Home  

Zambian Adoption Program

Zambia

We are pleased to offer our newest African program – ZAMBIA

Zambia is a beautiful country, rich with culture and history. Amidst its spectacular rivers and waterfalls, it is also a poor country, where thousands of orphaned children are in need of permanent loving homes.

The capital of The Republic of Zambia is Lusaka.  Zambia is located in southern Africa.  The neighbouring countries are the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the north, Tanzania to the north-east, Malawi to the east, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Namibia to the south, and Angola to the west.  The population of Zambia is approximately 11 million, with approximately 1.7 million people living in the capital city.

Zambian Adoption Program
The Zambian adoption program is open to both single female applicants, and married couples between the ages of 25 - 50 years old.

German couple granted adoption of Namibian Child

German couple granted adoption of Namibian Child

 
Written by Faith Sankwasa and Tirivangani Masawi   
Thursday, 24 September 2009
HIGH Court Judge, Justice Sylvester Mainga, has ordered the state to allow a German couple to adopt a Namibian child who is currently living under their care.
The couple, Jen Holger and Bianca Detmold were seeking a court interdict in the adoption of Sonia Hammerslacht but the state argued that they were disentitled to adopt as they had not yet acquired Namibian citizenship.
In their application, the Detmolds cited the Ministry of Health and Social Services, Ministry of Women’s Affairs and Child Welfare (now Gender Equality and Child Welfare) and the Commissioner of Child Welfare for the Okahandja District as the respondents.
Government attorneys were questioning the legality of the adoption of Namibian Children by foreigners as it is not catered for in the country’s Constitution.
Presiding over the case heard yesterday at the Windhoek High Court, Justice Mainga ordered the state to hand over the birth certificate and adoption order as required by the applicants.
The State argued that, despite the agreement between the couple and the child’s biological mother, the law does not allow Namibian children to be adopted by foreigners.
The State quoted Article 15 (1) of the Constitution which says Namibian children should be cared for by their biological mothers and that the law does not specify on the adoption of children by foreigners therefore provision should be made for Parliament to deliberate on the matter.
According to the Namibian law, the couple should be permanent residents in the country for them to be able to adopt the child.
However, according to Justice Mainga’s order, the adoption should be urgently approved and that failure to comply with the order will not be condoned.
Permanent Secretary for Women Affairs and Child Welfare, Errka Usiku, who was cited as the respondent had also filed an affidavit objecting to the adoption but Justice Mainga’s order nullified the affidavit.
In addition, Usiku argued that they could not make the concession as the matter could be referred to the Children’s Court for consideration if Parliament removes the absolute prohibition upon non-Namibians as parents.
faiths@tgi.naThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it or informante8@tgi.na

http://www.informante.web.na/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4922&Itemid=100

Namibia: Childcare And Protection Bill Revised

Namibia: Childcare And Protection Bill Revised
Theron Kolokwe
12 June 2009

 

Windhoek — Workshops aimed at revising the Child Care and Protection Bill that is intended to eventually replace the outdated Children's Act 33 of 1960 were being held in the capital this week.
A number of international specialists on child law had also been brought into the country to make inputs into the bill.
The purpose of these, as well as earlier consultative workshops, is for the Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare to ensure that the bill is in the best possible form before being tabled in Parliament at the end of the year.
The bill addresses a number of key areas including children's courts, early intervention services, procedures for removing endangered children from the home, foster care, adoption, child trafficking, child-headed households and many more issues.
"The Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare has planned of revising the Child Care and Protection Bill through an extensive consultation process which is financially and technically supported by UNICEF.
During the last 15 years, the Bill has undergone numerous revisions and adaptations and finally there is a recently drafted Bill (Child Care and Protection) that is being completed by the Ministry of Justice in 2008." said Minister of Gender Equality and Social Welfare, Marlene Mungunda
http://allafrica.com/stories/200906120605.html

Namibia: Judge Slams Official for Stalling Adoption

The Namibian (Windhoek)

