'Donated' is the core of the adopted child

'Donated' is the core of the adopted child

(A response to five articles about adoption in the Volkskrant from 19 to 30 December 2006)

The core of the article by Saskia Harkema and Jan Smits is very good: they are very aware of the sadness and inevitability of ' being relinquished' and that is the core of adoption for the child. It's a shame that this gets overshadowed by the reference to colonialism. Whatever anyone's motives for adoption, no child wants to be given up . Although the M.Lolkema article 'Unique opportunity' is not known, much research has already been done in which this is demonstrated: among others Nancy Verrier, 1993. From the same year 1993 also dates the 'Hague Adoption Convention' that protects the best interests of the child. puts first. Putting that interest first has proven time and again very difficult.

In his article Paul Vertegaal of Spoorloos also first mentions the pain and humiliation for biological adults of having to give up a child. Giving up, however painful it may be, is active. ' To be relinquished' is passive. Should the child also have those burdens placed on the shoulders of adults? The child is the only one who hasn't had a choice, that it all happens. The child should be at the forefront of opinions about adoption. Even if their adoption is successful and they don't want to undo it, the 'pain of a successful adoption ' can present a lifelong dilemma for the abandoned child, which they continue to struggle with.

Every child that is born deserves parents who wish to have children. There should be no doubt about that wish among adoptive parents. However , the strong desire to have children that is often spoken of by adoptive parents also entails (the risk) that grief must be compensated for this. That is not the interest of an adopted child and should not be on their shoulders.

In her article 'Adoption is not chocolate', Henny Corver also puts adults first and pleads for selfish motives to allow the child to cope with life. To save what can still be saved afterwards? And then with humor and optimism and the ability to put things into perspective? To me that seems more like denying and covering up guilt about selfish motives. It has now been scientifically proven that taking the child's pain seriously and sharing it helps better.

Adoption is also not intended to bridge the gap between rich and poor. Any child that is put up for adoption for that reason is always better helped with a financial adoption to give the child a better future with its own parent(s).

The article of December 30, 2006: 'Protecting a child is the core of adoption', by Stan Meuwese describes exactly what it should be about. The article is realistic when it comes to economic aspects and as a child protection measure really puts the best interests of the child first. He is critical of adoptive parents who, apparently in their own interest, invest a lot of money. I endorse his plea for a new turn in adoption:

don't cut through old family ties ruthlessly

offering international foster care for (medical) treatment of the child if this is not available in the country of origin.

A combination of both starting points then leads to maintaining contact with and returning to one's own biological parents as quickly as possible.

It is the only article in this Volkskrant series that really puts the interests of the adopted child first and takes a position therein. The name of the institution also represents this: Defense for Children international.

Ina Hut of Wereldkinderen remains in two minds, first checking whether it is possible in her own country, but immediately stating that " a foreign adoptive family is better than a children's home" and creating fog again by raising the question of what the The starting point is really: the desire of adults or the interests of the child?

No, “ a family” is better than a children's home, and the Hague Convention has determined the starting point. The premise is clear.

It would be good if this 'World Children' organization started the new turn of Stan Meuwese. Then the 25,000 euros from 3,500 parents who have not been able to adopt one of the 700 children can be used for those children where the need is great, as Stan Meuwese describes: older than 3 and/or with a disability. Not putting your own interests first, but working in the interests of these children, so that they are helped as much as possible by their own parents and at least as much as possible in their own environment.

The objective of 'Plan Nederland' is not that crazy. In addition to offering structural help to a community, personal contact with a child at a distance is also possible there, which can give the feeling of having your 'own' child at a distance. In this way, adoptive parents can choose waiver parents, ie. become 'remote parents'. In this way, the 3500 waiting parents have a valuable task to keep the group of children who would benefit from adoption as small as possible.

It is important that the social new turn of the adoption system, which is based on the 'Hague Adoption Convention', is also translated politically. The Standing Committee of Justice on Intercountry Adoption has traditionally focused too much on the best interests of adults as the last option for childless couples to start a family. It is even considering raising the age of aspiring adoptive parents (written consultation 25 April 2006).

Do adopted children ask for old parents? Fortunately, the PvdA sees the not inconceivable danger that the adopted child will have to go through another loss.

The articles mainly dealt with foreign adoptions. But the considerations that apply to foreign adoptions also apply to Dutch adopted children.

With so many 'prospect parents' in the Netherlands and at the start of a new cabinet, in which adoption by the CU and the CDA is even seen as a suitable alternative to abortion, let's pay attention that ' the best interests of the child are not given up'. remains high on the agenda. A child does not also have to solve the ethical problems of adults.

There are many other ways for people who "want to" (help) have a child:

There are plenty of children in Dutch youth care who would benefit from extra ' remote parents ' who support the biological parents. This offers a (new) possibility to have a 'your own' child a little closer to home than far away in the developing world.

A new year, a new cabinet and hopefully this new turn of adoption.

Femke van Trier te Doorn, youth care worker at Altrecht GGZ Utrecht and, together with her Dutch adoptive daughter Esther, author of the book 'Ik ben haarkind': 'the pain of a successful adoption', publisher Aspekt (2006).