The Netherlands adopts children from Hungary, although quite a few things seem wrong

By strictly selecting adoption countries, outgoing Minister Weerwind wanted to secure international adoption by Dutch parents. But what does Hungary do on its list of selected countries?
 

What should happen next with international child adoption after the devastating conclusions drawn by the Joustra committee in 2021? It was a major political task for outgoing minister Franc Weerwind (D66, Legal Protection), so devastating was Joustra's assessment of the adoption world. The former top official had identified corruption, fraud and child trafficking in almost all adopted countries investigated. According to Weerwind, the only option to prevent large-scale abuses in the future as much as possible was a completely new adoption system. A system with 'important guarantees' and a strict selection of adopting countries.

In order to be able to choose from which countries adoption should remain possible, Weerwind had an 'analysis' drawn up for each country. This meant that one adoptive country after another was eliminated, leaving six. And so, in November 2022, it was announced that Hungary passed Weerwind's test. The 'country report' of the Central European country covers just over two A4 pages and is predominantly positive. Justice therefore concludes that there are 'reasons to continue the adoption relationship'.

Major supplier

And that's a good thing, because Hungary has been a 'major supplier' of children to Dutch parents for ten years. Almost a quarter of the adopted children are now of Hungarian descent, 79 came to the Netherlands in the past five years. They are often a bit older and often come at the same time as a brother or sister. Sometimes they have medical conditions or psychological problems. They come from a Hungarian foster family or from a children's home. And many children come from poverty-stricken Roma families.

But the Hungarian adoption system is controversial, according to research that journalistic research platform Investico conducted for Trouw and De Groene Amsterdammer into international adoptions, in collaboration with TV program Zembla , the Flemish weekly Knack , the Hungarian medium Atlatszo and the newspaper 24 Chasa from Bulgaria.

The Hungarian practice is not in line with its own national legislation. The Hungarian Child Protection Act prohibits removing children from their homes due to poverty, which is also not permitted under international law and regulations, experts agree. “Poverty should never be a reason to take a child away from its parents, that goes against the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child,” says assistant professor of criminal law and criminology Elvira Loibl of Maastricht University.

Court case

The European Center for Roma Rights (ERRC) conducted a years-long lawsuit against the Hungarian authorities for violating this law. “Our studies showed that children are still taken from their parents due to poverty. We also wanted to demonstrate that racism and prejudice play a role when children are removed from home,” says Vivien Brassói.

ERRC eventually won the lawsuit in part in 2023, when the Hungarian Supreme Court ruled that children were indeed discriminated against based on their 'socio-economic status'. The court did not consider it proven that there was racism on the basis of their Roma ethnicity. But the Supreme Court did order the Orbán government to create policies to prevent poverty from playing a role in decisions to take children away from their parents. That deadline expired last February, with no results, according to Brassói. Hungarian authorities declined to respond to Investico's questions about adoption.

Expertise center critical

Fiom, the expertise center that guides Dutch adoptive parents, is also critical. In 2021, the organization wrote to the Ministry of Justice that the objection options for Hungarian parents appear to be inadequate, which is contrary to international agreements on adoption. Some of the Hungarian children have been adopted 'against the will of their parents' and 'the vast majority of these children are Roma', according to Fiom. Due to the lack of consent from the parents and 'when it appears that substantial children are offered from a population group that is discriminated against and for which no research has been conducted', Fiom cannot support the 'adoption'.

It is striking that Justice officials also noted the same internally, in an unpublished version of Weerwind's country report. It reports that '40 percent of Hungarian parents object to adoption', although 'an appeal rarely follows'. The officials also write that "parents and children" in Hungary have "limited access" "to complaint procedures and support in the child protection system if the guardian or social worker were to make decisions that are not in the best interests of the child." Those comments have disappeared in the final country report. The Justice Department states that 'the biological parent can object and appeal. Appeal procedures hardly occur in practice.'

Different versions

Anyone who reads the different versions of Weerwind's country analysis will see how officials in The Hague struggle with the unfavorable signals from Hungary. The final analysis contains nothing of significance about poverty. It merely notes that 'there is a lot of poverty' in the country. But in a previous, unpublished version, officials did confirm the existence of the Hungarian law that states that poverty cannot be a reason to remove a child from their home. In fact, they state: 'poverty is (along with limited prevention and early intervention services) one of the most common reasons why children do not grow up with their own parents'.

The Justice Department now says, about that difference, that the information about poverty is 'outdated' and that there are no 'recent figures' available on objection procedures against adoption, or that these figures are 'difficult to interpret'. But this was discussed during a working visit by the Dutch authorities to Hungary in 2022, the ministry said. 'The country analysis took into account that Hungary is making efforts to improve the youth system. There are also projects specifically aimed at Roma to support this group," according to a written response from the Ministry of Justice.

Swept under the carpet

“Poverty should not be a reason to separate a child from his family,” says assistant professor at Maastricht University Elvira Loibl. She obtained her PhD in international adoption. “If there are figures showing that this does happen in some cases in Hungary, then the Netherlands should consider whether Hungary is a suitable cooperation partner.”

Georg Frerks, emeritus professor at Utrecht University and lead researcher at the Joustra committee on international adoption, calls the differences between the reports 'staggering'. “The more critical elements or the problematic aspects have disappeared under the carpet,” he says. “Should this be a country that passed the exam, because we still needed a number of countries?”

Another thing that stands out is how Hungary provides information or handles (critical) questions. "Due to 'privacy considerations', Hungary provides 'limited information' about the background of the child's parents," Justice writes in the country report. The questions from the Netherlands also give Hungary the feeling of being 'not trusted'. 'During the working visit, agreements have now been made to 'improve cooperation' and there are 'sufficient opportunities for a critical conversation', according to the report.

Mutual trust

According to the emeritus professor, this also affects the trust that countries should have in each other. “You can of course try to see whether everything is correct by exchanging information and visiting countries. But you still have to rely on what the other country reports about this.”

Frerks visited Colombia in the context of the Joustra Committee investigation, in which he participated. The legislation there was 'pico bello' in order, he says. “We had a lesson there from a professor who told us how well everything was organised. But yes, she also said: 'It's beautiful on paper, but no one does anything with it'.”

International adoption is a sensitive issue for Western governments, which have to navigate between international agreements, the inadequate control they can exercise on adoption, persistent media attention for abuses and the polarized public debate.

House of Representatives in favor of an adoption freeze

Diplomatically difficult, as becomes apparent when the Netherlands is considering stopping adoptions altogether in 2022. "If a complete adoption freeze is chosen, this could really mean something internationally," officials write. 'To put it bluntly, we are withdrawing confidence in cooperation with other countries.' According to them, this would create 'a difficult situation' for the Netherlands.'

Last April, a suddenly widely adopted motion from SP MP Michiel van Nispen to Weerwind may offer a simpler way out of this dilemma. Now that a majority in parliament is in favor of an adoption freeze, he announces that he will come up with a new plan after the summer. Foreign adoptions must definitely be a thing of the past – except for the five hundred ongoing procedures.

Minister Franc Weerwind says in a response that Hungary was chosen because it can be investigated 'at an individual level very carefully and sharply' whether the adoption has been carried out correctly and meets all the conditions.