-->

Namibia: Judge Slams Official for Stalling Adoption

Werner Menges

24 September 2009

Inter-country Adoption: The Complexities Behind The Conflict

01.10.09
Inter-country Adoption: The Complexities Behind The Conflict
By: DIANNE HUBBARD and RACHEL COOMER Gender Research & Advocacy Project, Legal As
The issue of inter-country adoption made front-page news in The Namibian of September 24. This piece is intended to provide information to the public about inter-country adoption as the issue is more complicated than it may seem at first.
INTERNATIONALLY, inter-country adoption is a relatively recent phenomenon dating from World War II when many countries were left with war orphans but lacked the resources to provide alternative care within the country. Inter-country adoptions became increasingly popular in the 1970s and 1980s, as a measure aimed at alleviating the plight of couples unable to conceive. This led to abuses such as child trafficking and “baby markets”, resulting in greater international efforts to return the child to the centre of the picture and to establish mechanisms to prevent abuses of the process.
In Namibia, recent legal developments layered on top of the outdated Children’s Act 33 of 1960 have left the Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare between the proverbial rock and a hard place.
In the 2004 Detmold case, the High Court found that the prohibition on the adoption of children born to Namibian citizens by non-Namibian citizens in the Children’s Act was unconstitutional.
In that case, the applicants were German citizens and permanent residents of Namibia who were applying to adopt a child who had already been in their foster care for several years. They had been found suitable to be adoptive parents, and the child’s biological mother had consented to the adoption. The only obstacle to the adoption was their citizenship.
The Court found that the rule on citizenship violated Article 10 of the Namibian Constitution, which guarantees the equality of all persons before the law, and Article 14, which protects the family. The Court found that a family is “the best vehicle for bringing up children”, and that the next best thing to a biological family is an adoptive family, saying that it is therefore society’s duty “to make possible, and not hinder or frustrate, a family for every child given up for adoption”. It found that the strict prohibition on adoption by non-Namibian citizens was unconstitutional because it could deprive a child of the possibility of being adopted into a secure and stable family that might not otherwise be available to the child.
This case sits alongside the Convention of the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. Namibia is a party to both of these international agreements, meaning that they are by virtue of Article 144 of the Namibian Constitution “part of the law of Namibia”. Both of these agreements state that inter-country adoption may be considered as an alternative means of providing care for the child – if the child cannot be cared for in the country of origin in any suitable manner. The African Charter calls inter-country adoption a “last resort”.
Both agreements require governments to take measures (a) to ensure that the safeguards and standards for inter-country adoption are equivalent to those for national adoption; (b) to ensure that placement in inter-country adoption does not result in trafficking or improper financial gain for anyone involved; and (c) to promote bilateral or multilateral arrangements to regulate inter-country adoption.
Thus, a social worker who recommends an inter-country adoption without first attempting to find adoptive parents for the child within Namibia is violating international commitments made by Namibia.
The situation is complicated by inadequate procedures in the Children’s Act which currently governs adoption. Because private social workers can make reports to the courts recommending adoptions without channelling these through the Ministry of Gender Equality and Child Welfare, the Ministry is faced with completed adoptions without previously having a chance to see if local options for the child were properly considered. Furthermore, this law does not give the Ministry any right to appeal an order of adoption.
Ministerial consent was previously required for the limited exceptions to the prohibitions on adoption by foreigners, but this safeguard fell away when the Detmold case invalidated that provision in its entirety. Yet the regulations issued under the Act give the Ministry, in its role as the Registrar of adoptions, a duty to ensure that the correct rules and procedures have been followed in respect of all adoption orders.
So the existing procedures for inter-country adoption have large gaps, which can (as in the present case) leave the Ministry in the position of being expected to register an inter-country adoption even where it is not clear to the Ministry that local alternatives have been exhausted.
The Ministry is in the process of making the final revisions to a proposed new Child Care and Protection Act which will replace the outdated Children’s Act. The Legal Assistance Centre has been acting as technical adviser to the Ministry on this process, which is being supported by UNICEF.
This Act is expected to pave the way for Namibia to ratify the Hague Convention on Inter-country Adoption, which is widely viewed as being the best mechanism for preventing abuses in this field. The Hague Convention does not encourage inter-country adoption – quite the contrary, it says that inter-country adoption should take place only if authorities have determined that this would be in the child’s best interests, and possibilities for placement of the child within the country of origin have been given due consideration.
The Hague Convention also provides mechanisms to ensure that an inter-country adoption will be recognised in the country to which the child is going, so that the adopted child does not end up stateless in some foreign country. It also provides for cooperation between authorities in both the sending and receiving countries, to provide for proper monitoring and control.
The Legal Assistance Centre strongly recommends that Namibia becomes a party to the Hague Convention as the best way to regulate inter-country adoption – which should be an extremely rare alternative for Namibian children.
The forthcoming Child Care and Protection Act would also provide other safeguards, such as setting qualifications for which social workers can handle adoptions, requiring that all social worker reports on adoption must be sent to the Channelling Officer appointed by the Minister before the matter goes to court, establishing a register of prospective adoptive parents within Namibia and limiting fees which can be charged in connection with arranging adoptions.
Inter-country adoption should not provide any scope for baby shopping. Parents from the England, the United States of America or anywhere else in the world cannot come to Namibia to “pick” a child that they would like to adopt. (An example of this misconception can be seen in the recent statement by Sir Elton John, who reportedly said that he would like to adopt a specific child from Ukraine.) Adoption is not supposed to be about seeing a child and saying that you want it – it is supposed to be about providing for the best interests of child through the matching of the child to a family, not the family to the child. There are some rare situations where a child may be placed for adoption only with a specific prospective parent for some good reason, but this should not be the norm.
Similarly if not carefully handled and regulated, inter-country adoption can lead to baby-buying, where parents desperate for a child are prepared to pay enormous sums of money to “baby brokers” who can source a child for them. This is a form of child trafficking which must be guarded against – Namibian children should not be made available to the highest bidders.
There is no doubt that these problems will threaten Namibia.
The Legal Assistance Centre has already received multiple enquiries about inter-country adoption, just because the term appears in an obscure part of our website in connection with discussions around the draft Child Care and Protection Bill. Although there is a role for inter-country adoption, we believe that Namibia generally has the capacity to care for its own children.
So what to do in the meantime? We suggest that, as an interim measure, until the new law and the Hague Convention are in place, that Commissioners of Child Welfare and social workers throughout the country be officially reminded of their legal obligation to ensure that local alternatives have been considered ahead of any inter-country adoption.
There is already an existing agreement between the Ministry and private social workers to channel all reports concerning inter-country adoption through the Ministry before they are laid before the court, so that the Ministry can assist with finding and assessing local options; this agreement should be honoured, and Commissioners of Child Welfare should not accept reports that have not been channelled through the Ministry.
The current difference of opinion is really the fault of a flawed system. The forthcoming Child Care and Protection Act should repair those flaws and make the process clearer and smoother for all concerned, with the focus securely on the best interests of the child. 
 

