Content uploaded by Peter Selman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Peter Selman on Jun 24, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://isw.sagepub.com
International Social Work
DOI: 10.1177/0020872809337681
2009; 52; 575 International Social Work
Peter Selman
The rise and fall of intercountry adoption in the 21st century
http://isw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/52/5/575
The online version of this article can be found at:
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Association of Schools of Social Work
International Council of Social Welfare
International Federation of Social Workers
can be found at:International Social Work Additional services and information for
http://isw.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://isw.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://isw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/52/5/575 Citations
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
International Social Work 52(5): 575–594
i s w
Sage Publications: Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC
DOI: 10.1177/0020872809337681
The rise and fall of intercountry adoption
in the 21st century
Peter Selman
This article focuses on the remarkable changes in the number of
intercountry adoptions (ICAs) in the first decade of the new mil-
lennium (Table 1). In the 50 years or so following the initiation of
transracial inter national adoption from Korea in 1953, global numbers
of children moving for ICA had steadily increased to an estimated total
worldwide of over 45,000 a year in 2004 (Selman, 2006). At that stage
there seemed to be an assumption that growth would continue, and the
number of applicants in receiving states continued to rise. However,
the number of adoptions worldwide fell by 17 percent between 2004
and 2007 (see Table 3 later). At the time of writing less than half the
receiving states had published statistics for 2008. The total number
of USA ‘orphan visas’ issued in 2008
1
was 17,438, 2000 less than
in 2007, and 24 percent below the highest recorded number of 22,884 in
2004 (Office of Children’s Issues, 2009). Numbers have also fallen in
the Nordic countries, the Netherlands and Australia. In contrast, the
number of ICAs to Italy rose by 16 percent to 3977, which was 550
more than in 2007, and a small increase was also recorded in Belgium
and France.
The article will review trends in receiving states and states of origin
from 2001 to 2007, with a detailed study of selected countries between
2003 and 2007. The global and regional totals cited are based on an
aggregation of data from over 20 countries which are primarily receiving
states. Problems of data are discussed elsewhere (Selman, 2002, 2006).
Key words adoption trends children intercountry adoption numbers
receiving states states of origin
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
576 International Social Work volume 52(5)
The article ends with a consideration of the implications of the cur-
rent changes, for example the growing numbers of ‘approved’ poten-
tial adoptive parents, many of whom may never receive a child, and
the potential for further marketization of ICA leading to an increase in
child trafficking.
ICA in the 21st century
The fall in adoptions since 2004 has brought global numbers back to the
level of 2001 but they are still higher than in the late 1990s. Figure 1
shows trends from 1998 to 2007 for 23 receiving states (World), the top
five, the USA and Europe (18 European states).
Figure 2 shows the changes in numbers in the four receiving states
taking most children after the USA.
Table 1 Intercountry adoption to selected receiving countries,
1998–2007, by rank in 2004 (peak year in bold)
Country 1998 2001 2003 2004 2006 2007
USA 15,774 19,237 21,616 22,884 20,679 19,613
Spain 1487 3428 3951 5541 472 3648
France 3777 3094 3995 4079 3977 3162
Italy 2233 1797 2772 3402 3188 3420
Canada 2222 1874 2180 1955 1535 1713
Subtotal for
5 top countries
25,493 29,430 34,514 37,861 33,851 31,556
Netherlands 825 1122 1154 1307 816 778
Sweden 928 1044 1046 1109 879 800
Norway 643 713 714 706 448 426
Denmark 624 631 523 528 447 429
Australia 245 289 278 370 421 405
Total
a
(to 23 states)
31,710
(21)
36,379
(23)
41,530
(23)
45,288
(23)
39,742
(22)
b
37,526
(23)
% to top 5 80 81 83 84 85 84
% to USA 49 53 52 51 52 52
Notes:
a
13 other countries are included in the overall totals: Belgium, Cyprus, Finland,
Germany, Iceland, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the
UK with the addition of Andorra and Israel from 2001.
b
Data for Cyprus 2006 not available.
