in Hubei recounted a conversation where the orphanage director “admitted to us that this orphanage deliberately changed the date of birth, so that no family could later come back (though none ever did so) to claim a child that they claimed was born on a particular date: no such child would ever be recorded in the orphanage registry.” On a research trip we made to a Jiangxi orphanage, the foster family caring for the child had the hospital birth record giving the birth date of the child as three days earlier than the "official" birth date, even though the orphanage had provided the foster mother with the hospital record. Thus, inaccurate biographical information would prevent, even if the birth family and the adoptive family both accessed the same database, a match from being made.
Adoptive families understandably hope for a simple method to locate birth families -- a DNA or other database that will allow them to put in their child's information, push a button, and out would come the birth family information. Certainly if such a service existed that was open and free to use, there would be little to lose by participating. But in reality, given the "complexities" surrounding most children adopted from China, such a program will result in failure in nearly every case. Technological barriers inside China, birth family participation rates, information accuracy, and many other reasons will prevent successful matches except in rare and very specific instances (kidnapping, Family Planning confiscations, etc.)
Is there a magic panacea for finding a birth family? No. It takes hard work. It takes an open mind willing to follow the trail wherever it goes. It takes sleuthing skills, determination, and an ability to accept information that runs contrary to one's preconception. Adoptive families unwilling to put in that kind of energy will largely fail. Hiring "investigators" unfamiliar with the situation in a given orphanage will meet with failure in most instances if the methods employed do not match the circumstances. Posting fliers in a market belonging to a trafficking orphanage will produce few results. Adding information to a database requires a 1 in a thousand stroke of luck. These avenues can be employed as a last, "hail Mary" attempt at finding birth families, but there are many more targeted approaches that should be employed first. Generally, the most success will come from a "bottoms up" approach -- quiet, discreet, focused attention to an individual child's birth family. Other methods can be used, but they will almost always meet with failure, and represent a poor use of limited funds and energy.
___________
Families wanting to gain a deeper understanding of their child's orphanage and abandonment circumstances should seriously consider purchasing our "Birth Parent Search Analysis". Available for under $50, this report outlines the patterns in a given orphanage, and how those patterns would impact a search for birth parents. We believe that conducting even a basic search without having as much information as possible can seriously undermine your efforts.
It seems, from a perusal of many birth parent search groups, that most adoptive families are still working under the assumption that the orphanages have been forthright in presenting information, and continue to believe that abandonments are the usual means by which children come into the orphanages. Such an assumption, if in fact untrue, will cause the adoptive families to utilize means of investigation that will almost always lead to failure. For example, if one assumes that a birth family left a child at the gate of the orphanage, one might also expect that the birth family might be curious enough to add their names to a database. This would be a natural assumption to make if one assumes a child was in fact abandoned as we are so often told.
But the growing realization is that such true abandonments are, in fact, very rare. It is important for adoptive families, when they are starting a search, to realize that everything they know about their child may, in fact, be a fiction. This statement will offend some adoptive families, who have invested their adoption story with emotional baggage that in large part makes it difficult for them to search with an open mind. They fiercely seek to cling to the "China myth", the idea that their child was wanted, even loved, and that cruel circumstances prevented the birth family from keeping their child. While this may sometimes be true, adoptive families must realize that the probability is that their child was relinquished for other reasons, including for money, promises, through deception, and a myriad other reasons. It is important for adoptive families to start a search realizing that any of these reasons may play a role in their child's history. To emotionally refuse to accept any one of these possibilities will impose artificial limitations, which will almost always significantly reduce the probabilities of success.
It is probable that between 2000 and the present, in excess of 80% of the healthy infant children adopted came into the orphanages through incentive programs. An adoptive family may scoff at this figure, refuse to accept or believe it, and continue their search assuming that their child was truly found abandoned. That is certainly their right, but they should realize that by such thinking their search will, in most instances, be doomed to fail. They will employ means of searching that are inefficient, will not adequately target the birth family of their child. These families will "go through the hoops" of a search, not realizing, or perhaps in fact hoping, that the search will not be successful.
If one allows for the possibility that a child was trafficked into an orphanage, one can readily see how ineffective certain search methods such as databases, market fliers, and other "top-down, shotgun" approaches would be. One of the peculiar aspects of most stories dealing with trafficked children inside China is that even with substantial and sustained publicity, the birth families for the children retrieved from trafficking rings rarely come forward. Certainly most adoptive families would feel that having their child on TV all across China would be an effective way to locate a birth family, yet time and time again it has been shown to be very ineffective. Why? Because the children captured in trafficking rings were almost always willingly sold by the birth families to traffickers, and they have little interest in coming forward and reclaiming that child.
The idea that instituting a database that can be used to "match" with searching birth families is, from the outset, fatally flawed for this simple reason. Most birth families will not be interested in coming forward. This reluctance will be partially emotional, partially legal, and partially out of ignorance. Many of the birth families that we have located had no idea that their child even ended up in an orphanage, but were told the child was being adopted locally. Thus, even if a birth family had an interest in reuniting, many would not suspect that their child ended up in a foreign family.