SEX ALLEGATION PUZZLES LAWYER'S ACQUAINTANCES

SEX ALLEGATION PUZZLES LAWYER'S ACQUAINTANCES

By Arthur C. Gorlick P-I Reporter

TUESDAY, February 21, 1989

Section: News, Page: B1

Attorney Lane Wolfley says he is perplexed by an allegation of child sex abuse against his friend and former law partner, Ted Ripley.

PROTECTIVE RULING SOUGHT IN CHILD ABUSE CASE

PROTECTIVE RULING SOUGHT IN CHILD ABUSE CASE

By Caroline Young P-I Reporter

FRIDAY, February 10, 1989

Section: News, Page: B1

State children's services workers will ask a Clallam County judge today to order a Port Angeles attorney accused of sexually abusing a 12-year-old girl living in his home not to have contact with any children until the case is resolved.

Israel -sect/adopted, WRITTEN QUESTION E-2273/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE / NGL) to the Commission on international adoptions

 

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2273/99
by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE / NGL) to the Commission
13 december 1999
Subject: International Adoptions
The unrest that has arisen in recent days about the members of a sect called Christians, alarmed, brings back the problems of international adoptions in the day, particularly if it is to Eastern Europe. Among the 25 members of this sect are in need six adopted children from Romania, the special care. These children are supposed to in a safe environment to live and not be moved in a group of adults with uncertain intentions from Greece to Israel, especially since this group intends to press reports, take the turn of the century life, so that so that the life of children would be jeopardized.
The European Parliament believes that uncontrolled international adoptions are a big problem of our time, as well as the sexual exploitation of children, especially in the countries of Eastern Europe. The European Parliament has called in its resolution of 12.12.1996 (1) to improve the law and cooperation between the Member States in the adoption of minors, the Commission, the Council and the Member States, all legal and other measures to protect children to take against illegal international adoption practices.