Source: Statistics provided by central authorities of the 23 receiving states.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 577
Trends in ICA in receiving states
The total number of children received by all countries increased by
15 percent between 1998 and 2001. During this period some countries,
for example Canada, France and Italy, experienced a significant reduction
in numbers (15–20%), while others had an above-average rise, notably
the Netherlands, where numbers increased by over a third and Spain,
where numbers more than doubled (Table 1). In the next three years
there was an acceleration, with the global total rising by 25 percent
from 2001 to 2004 (Table 2).
Figure 1 Trends in intercountry adoptions to 23 receiving countries; top five
receiving countries; USA and Europe, 1998–2007
Figure 2 Countries receiving most children after the USA, 1998–2007
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
578 International Social Work volume 52(5)
The rise in number of children in receiving states, 1998–2004
The number of ICAs worldwide increased by 42 percent between 1998
and 2004 (Table 1) but there was wide variation between receiving
countries, with Spain experiencing a rise of 273 percent and Ireland
a rise of 171 percent. Table 2 shows changes in 13 receiving states
between 2001 and 2004.
The decline in numbers, 2004–7
The steady increase in the global number of ICAs was reversed in 2005
and the decline accelerated in 2006 and 2007. Overall there is an esti-
mated decline of 17 percent (Table 3).
Only Malta and Italy show an increase over the four years and for
Italy numbers fell in 2004–5 before rising in subsequent years. The
largest falls were in the Nordic countries, the Netherlands and Spain.
States of origin in the 21st century
The data presented in the tables are estimates based on children
received by the 23 receiving states listed in Table 1. The accuracy of
Table 2 Percentage change in number of adoptions, 2001–4, selected
receiving states (peak year in bold)
Adoptions
2001
Adoptions
2002
Adoptions
2003
Adoptions
2004
Change
2001–4
%
Ireland 179 357 358 398 +122.4
Italy 1797 2225 2772 3402 +89.3
Spain 3428 3625 3951 5541 +61.6
Finland 218 246 238 289 +32.6
France 3094 3551 3995 4079 +31.8
Australia 289 294 278 370 +28.0
USA 19,237 20,099 21,616 22,884 +19.0
Netherlands 1122 1130 1154 1307 +16.5
Sweden 1044 1107 1046 1109 +6.2
Canada 1874 1926 2180 1955 +4.3
Norway 713 747 714 706 –5.5
Israel 269 165 256 226 –16.0
Denmark 631 609 523 528 –16.3
Total
a
36,379 38,524 41,530 45,288 +24.5
Note:
a
23 states as listed in Table 1.
Source: Statistics provided by central authorities of the 13 listed receiving states.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 579
such estimates is discussed by Kane (1993) and Selman (2002, 2006).
While most receiving states shared the general trend of a rise in num-
bers to 2004 and a subsequent decline, the story is very different for
states of origin. Table 4 shows the changes in the numbers for the coun-
tries sending most children in 2003.
Changes in states of origin, 2001–7
In contrast to most receiving states, the pattern of change over this
period varies greatly among countries. Figure 3 shows the trends in total
adoptions for the four countries (China, Russia, Guatemala and Ethiopia)
sending most children in 2007. Adoptions from China peaked in 2005;
those from Russia in 2004. Adoptions from Guatemala and Ethiopia rose
annually throughout the period.
The decline in intercountry adoption, 2004–7
During this period, estimated global numbers fell by nearly 8000
(Table 3). Ten of the states of origin listed in Table 4 experienced a
Table 3 Changes in number of adoptions, 2004–7, ranked by
percentage change 2004/5–7 (peak year in bold)
2004 2005 2006 2007 % change
2004/5–7
Finland 289 308 218 176 –42.9
Netherlands 1307 1185 816 778 –40.5
Norway 706 582 448 426 –39.7
Spain 5541 5423 4472 3648 –34.2
Sweden 1109 1083 879 800 –27.9
Denmark 528 585 450 426 –26.8
Belgium 470 471 383 358 –24.0
France 4079 4136 3977 3162 –23.5
USA
a
22,884 22,728 20,679 19,613
a
–14.3
Australia 370 434 421 405 –7.3
Israel 226 191 176 218 –3.5
Canada 1955 1871 1525 1713 –1.5
Italy
b
3402 2840 3188 3420
b
+0.5
Malta 46 39 60 64 +39
Total
c
45,288 43,857 39,742 37,526 –17.1
Notes:
a
Total to USA fell by a further 11% in FY 2008 to 17,438.
b
Total to Italy rose by 16% to 3977 in 2008.
c
23 states as listed in Table 1.
