When Maria Lundberg Ström's mother and father learned that the biological parents demanded their daughter back, it was the beginning of one of history's worst adoption scandals. It turned out that Maria had been stolen from her home in Seoul. Her new Swedish parents became desperate.

FJung Yoon Huh's life in Sweden began on 18 February 1968 at Arlanda. It was the day when her expectant adoptive parents, Ulla and Stig, received their adopted child from Korea.

They were a childless couple in their 40s who had longed to start a family, but did not succeed. The 2.5-year-old Korean girl was received with open arms. They called her Mary.

The girl was precocious for her age. In fact, she was four years old. But about that and about Mary's real background, they knew nothing. They thought she was orphaned.

Maria Lundberg Ström, who is now 56 years old, agrees that her story is exceptional. Few adoptees find their biological parents. In her case, on the contrary, it was the biological parents who, after two years of searching, found their lost daughter. Because she was anything but poor and orphaned, she came from a wealthy entrepreneurial family in Seoul.

Last week, the cabinet announced that it would now only wish to allow intercountry adoptions to go through a government organization. Patrick Noordoven would rather see the Netherlands renounce intercountry adoption altogether.

In 1980, with the help of a Dutch diplomat, with the cooperation of the consulate in São Paulo, I was illegally adopted from Brazil. Because my identity has been forged – a common problem for adoptees – it has been virtually impossible to obtain vital information about my ancestry.

As a result, I do not know under what circumstances I was handed over and as a result, after more than twenty years of searching for my identity, I have not yet been able to find my father.

According to the District Court of The Hague, the Dutch state has acted unlawfully towards me by failing to take measures to protect my right to know my origin. The state was required to make every effort to ensure that I, as a victim of criminal conduct, would actually receive parentage and other identifying information, the court ruled.

Gross violations of children's rights

The South Korean Cabinet on Tuesday approved bills to allow single people to adopt children, as the number of one-person households is sharply increasing.

The Justice Ministry revised the Civil Act and the Family Litigation Act, which currently stipulate only married couples can legally adopt, reports Yonhap News Agency.

Under the revisions, single people can adopt if they are 25 or older and meet requirements to sufficiently guarantee the welfare of the children.

The Ministry said it will submit the amendments to the National Assembly on Friday for approval, while it also strengthened qualification reviews of would-be adoptive parents.

The revisions call on the family court to consider parenting time and the post-adoption environment when reviewing applications, in addition to their capability and conditions to raise a child.

Children who have been removed from home should also be able to return to their parents after a longer period of time. The directive that currently often prevents this from happening is being scrapped. Youth protectors can then deal more flexibly with the so-called 'acceptable period for return'.

The change of course of the Netherlands Youth Institute (NJi), which draws up the guidelines together with the professional associations, is important for the approximately 420 children of parents affected by the benefits affair who have been placed out of their homes and still live separately from their parents. A government support team has been available for them since last week. In total, about 46 thousand children live in foster families or institutions in the Netherlands, more than 20 thousand of whom are through the intervention of the juvenile court.

Determine what is possible per family

The new starting point is that it must be determined per family what is possible, without applying a generally applicable strict term any longer. Even before the official new guideline is available, which is expected after the summer, it is already the intention that the acceptable term will be applied less strictly.

The term 'acceptable term' was included in the Civil Code in 2015 to prevent children from being left in uncertainty about where they would grow up for too long after a custodial placement. As a national knowledge centre, the NJi has drawn up two terms based on scientific insights and practical experience: a maximum of six months for very young children up to 5 years old, and a maximum of one year for children aged 5 and older. Although the terms are 'indicative', it also stated firmly: 'If it is not possible to improve the conditions sufficiently within this term, then a permanent custodial placement is necessary.'

EAU CLAIRE — At just 2½ years old, Ary Krejchi already has come a long way.

Ary was born in India, where he spent the first 20 months of his life in an orphanage before being adopted by Serena and Jon Krejchi of Eau Claire.

The boy also was born with biliary atresia, a rare liver disease that left him so malnourished he weighed only 11 pounds, had broken bones all over his frail body and had to be held like a baby when the Krejchis welcomed him into their lives.