Blog - Rechtszaak Kenya

zaterdag 4 oktober 2008

Dag 134

Vrijdag 26 september 2008

Manuelle voelde het blijkbaar aan dat er iets moest gaan gebeuren. Normaal slaapt ze wel aardig goed, maar vannacht was het echt bar en boos. Ze werd wel 4 keer wakker. Eindelijk was het dan zo ver. We mochten vanmorgen eindelijk de nette kleren uit de kast halen. Het was vandaag de dag van eerste rechtzaak. We moesten vroeg op, zodat we op tijd konden vertrekken. We mochten echt niet te laat komen. We moesten daarom op tijd vertrekken zodat we voldoende rekening hielden met eventuele files. Gelukkig kwamen we ruim op tijd aan, zodat we nog wat bananen konden kopen voor Manuelle.
We mochten pas om half negen naar binnen (in het rechtsgebouw). De rechtzaak zou plaats vinden op de begane grond kamer 33. Er stonden allemaal adoptiestellen te wachten. De één was nog zenuwachtiger dan de ander. Voor ons stond er niet zo heel veel op het spel. Vandaag zou alleen onze guardian aangesteld worden. We zouden een man als rechter hebben. Daar was onze guardian niet zo blij mee. Deze man had haar namelijk gezegd dat hij haar de komende tijd niet meer wilde zien.
Bij de ene rechter gaat het allemaal wat sneller als bij de ander. Zo had de vrouwelijke rechter al drie zaken afgehandeld en was onze rechter nog met de eerste bezig. Een ander Nederlands koppel was eerder aan de beurt (bij de vrouwelijke rechter) als wij, maar zij hadden de pech dat hun guardian er nog niet was. Dat betekende dat hun rechtzaak is verplaatst naar volgende week.
Op een gegeven moment kwam de clerk naar buiten en riep ‘de zaak S. K.’. Er was even wat onrust in de gang over wie er aan de beurt was, maar al gauw bleek dat het om de zaak Sharon Karimi ging. We liepen gauw naar binnen en gingen zitten achter de advocaat en de vrouw van de LAN. De rechter stelde wat vragen aan onze advocaat en schreef allerlei dingen op. Op een gegeven moment vroeg hij wie onze guardian zou worden. Onze advocaat gebruikte toen haar eigen naam in plaats van haar mans naam. Die guardian kende hij nog niet en wilde daar dus nog wel info over hebben. Manuelle mocht in de kamer rondlopen, maar dar wilde ze liever niet. Ze had mama’s telefoon gevonden en wilde even demonstreren hoe die werkte. Dat was niet echt het juiste moment (dat lieten de aanwezigen wel met hun gezichtsuitdrukking zien!). Uiteindelijk stelde de rechter nog wat lastige vragen over ons. Waarom adopteren zij niet in Nederland? Vervolgens vroeg hij naar onze leeftijd. Hij vond het belachelijk dat iemand op die leeftijd ging adopteren. De advocaat gaf er wel een goed antwoord op, maar blijkbaar was de rechter het daar nog niet mee eens. De volgende keer wilde hij het opnieuw daar over hebben. Dat zijn eerlijk gezegd geen leuke vragen. Zo word je steeds bepaald bij het kinderloos zijn. De rechter sloot af met een drie keer belachelijk en gaf nog een samenvatting. De guardian was aangesteld en we mochten gaan (daar ging het om). Buiten de rechtzaal spraken we nog even met wat andere stellen en zijn toen naar huis gegaan. De rechtzaken zijn niet voor iedereen even goed verlopen -- > helaas!
’s Middags zijn we opnieuw naar het postkantoor gegaan om een pakketje op te halen. Dat is echt een soort hordeloop. Je van loopt van a naar b enz. enz.. Uiteindelijk waren we 2 uur bezig om het pakketje op te halen, maar dat hadden we er zeker voor over!
Na het postkantoor zijn we met een Amerikaans stel wat gaan drinken. (Wij hebben een aantal weken geleden bij hen een afscheidsfeest gehad van een Amerikaans adoptie gezin). Het was heel gezellig.

A generation fights to reform adoption laws

A generation fights to reform adoption laws
November 11, 2009
 
   
Six Korean adoptees filed an appeal with the Anti-corruption and Civil Rights Commission last year to request a probe into irregularities in their adoption documents and possible illegal procedures at local adoption agencies.