Source: Statistics provided by central authorities of the 14 listed receiving states.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
580 International Social Work volume 52(5)
Table 4 Selected states of origin, 2003–7, by rank, 2003
(peak year in bold)
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Ratio
a
in
peak year
China 11,228 13,404 14,493 10,740 8753 0.83
Russia 7745 9425 7471 6783 4873 7.7
Guatemala 2677 3424 3857 4227 4844 10.9
Korea 2287 2258 2101 1899 1265 4.8
Ukraine 2052 2021 1982 1053 1619 5.0
Colombia 1750 1741 1470 1629 1626 1.8
India 1172 1062 857 798 941 0.03
Haiti 1055 1159 914 1063 736 5.4
Bulgaria 962 378 125 96 95 15.5
Vietnam 935 483 1190 1364 1692 1.02
Kazakhstan 861 903 823 699 753 6.0
Ethiopia 854 1527 1778 2172 3031 0.93
Belarus 656 627 23 34 14 7.5
Total
b
41,530 45,288 43,857 39,742 37,526
Notes:
a
Ratio = number of adoptions per 1000 live births.
b
Total children sent to 23 receiving states.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on states of origin in statistics provided by the
receiving states listed in Table 1. Korean data provided by Ministry of Health and
Welfare.
Figure 3 Countries sending most children, 2001–7
reduction in total children sent between 2004 and 2007 and three saw
a substantial increase. Table 5 shows the contribution to the decline of
three key states of origin and the counter-effect of the three countries
that experienced an increase over the same period.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 581
The reduction in the number of children sent by China and Russia
would have had even more impact if it were not for the continuing
growth in the number of children sent by Guatemala (mainly to the
USA) and the large rise in numbers from Ethiopia and Vietnam. As
the number of children sent by China, Russia and Korea is expected to
decline further and the trend in Guatemala is predicted to reverse, global
numbers seem likely to fall even more rapidly in the future, unless new
sending countries emerge. The statistics for 2008 in the USA confirm
this. Total numbers fell by 11 percent from 19,613 in 2007 to 17,438
in 2008. The number from China fell by over 500; the number from
Russia by 450. Only Ethiopia had an increase – of just under 500 –
while the number of visas for Vietnam and Guatemala fell. However,
the number of children received by Italy rose in 2008.
There are well over 100 countries involved in sending children for ICA
and it is impossible to review trends in all of these. However, the years
from 1997 have indicated some clear changes in movements between
continents. In 1997, 67 percent of children adopted in Spain came from
Table 5 Contribution to decline in number of adoptions, 2004–7, of
three key sending countries and counter-influence of three countries
sending more children (peak year in bold)
Country 2004 2005 2007 Total change
2004–7
Change
2004–7 (%)
Total sent to
23 receiving states
45,288 43,857 37,526 7762 –17
Countries sending fewer children
China 13,404 14,493 8753 –4651 –35(–40)
a
Russia 9425 7471 4873 –4552 –48
Korea 2258 2101 1265 –993 –44
Total for 3 countries 25,087 24,065 14,891 –10,196 –41
Countries sending more children
b
Guatemala 3424 3857 4844 +1420 +41.5
Ethiopia 1527 1778 3031 +1504 +98.5
Vietnam 483 1190 1692 +1209 +250
Total for 3 countries 5434 6555 9567 +4133 +76
Notes:
a
Bracketed figure is decline from 2005 when number of adoptions peaked.
b
In FY2008 the number of adoptions from Guatemala to the USA fell by 12% and those
from Vietnam by 9%; but adoptions from Ethiopia rose by 37%.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on states of origin in statistics provided by the
receiving states listed in Table 1. Korean data provided by Ministry of Health and
Welfare.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
582 International Social Work volume 52(5)
Latin America. By 2000 this had fallen to 21 percent and eastern Europe
had become the main source, accounting for 47 percent. By 2005 the
growth of adoption from China meant that Asia was the main source
at 53 percent and the contribution of Africa alone showed growth, to
15 percent of the total by 2007. It now seems likely that Europe will
cease to be the major sender it has been since 1990 and that Africa will
be the only continent showing an increase. The following four sections
will look at trends in four continents with some brief case studies.