One year later, after undergoing a liver transplant in September at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, Ary’s transformation is stunning. His weight has more than doubled, his smile is nearly constant and he struts around the family’s living room — still with a helping hand from mom or dad — like he owns the place.

“His personality has really developed since the transplant. He’s a completely different child,” Serena said. “It feels like we’ve had him forever now.”

https://open.overheid.nl/repository/ronl-97920b9b46c6a81438385ede6c7db42d2c9cb07a/1/pdf/Wob-verzoek%20mbt%20Adopties%20uit%20India%20-%20Wob-besluit_%20inventarislijst%20en%20documenten.pdf

Revised 'acceptable term' in the Out-of-home placement guideline

If children are removed from home, then according to Dutch law it must be decided for each child within an 'acceptable period' where the child will definitely grow up. This term is further elaborated in the Out-of-home placement guideline. In practice, the wording of the directive sometimes leads to unbalanced decision-making. The three owners of the guideline, the professional associations NIP, NVO and BPSW, and the Netherlands Youth Institute (NJi) delete the current passages in the new version of the guideline, in which the acceptable term is specified.

The revision of this guideline has been in progress since the autumn of 2021. In this review, new insights on the various factors that influence 'the acceptable time frame' will be prioritized. In the meantime, it is important for the application of the directive not to strictly observe the time limits specified in the directive. Joint, careful decision-making is essential, which does justice to the specific situation of the child and the family.

Do not use fixed terms

In the guideline (and substantiation, work cards and information for parents) in various places time limits are mentioned within which decisions about out-of-home placement or back placement should take place. These terms are indicative, i.e. intended as an example. They are not universally applicable. We note that youth professionals apply these terms too strictly in practice. We can imagine that the firm wording of the relevant passages in the directive could lead to a misinterpretation.

Finally. The government's long-awaited position is here. The suspension is lifted. There will be 1 intermediary organization. More intensive cooperation with (possibly a limited number of) countries. Goal: even better guarantees. Relief prevails at ANW HQ. Of course there are still many questions and a lot will come to everyone in the near future. But the most important thing: new parents are becoming available for children for whom the biological parents cannot, do not want or are not allowed to care. And that's what we do: we help find parents for children

n

"Is adoption still of this time?" I read. Is war still of this time? Love sickness? Death? The maddening prose of progress of the time readers, who know exactly what time it is on the clock of world history. In the adoption case, a decision will be made today in The Hague about the 'intercountry adoption stop' that has been in effect since February 2021. Is it okay again, a little bit? Because adoption is no longer hip and happening, while in my time, well, I was adopted once.

That noble thing had to get rid of that kind of development cooperation, because those aspiring parents wanted children, and there was certainly an egocentric motive. But how the zeitgeist has changed: adoptive parents, especially of foreign children, are now robbers, imperialists, neo-colonialists, 'white saviors' and, if we go on and on, Putin supporters. How was it again? There are orphanages in distant countries that are full, there are Dutch people who would like to have a child, and that's how those parties were linked. We now know that a lot went wrong: orphans turned out not to be real orphans, papers were forged and the adopted child was sold over the counter. Sometimes.

This total, intercountry adoption by the state can be compared to an absolute ban on car traffic, given the many deaths. No one is allowed to drive a motorized vehicle anymore. Everyone for? No, because people drive cars and motorized, and adoption was and is an exception.

I just read on the NOS site: 'The surnames of Dirk Jan and Christiaan are known to the editors, but have been omitted at their request.' Dirk Jan and Christiaan are a couple, probably a gay couple, because the site mentions 'partner' and that's always right. The two are waiting for a baby from the United States, and they've been doing that for a long time now. These men have become more or less suspicious. D.J. and C. would have been even better, because the state-imposed adoption ban has made them half criminals, not people who want children.

I'm decency to do that for personal reasons, because I won't posthumously say that about my parents.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a petition seeking simplification in the process of adoption in India.The matter was listed before the be

bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant. The PIL was filed by a charitable trust "The Temple of Healing" through its secretary Dr. Piyush

Saxena.When the matter was called for hearing, Dr Piyush Saxena, appearing as petitioner- in-...