If one assumes that a child was truly abandoned, one would expect that the birth and finding information would be as accurate as possible, and that this information would allow a birth family to "search" a database and find their child. But evidence shows that this assumption is often misplaced. One adoptive father of a child from the Qichun orphanage in Hubei recounted a conversation where the orphanage director “admitted to us that this orphanage deliberately changed the date of birth, so that no family could later come back (though none ever did so) to claim a child that they claimed was born on a particular date: no such child would ever be recorded in the orphanage registry.” On a research trip we made to a Jiangxi orphanage, the foster family caring for the child had the hospital birth record giving the birth date of the child as three days earlier than the "official" birth date, even though the orphanage had provided the foster mother with the hospital record. Thus, inaccurate biographical information would prevent, even if the birth family and the adoptive family both accessed the same database, a match from being made.
Adoptive families understandably hope for a simple method to locate birth families -- a DNA or other database that will allow them to put in their child's information, push a button, and out would come the birth family information. Certainly if such a service existed that was open and free to use, there would be little to lose by participating. But in reality, given the "complexities" surrounding most children adopted from China, such a program will result in failure in nearly every case. Technological barriers inside China, birth family participation rates, information accuracy, and many other reasons will prevent successful matches except in rare and very specific instances (kidnapping, Family Planning confiscations, etc.)
Is there a magic panacea for finding a birth family? No. It takes hard work. It takes an open mind willing to follow the trail wherever it goes. It takes sleuthing skills, determination, and an ability to accept information that runs contrary to one's preconception. Adoptive families unwilling to put in that kind of energy will largely fail. Hiring "investigators" unfamiliar with the situation in a given orphanage will meet with failure in most instances if the methods employed do not match the circumstances. Posting fliers in a market belonging to a trafficking orphanage will produce few results. Adding information to a database requires a 1 in a thousand stroke of luck. These avenues can be employed as a last, "hail Mary" attempt at finding birth families, but there are many more targeted approaches that should be employed first. Generally, the most success will come from a "bottoms up" approach -- quiet, discreet, focused attention to an individual child's birth family. Other methods can be used, but they will almost always meet with failure, and represent a poor use of limited funds and energy.
___________
Families wanting to gain a deeper understanding of their child's orphanage and abandonment circumstances should seriously consider purchasing our "Birth Parent Search Analysis". Available for under $50, this report outlines the patterns in a given orphanage, and how those patterns would impact a search for birth parents. We believe that conducting even a basic search without having as much information as possible can seriously undermine your efforts.
Monday, February 07, 2011
"The Missing Girls of China"
Another academic article by David Smolin has been published, this one focused more narrowly on China and her international adoption program. The entire article is extremely informative, and offers insightful comments and explanations for the slowdown in China's adoption program, refuting some of the most commonly held explanations such as CCAA imposed quotas, etc. On our subscription blog we discuss the article and some of its implications for understanding the current state of China's adoption program.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Police Reports -- Why They Are Important, and Why They Are Not
On our subscription blog we have an essay on what the value of so-called police reports really is, and the answer may surprise you.
As families seek to obtain pre-adoption history for their child, a common piece of documentation that is seemingly important is the so-called "police report". This one-page document is usually created soon after a child is found, and supposedly details the events surrounding a child's finding. It is almost always used by the orphanage as the basis for all future adoption paperwork, including the "certificate of abandonment" required to process the child internationally.
In my research, I have learned that "police reports" vary widely from orphanage to orphanage. Some orphanages have pre-printed forms with data fields for information required by the CCAA for adoption -- Name, gender, birth date, finding date, etc. These pre-printed forms usually have three blanks areas that are filled in by the finder, and then testified as to the truthfulness by the orphanage director and the police official.
Other orphanages simply have the finder write down what happened on a piece of orphanage stationary. While the pre-printed forms are largely machine printed, these forms are largely hand-written.
It is a common assumption among adoptive families that when a finding occurs, that the police are notified and an officer is dispatched to the finding site to do an investigation. This belief is usually supported by the "police report" itself, which often uses words such as "the Emergency police '110' [China's version of the U.S. "911" police] were called, and officer Wang was sent to investigate the finding." Most adoption paperwork contains statements to the effect that "The police searched for two months, and were unable to locate the birth parents of this child." As a result of these and similar statements, many adoptive families assume that the existence of a police report verifies the underlying facts about their child's finding. But such a conclusion is usually not justified.
As families seek to obtain pre-adoption history for their child, a common piece of documentation that is seemingly important is the so-called "police report". This one-page document is usually created soon after a child is found, and supposedly details the events surrounding a child's finding. It is almost always used by the orphanage as the basis for all future adoption paperwork, including the "certificate of abandonment" required to process the child internationally.
In my research, I have learned that "police reports" vary widely from orphanage to orphanage. Some orphanages have pre-printed forms with data fields for information required by the CCAA for adoption -- Name, gender, birth date, finding date, etc. These pre-printed forms usually have three blanks areas that are filled in by the finder, and then testified as to the truthfulness by the orphanage director and the police official.
Other orphanages simply have the finder write down what happened on a piece of orphanage stationary. While the pre-printed forms are largely machine printed, these forms are largely hand-written.
It is a common assumption among adoptive families that when a finding occurs, that the police are notified and an officer is dispatched to the finding site to do an investigation. This belief is usually supported by the "police report" itself, which often uses words such as "the Emergency police '110' [China's version of the U.S. "911" police] were called, and officer Wang was sent to investigate the finding." Most adoption paperwork contains statements to the effect that "The police searched for two months, and were unable to locate the birth parents of this child." As a result of these and similar statements, many adoptive families assume that the existence of a police report verifies the underlying facts about their child's finding. But such a conclusion is usually not justified.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