Intercountry adoption from Asia in the 21st century
For many years Asian countries were the main source of children for
ICA in both Europe and the USA. Adoption from Korea dates back to
1953 and the Korean War.
2
In the USA, in particular, Korea domin-
ated the scene, accounting for over 50 percent of children adopted from
abroad in the years 1972 to 1987 (Altstein and Simon, 1991: 14–16).
By then, nearly 111,000 children had been adopted worldwide from
Korea and by 2007 the total had risen to over 160,000, despite a sharp
decline in annual totals after the Seoul Olympics in 1988. Adoptions
from the Philippines started in the 1960s; from India and Vietnam in
the 1970s. Kane (1993) lists three Asian countries – Korea, India and
Sri Lanka – in the top five states sending children for ICA in the 1980s.
In the mid-1990s, China entered the ICA arena and is now the most
important Asian state of origin. Between 2001 and 2007 China was the
origin of more than half the children sent from Asian countries, but
India, Korea and Vietnam continue to send significant numbers. Table 6
shows annual totals for the nine Asian countries sending most children
in 2003. By 2007, some – China, Korea and Cambodia – were sending
substantially fewer; adoptions from Vietnam were rising after an earlier
moratorium.
Although the number sent by China in 2007 was only 22 percent
down on 2003, the noteworthy change in China over this period was the
dramatic fall of 40 percent between 2005 and 2007 (Table 7), a decline
likely to continue in 2008.
Figure 4 shows the very different trajectories in four other Asian
countries between 2001 and 2007.
Intercountry adoption from Latin America and the Caribbean
Adoption from Latin America dates back to the 1970s, when Colombia
began to send children to the USA, becoming the second most import-
ant source of children after Korea from 1975. By 1980, El Salvador and
Mexico also featured in the top six states sending children to the USA.
Kane (1993) found that in the 1980s six of the top 10 sending countries
(which together accounted for 90% of adoptions in that decade) were in
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 583
Latin America. By 2006, only two of those – Guatemala and Colombia –
remained in the top 10 (Selman, 2009a: 51).
Figure 5 shows the pattern of adoption in the four states sending
most children in 2003. Guatemala has clearly been of most significance
Table 6 Adoptions from Asia, 2003–7, and decline from peak year
(in bold) to 2007, or increase 2003–7
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Change (%)
China 11,228 13,404 14,493 10,740 8753 –40
Korea 2287 2258 2101 1899 1265 –45
India 1172 1062 857 834 978 –17
Vietnam 935 483 1190 1364 1692 +80
Thailand 495 515 414 360 438 –12
Philippines 405 411 480 460 532 +31
Cambodia 309 94 95 159 167 –46
Taiwan 221 189 237 260 262 +18
Nepal 195 269 182 395 222 –44
Source: Data for Korea are provided by the Korean Ministry for Health and Welfare.
Numbers for the other eight countries are calculated from data on adoptions from the nine
countries in statistics provided by the receiving states listed in Table 1.
Table 7 International adoptions from China
a
to 15 receiving states,
2000–7; six countries receiving most children, 2005
a
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
USA
b
4681 5053 6859 7044 7906 6493 5453
Spain 941 1427 1043 2389 2753 1759 1003
Canada 618 771 1108 1001 973 608 658
Netherlands 445 510 567 800 666 362 365
Sweden 220 316 373 497 462 314 280
France 130 210 360 491 458 314 176
Total to
16 states
a
7725 9135 11,228 13,404 14,493 10,738 8753
Notes:
a
In 2006 the China Centre for Adoption Affairs reported links with 16 countries.
The table shows the top six countries. The totals include children sent to Australia,
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK, but
no data were available for children sent to Singapore. In 2008 the China Central Adop-
tion Authority announced an agreement to send children to Italy from 2009. The small
number of adoptions to Switzerland (about four a year) is not included, as their status
is unclear.
b
Latest figures for USA in FY2008 show that adoptions from China fell by nearly 30%
to 3909, the lowest number since 1987.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on adoptions from China in statistics provided by
the 15 receiving states listed.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
584 International Social Work volume 52(5)
in recent years. Figures submitted by Guatemala to the 2005 Hague
Special Commission show a rise in transnational adoptions from 1347
in 1998 to 3572 in 2004. Estimates based on adoptions recorded by
receiving states (Table 8) indicate a continued rise through 2007.