Now, they’re involved in a full-fledged battle to reform adoption laws and procedures, and they’re getting help from some heavyweights.

Adoptee rights and community groups as well as unwed mothers, the public interest law firm Gong-Gam and Democratic Party Representative Choi Young-hee have joined forces with the adoptees in an effort to convince lawmakers to revise the Special Law Relating to the Promotion and Procedure of Adoption.

The National Assembly has now taken up the issue and is exploring changes through a series of hearings.

The latest hearing took place yesterday.

 
   
If their efforts succeed, the groups will drastically change the landscape of domestic and international adoption in Korea, a country which lawmaker Choi said at yesterday’s hearing said “still has a stigma attached to it as one of the major exporters of children.”

It would also rank as one of the few cases in the world where adoptees returned to their original country and changed adoption practices through legislation.

False records

When they started this quest, the adoptees, hailing from three different countries, said their adoption records contained contradictory information.

 
  Adoptee Jane Jeong Trenka
In one case, an adoptee only identified by her initials, SIA, said her adoptive parents in Denmark were informed by an adoption agency in 1977 that it did not have the records of her birth parents. But when SIA came to Korea in 1998 and asked for information about them, the agency did in fact have information about her birth mother. SIA also found that the adoption was done without her mother’s consent.

In another case, an adoptee only identified as PYJ said her adoption agency created a new identity for her when she was sent to Norway for adoption in 1975.

Their initial attempt to delve into the issue hit a brick wall when the civil rights commission dismissed the appeal, citing a lack of proper administrative procedures in Korea at the time of their adoption.

Taking on the law

The adoptees, however, did not stop there. Instead of filing another petition or begging for the release of their records at adoption agencies, they decided to try to revise adoption-related laws to find out the truth and improve the system.

According to the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs, 161,588 Korean children were sent overseas for adoption from 1958 through 2008. Korea is the world’s fifth-largest exporter of children behind China, Guatemala, Russia and Ethiopia as of 2007, according to World Partners Adoption Inc.

“Most Korean adoptees are growing up in foreign countries and facing confusion over their identity. Even though they come to Korea to find their roots, there are few cases in which they are given accurate information on their birth or succeed in locating their birth parents. To improve the situation, we decided to hold a hearing on revising the Special Act,” lawmaker Choi said.

Need for stricter regulations

The proposed bill starts with the idea that foreign, and even domestic, adoption is not the best option for children and that public assistance should be given to mothers to help them raise their children, a concept that follows international adoption practices. It also incorporates the notion that adoption processes need to be more strictly regulated to prevent possible abuses by adoption agencies.

“The government wants to push domestic adoption, but all the children already have mothers,” said Jane Jeong Trenka, the president of the Truth and Reconciliation for the Adoption Community of Korea and one of the adoptees who filed the appeal at the commission. “The children can stay with their mothers. Single mothers should be given resources to raise their own children. It is still a matter of social prejudice in Korea.”

 
  A National Assembly hearing was held yesterday on revising Korea’s special adoption law. By Jeon Min-gyu
Trenka added that a number of adoptees had families but were reclassified as orphans before they were sent abroad for adoption. “Because their records were manipulated, only 2.7 percent of adoptees succeed in locating their birth parents,” she said.

The majority of children relinquished for adoption in Korea are the children of unwed mothers. Of the 2,556 adoptions in 2008, international and domestic, 2,170 were the children of unwed mothers. Others were from low-income families or broken homes.

One of the biggest obstacles that prevents these women from raising their children on their own is the social stigma they face as unwed mothers. Another is the lack of social welfare services available to them should they choose to raise their child.

Trenka was adopted by a couple in Minnesota in the United States in 1972 when she was six months old. In 2007, Trenka and other Korean adoptees founded TRACK to help get the government to fully acknowledge its past and present adoption practices.

Reverend Kim Do-hyun, who is the director of KoRoot, which provides accommodation for Korean adoptees returning to the country, echoed those thoughts.

“Behind the Special Law is an idea that adoption needs to be encouraged,” Kim said. “But adoption is not something that we should promote. Rather than pushing adoption, we should reinforce the original family to prevent further separation between mothers and their children.”

Adoption as a business

One of the major changes proposed by the bill drafted by the public interest law firm Gong-Gam is that it would require court approval for all types of adoptions - currently they’re needed only for domestic adoptions - and increase government intervention in matters dealt with mostly by private adoption agencies.

