The U.S. intercountry adoption system has failed

It's time for a complete overhaul

OPINION:

In releasing its latest annual report to Congress on intercountry adoptions, the State Department claimed last month on X that intercountry adoption remains “viable, ethical, and transparent.” A year earlier, it praised its team for working “tirelessly” on behalf of families. Yet the numbers and the outcomes for children tell a different story.

What the report doesn’t say outright is this: In fiscal year 2024, the U.S. processed the fewest intercountry adoptions in our recorded history. The report also fails to mention that, despite our government having far fewer adoptions to process, the length of time processing cases has dramatically increased, forcing children to stay in orphanages for months and often years longer than necessary.

The State Department’s 2024 Annual Report on Intercountry Adoption confirms what advocacy groups, adoptive families and child welfare experts already know: The intercountry adoption system is deeply broken, and minor tweaks won’t suffice. A sweeping redesign built on genuine bilateral partnerships and a child-centered strategy is urgently needed.

It’s not enough for the State Department to churn out internal regulations; if it is committed to serving in the leadership role over intercountry adoption, it needs to work collaboratively with partners in the United States and abroad to serve children’s interests.

The numbers tell a story of decline.

At its peak in 2004, the United States completed 22,988 intercountry adoptions. Now, that number has dropped to 1,172, a staggering 95% reduction. This dramatic level of drop-off is a sign of systemic failure.

That decline reflects more than demographic shifts abroad or pandemic-induced delays. It reveals a U.S. system that failed to keep adoption channels open and actively suppressed new country partnerships from forming. Yes, countries such as China, Ethiopia, Guatemala and South Korea, which once facilitated many adoptions, have either closed their adoption programs or sharply restricted them. Still, we should ask about the U.S. government’s role in those decisions, especially given that each of those countries continues to have many children residing in orphanages rather than on a path toward family reunification or domestic adoption in their country.

Additionally, the U.S. has failed to partner with many other countries on behalf of children, or U.S. authorities have drawn out such extended processing times as to make adoption unrealistic.

Where diplomacy is missing, children suffer

One critical driver of the decline is the State Department’s inaction on diplomacy. The fiscal year 2024 report barely references efforts to negotiate new bilateral frameworks or revive suspended adoption programs, simply using nearly the same language as prior years’ reports. Instead, the department’s focus seems to remain solely on regulatory compliance, ensuring that accredited agencies meet rigorous standards under the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 and the Universal Accreditation Act of 2012.

Are these standards good? Yes, to the extent that they prevent bad actors or inappropriate placements, but they won’t lead to a single adoption. In other words, they are good but not sufficient.

Without proactive engagement, the situation resembles a hospital that boasts perfect hygiene protocols while leaving patients untreated. We all recognize the absurdity of this, especially if the hospital then produced a report on its work and congratulated itself on social media. (If it did so multiple years in a row, we would question whether it really understood its purpose or mission.)

Ethical oversight is essential; a system that prioritizes rulemaking over relationship‑building leaves children in limbo. Without outreach to foreign authorities or proactive efforts to reengage with other countries, children who could be with families will remain in orphanages. Children in orphanages or institutional care face developmental and emotional harm, especially those who age out of legal eligibility to join a family via adoption. Many waiting children are older, are part of a sibling group, or have medical or developmental needs. We should reject the false dichotomy that our system can be ethical or functional because it can and should be both.

It’s time to rebuild, not just report

Far beyond compliance, the department should see itself as an international architect and partner in actively finding families for orphaned children. That means dedicated collaboration with U.S. adoption agencies and foreign countries’ adoption authorities. It means coordinating efforts and problem-solving issues with other government authorities, such as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

With just 1,172 adoptions completed while hundreds of thousands of children remain in orphanages, the system has collapsed.

Comprehensive reform is essential, one that foregrounds diplomacy, partnerships and child welfare outcomes over procedural inertia. The State Department must transition from passive recordkeeper to proactive oversight of new, ethically grounded international adoption pathways.

Congress should exercise its oversight authority over the department’s work, holding it accountable for its mandate to serve children and families. If the State Department continues to show that it is not up to this task, Congress should appoint another agency to oversee adoptions.

Without swift and radical change, children will remain stuck, families will remain waiting and hope for their future will dim.

• Ryan Hanlon is the president and CEO of the National Council for Adoption.