Table 8 shows annual totals for 2003–7 for nine countries from
Central and South America and the Caribbean, with the adoption ratios
(adoptions per 1000 live births). In 2007, Guatemala had the highest
ratio of all sending countries, with one out of every 100 live births
leading to an overseas adoption, a level exceeded only by Korea in the
1980s, Romania in 1990–1 and Bulgaria in 2002–3.
Figure 5 Trends in number of children sent by four Latin American countries,
2003–7
Figure 4 Trends in number of children sent by four Asian countries, 2001–7
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 585
In 1999, 68 percent of the children sent by Guatemala went
to the USA, but Canada, France, Spain and the Netherlands also
received significant numbers (Table 9). By 2004, over 95 percent
was going to the USA while the number going to Canada, Spain and
the Netherlands had fallen sharply. In 2007, the USA received 98
percent of the estimated total of 4844 and only Italy, Israel and the UK
3
received more than 10 children. Following Guatemala’s new adop-
tion law in December 2007, the US ceased to accept new applications
for adoption, and this continued to be the case in March 2009
(US Department of State, 2009), with little prospect of this changing
in the near future.
In contrast, only 12 percent of adoptions from Brazil in 2007 were to
the USA and over two-thirds went to Italy. Numbers fell further in 2008
and Brazil has indicated that it will limit adoptions further as there is
no Hague-accredited US agency in the country. Brazil has reduced the
number of international adoptions to 500 a year from over 1600 in 1993
and now only sends children over age 5 or younger ones with special
needs or who are in sibling groups. Many other countries in the region,
such as Bolivia, Colombia and El Salvador, send children primarily to
Europe.
Elsewhere in South and Central America the number of children sent
for adoption is well below the level of the 1990s. In the USA, in 1990
13 of the top 20 sending countries were in the Caribbean and Central
or South America. By 2006, only four of those – Guatemala, Colombia,
Table 8 Adoptions from Central and South America and Caribbean,
2003–7 (peak year in bold)
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Ratio
a
in
peak year
Guatemala 2677 3424 3857 4227 4844 10.79
Colombia 1750 1741 1470 1629 1626 1.80
Haiti 1055 1159 914 1063 736 4.62
Brazil 478 487 463 513 486 0.14
Bolivia 273 260 250 130 134 1.02
Peru 118 91 163 174 164 0.30
Chile 100 93 85 81 80 0.43
Mexico 79 145 149 139 167 0.08
Jamaica 79 75 85 69 66 1.63
Note:
a
Ratio = number of adoptions per 1000 live births.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on adoptions from the nine countries in statistics
provided by the 23 receiving states listed in Table 1.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
586 International Social Work volume 52(5)
Haiti and Mexico – remained in the top 20 and five (Chile, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Honduras and Paraguay) sent few or no children to the USA
(Selman, 2009a). In 1991, Chile sent 302 children to the USA; in 2007,
it sent none to the USA but 60 to Italy. The children sent now are
largely over the age of 5 and many are from minority ethnic groups.
Argentina has outlawed ICA given its tragic history in that country, and
now only classifies itself as a receiving state.
Intercountry adoption from Europe
During the period 1948–62, US parents adopted nearly 20,000 children
from abroad. Many of them came from European countries: 3116 from
Greece influenced also by the Greek civil war; 1845 from Germany;
and 744 from Austria (Selman, 2009a). As late as 1967, there were
more children arriving in the USA from Germany than from Korea.
England and Italy featured alongside these two countries in the top five
states of origin for that year. But by the 1980s there were very few
ICAs from Europe.