The adoptees say there needs to be more government involvement in adoption because as more adult adoptees reunite with their birth parents and gain access to their records, examples of dubious international adoption practices have surfaced.

TRACK has been documenting these cases through interviews with adoptees and their birth families. They found that in some cases an orphan hojeok (family registry) is produced for a child sent for international adoption, even if the child has a family. Contradictions were also found between the records held by adoptive parents and those kept by the adoption agency. In one case the child was malnourished at the time of adoption but the records sent to the adoptive parents overseas stated the child was healthy. In another case, a child was given up for domestic adoption but was sent abroad for international adoption.

The adoptee coalition believes such irregularities occurred because adoption agencies manipulated records to push international adoption, which is very profitable.

According to the Health Ministry, the four adoption agencies authorized to facilitate international adoptions charge 13 million won ($17,211) to 20 million won for each child sent for international adoption.


Pressure on moms

Another proposed revision would give women a minimum of 30 days to make a decision on adoption, which is standard in Western countries. There is no set period for this in South Korea.

Observers say women are often forced to sign an agreement on adoption almost right after giving birth. If the mothers change their mind, the agencies charge them for all expenses they’ve incurred, from child delivery to the shelters they run. They said adoption agencies tend to encourage adoption rather than telling the women that there are other options available such as raising their child on their own.

“Adoption agencies pressure you to give up your child,” Choi Hyang-sook, a member of the group Miss Mamma Mia, which is also part of the adoptee coalition, said at yesterday’s hearing.


Access to records

Third, the agencies would be obligated to provide adoptees with all information on their birth parents, with the exception of name and registration number if the birth parents do not want their identities revealed. Kim said adoption agencies are often reluctant to share information with adoptees who are looking for their birth parents and vice versa because they are afraid that past abuses could become public knowledge.

“Adoption agencies provide adult adoptees with only partial information, citing the protection of their birth parents’ privacy,” Kim said. “The agencies have often falsified data to suit adoptive parents’ taste or to abide by the laws of the country to which they are sending a child. There were cases in which adoptees were classified as orphans when they were not. The more information they reveal, the more their reputation can be damaged.”

One adoption agency disputed the accusations. “There are records we can open but there are those we can’t,” said Choi An-yeo, a manager at Holt Children’s Services Inc., the biggest and oldest adoption agency in Korea.

Choi said things were different a few decades ago. “Then, it was possible to send an abandoned child abroad for adoption. If someone brought in a child and lied that he or she was a legal guardian, there would be no way for us to find out. We only have followed the laws and we will continue to do so,” she added.

Unifying adoption bills

Democratic Party Representative Choi is sponsoring the proposal while the Health Ministry is also drawing up its own bill. It is not certain how the government bill is going to be shaped but Park Sook-ja, the director of the Office for Child, Youth and Family Policy at the Health Ministry, said she generally sympathizes with the adoptee coalition. “We share similar ideas in general, but we need to take it one step at a time,” Park said.

The ministry has already held two hearings on the bill, however, Park said it is too early to talk about the bill as the final version has not been made yet.

Choi said the differences between the two bills will likely be ironed out before a unified bill is presented to the Assembly early next year.

Based on ‘lies’

Dozens of adoptees including Trenka attended the hearing yesterday in the hope that the bill Choi presented can transform adoption practices here.

Trenka commented, “Adoption may be an act of love, but all adoptions are meant to separate children from their mothers.”

Trenka started writing to her birth parents regularly when she was 16 years old. Her adoptive parents did not like her keeping in touch with her birth parents but one day she found letters from her birth mother in her adoptive parents’ mailbox. Her birth mother had found her adoptive parents’ address and kept sending her letters. Trenka said she still remembers the time she reunited with her birth mother.

“My mother was so emotional. I’d never seen a person so emotional,” she said. “She sat on the floor and poured her heart out.”

Trenka reunited with the rest of her birth family in the 1990s.

“Adoption is a big lie. Its success depends on everyone believing in that lie. They [my adoptive parents] wanted to believe in that lie but I could not do that.” Asked why she is devoting herself to creating the law, she said, “For my mother. My mother died but if I don’t try to change things, my suffering has no meaning.”


By Limb Jae-un [jbiz91@joongang.co.kr]