Adopted from India: National Councillor Nik Gugger launches petition against ban

The Federal Council wants to ban adoptions from abroad. Now, opposition is mounting. However, opponents and supporters agree on one point.

Shortly :

• In January, the Federal Council announced a ban on adoptions from abroad.
• Now, resistance is brewing. EPP National Councilor Nik Gugger, himself adopted from India, has launched a petition against the ban. The FDP plans to submit a motion on April 11.
• Supporters of the ban take the view that even stricter controls could not prevent illegal adoptions.

Nik Gugger still remembers it clearly: As a six-year-old, he was walking through the village with his parents when suddenly someone called out: "Ah, look, there's Gugger's souvenir."

This experience doesn't stop there. "There were racist remarks from time to time, which made me feel powerless," says the EPP National Councilor, who was born in India in 1970, adopted by a Swiss couple, and grew up near Thun.

Despite the difficult experiences, Gugger considers his adoption a success and his life a stroke of luck. "I had a loving environment and a career," he says. It's clear to him that, as the son of a widowed woman, he would have had no future in India. "Would I have preferred to end up on the streets in India instead of facing these challenges in Switzerland?" he asks – and immediately answers with a resolute "No."

The only National Council member who has adopted from abroad is therefore clearly opposed to the ban on foreign adoptions announced by the Federal Council in January.

Already over 5000 signatures

The Federal Council's decision is based on several research reports that revealed that several thousand children were adopted into Switzerland through illegal practices between 1970 and 1999. A commission of experts commissioned by the federal government subsequently concluded that a "complete exit from the practice of international adoptions" was a "serious option."

From Nik Gugger's perspective, however, such an exit would be an overreaction. He believes that one can discuss whether international adoptions need to be more strictly regulated, "but why should they be banned outright?" Gugger has therefore launched a petition calling on the Federal Council to stop the plan. Within a week, over 5,000 signatures had already been collected. His goal: 10,000 signatures by the end of March.

FDP motion against ban

Resistance is also forming elsewhere. At the beginning of February, a group of adoptive families founded the Swiss Adoption and Family Group (GAFS), which aims to prevent the ban through public relations work.

In addition, the FDP is planning a motion calling on the Federal Council to halt the drafting of a ban and instead focus on possible regulatory improvements. There are many successful and legally sound international adoptions, says initiator and FDP National Councilor Simone Gianini. "A ban is disproportionate."

To ensure the motion is prioritized in the Council, it will be introduced as a committee motion in the National Council's Legal Affairs Committee on April 11. Gianini says the announced ban is causing uncertainty for couples in the process of adopting, and that it also stigmatizes adoptive families. Therefore, the issue is urgent.

Around 37 international adoptions annually

In Switzerland, approximately 37 children are adopted from abroad each year. Federal Councilor Beat Jans stated this when he faced critical questions about the debate in parliament last week. The planned ban would not come into force until 2030 at the earliest, Jans said—about five years from now.

If a couple wants to adopt a child from abroad, they have to go through a long-term process. So, does the announced ban already affect potential adoptive parents in the adoption process?

For potential adoptive parents who are at the beginning of the process, the time until a possible ban is "certainly short," says Cora Bachmann, executive director of the organization "Foster and Adoptive Children Switzerland" (Pach). However, not many uncertain couples have contacted the organization yet. Bachmann emphasizes that it is still possible to submit adoption applications. Information events for interested parties are currently well attended.

Measures instead of bans?

Barbara Gysi, the president of Pach and a SP National Council member, clearly supports an exit: "I personally support the ban because, even with strict regulations, you can never completely eliminate illegalities," she says. The organization itself does not advocate an exit per se. However, if a ban is the only way to prevent abuses, then they welcome it, says Cora Bachmann.

The Back to the Roots association, which advocates for the concerns of those affected by irregular adoptions, takes a similar view: "We demand that illegal adoptions into Switzerland be consistently stopped. Whether this is achieved through a phase-out or stricter measures is secondary to us," says Sarah Ineichen, president of the association and herself adopted from Sri Lanka. However, she doubts that measures alone can achieve this goal. "Our controls only extend to the Swiss border."

Adoptions since 2000 are a “blind spot”

Ineichen also criticizes the emotional nature of the debate surrounding a possible end to international adoptions. It's not about pitting positive examples against negative ones. "If we want to have a well-founded discussion about international adoptions, there must be an independent study of international adoptions from 2000 to the present," says Ineichen. Because this remains a "blind spot."

The Gafs association, which opposes the ban, also sees it this way. The situation has changed since the 1970s and 1980s, especially since Switzerland joined the Hague Convention in 1993, when stricter rules apply to international adoptions. "The proposed ban is based on data that is now outdated," says Laura Ott, spokesperson for the association.

At least on this point, supporters and opponents of the ban agree.