Table 9 Adoption from Guatemala, 1999–2007: states receiving more
than 20 children in at least one of the listed years
1999 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
USA
a
1002 2328 3264 3783 4135 4728
France 186 247 72 <50
c
<50
c
<50
c
Canada 74 0 0 0 0 0
Spain 70 28 8 3 0 8
Netherlands 41 4 4 1 1 3
Italy 22 20 8 16 13 14
UK
b
15 29 17 21 30 46
Israel n/a 4 11 17 21 31
Total to 23 states 1453
d
2677 3424 3857
e
4227
e
4844
e
% to USA 68 87 95 (98) (98) (98)
Notes:
a
In 2008 the number of children sent to the USA fell to 4123.
b
The UK no longer permits adoptions from Guatemala.
c
Since 2005 France has listed only states sending 50 or more children.
d
1998 total had no data from Israel or Ireland, countries which received 10–20 adoptees
a year from 2001.
e
Totals for 2005–7 are underestimates as no data were available for adoptions to Austria,
France or Switzerland; proportion to USA may be nearer to 95%.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on adoptions from Guatemala in statistics
provided by the 23 receiving states listed in Table 1.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 587
It is only in the last 20 years that Europe has once again become a
significant source of children for adoption in the USA, initially with
adoptions from Romania, from 1990–1, and later from other eastern
European countries, such as Russia, Bulgaria and Ukraine (Selman,
2009c). At the turn of the century, eastern Europe continued to be
a major source for children worldwide, but all that changed when
Romania and Bulgaria reduced their numbers sharply as they sought
membership of the European Union.
In 2003 Bulgaria had the highest ratio of adoptions to live births (15.5
per 1000) of all sending countries (Selman, 2006: 195). The number
of ICAs fell from just over 960 in 2003 to less than 100 in 2006 and
2007 (Selman, 2009c: 147). However, the most striking change was in
Romania, which had accounted for about a third of all ICAs between
January 1990 and July 1991 (Defence for Children International, 1991;
UNICEF, 1998), but finally ended all ICAs to non-relatives in 2005
(Selman, 2009a). The number of adoptions from Romania had fallen
from over 2000 per annum in 1999 and 2000, when the ratio would have
been higher than 10 adoptions per 100 births (Selman, 2009c: 146).
Other countries such as Belarus and Russia also sent fewer children. The
number of children from Belarus fell from 656 in 2003 to 13 in 2007; the
number from Russia fell from 9425 in 2004 to 4844 in 2007, with further
reductions in the number sent to the USA and Italy in 2008. There had been
growing concerns in the Russian media over the fate of children sent for
adoption, following reports of the murder of children by their adoptive parents
in the USA (Khabbibullina, 2006) and the case of the 5-year-old girl adopted
by a paedophile for purposes of sexual exploitation (Smolin, 2007: 20–31).
In 2006, Russia announced that it intended to re-accredit all foreign agencies
involved in the placement of children, and in 2009 released a new list of US
agencies with which they would no longer work.
Although most countries of central and eastern Europe have reduced
numbers, the exceptions are five of the countries which joined the EU
in 2003 – Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland – all of which
sent more children for ICA in 2007 than in 2003 (Selman, 2009c: 147).
Intercountry adoption from Africa
In the 1980s and 1990s there were few ICAs from Africa. Only two
countries – Ethiopia and Madagascar – featured in the top 25 sending
countries in the 1980s according to Kane (1993). The numbers sent by
these two countries to France increased in the 1990s: Ethiopia from
70 in 1991 to 217 in 2003; and Madagascar from 104 to 325 over the
same period. After 2003 the number of children sent by Madagascar
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
588 International Social Work volume 52(5)
fell steadily, but numbers from Ethiopia rose, doubling in France and
increasing very rapidly in the USA and Spain, which had become the
main destinations for Ethiopian children by 2007 (Table 11 opposite).
Table 10 shows the changes in seven key African states of origin in
2003–7. Only Madagascar has reduced numbers significantly. The rapid
growth in Ethiopia (Table 11) is partly due to an increase in the number
of children sent to the USA, which some attribute to the publicity over
the adoption of an Ethiopian child by film stars Angelina Jolie and Brad
Pitt. Adoptions from Liberia are almost entirely to the USA.
Ethiopia has clearly been of greatest significance in global terms. The
estimated number of children sent for ICA has risen from under 500 in
1998 to nearly 3000 in 2007 and is expected to rise further in 2008.
Nearly 80 percent go to the USA, Spain and Italy. But the adoption
ratio remains modest and if Ethiopia were to send children on the scale
of Russia and Korea, the total numbers could rise to over 10,000.
Much has been made of the huge number of AIDS orphans in
Ethiopia, but most of them are cared for by their extended family and
the priority is to give support to grandparents and other caring relatives.
Fears that Africa might be seen as a new source of children to replace
those formerly received from China and Russia were fuelled by the
arrest in October 2007 of seven French aid workers who were attempt-
ing to fly out 103 children from the impoverished country of Chad,
which borders on the Darfur region of Sudan (Duval Smith and Rolley,
2007). This episode raised again the unacceptability of ICA as a rescue
Table 10 Adoptions from Africa, 2003–7; countries ranked by number
sent in 2003 (peak year in bold)
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Ratio in
peak year
Ethiopia 854 1527 1778 2172 3031 0.95
Madagascar 393 331 280 133 63 0.55
South Africa 144 242 226 204 186 0.22
Mali 135 82 93 125 166 0.33
Burkina Faso 63 93 78 106 97 0.18
Nigeria 64 94 99 100 70 0.02
Liberia
a
32 87 193 369 335 2.01
Note:
a
Adoptions from Liberia, mostly to the USA, rose rapidly until 2006, but have
subsequently declined amid continuing concern over irregularities.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on adoptions from the seven countries in statistics
provided by the 23 receiving states listed in Table 1.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 589
mission at times of crisis when so many children are separated from
their families (McGinnis, 2005). The organization involved, Zoe’s Ark,
which was set up to help tsunami victims in 2005 (BBC News, 2007),
has been condemned by the French government. The episode was remin-
iscent of the Italian ‘adoptions’ from Rwanda in 2000 (BBC News,
2000, 2001) which led to a major crisis between the two countries.
Why are numbers falling after a decade of growth?
The rise in international adoptions to 2004 seems in many ways to have
been driven by an increasing demand for children, fuelled by the appar-
ent steady increase in the number of children available in China, Russia
and Guatemala and the opening up of possibilities for adoption by
single individuals. The subsequent decline seems to be more influenced
by the supply of children from key states of origin (Table 5). A reduc-
tion in numbers from individual countries has been found in the past,
notably in Latin American and Asian countries in the 1980s, as dis-
cussed earlier. The reduction in the number of children received in the
Netherlands – from 1704 in 1980 to 574 in 1993 – was seen as reflecting
a fall in demand, as the problems associated with ICA became apparent
Table 11 Adoptions from Ethiopia, 1998–2007: countries ranked by
number of children received in peak year (2007)
1998 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
USA 96 105 135 289 441 732 1255
a
Spain 0 12 107 220 227 304 481
France 155 209 217 390 397 408 417
Italy 9 112 47 193 211 227 256
a
Canada n/a 13 14 34 31 61 135
Belgium 46 41 52 62 112 88 124
Netherlands 18 25 39 72 72 48 68
Australia 37 36 39 45 59 70 47
Total
b
481 695 854 1527 1778 2172 3031
b, c
Notes:
a
In FY 2008 adoptions from Ethiopia to the USA rose by a further 500 to 1725; the
number of children sent to France and Italy also rose, to 484 and 338 respectively.
b
The total includes other countries which have received children from Ethiopia in this
period, e.g. Finland, Germany, Ireland, Malta and Switzerland.
c
Currently adoptions to Ireland are suspended and the Austrian agency (Families for
You) which received over 70 children between 2004 and 2006 has been removed from
the approved list.
Source: Numbers calculated from data on adoptions from Ethiopia in statistics provided
by the 23 receiving states listed in Table 1. Adoptions to Austria not included.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
590 International Social Work volume 52(5)
(Hoksbergen, 1991, 2000). Similar falls were recorded in Sweden,
where the number of overseas adoptions was the equivalent of two for
every 100 births in 1979 (Andersson, 1986). By the end of the 1980s
global numbers seemed to have peaked and Howard Altstein, writing
in 1991, predicted a continuing decline despite the temporary rise as a
result of the situation in post-Ceausescu Romania (Altstein and Simon,
1991: 191). In reality, the years from 1988 to 1992–3, when numbers
fell in the USA and many other countries, proved to be a period of tran-
sition to the huge acceleration in ICA from 1993 to 2004, fuelled by the
increased demand created by the Romanian surge, the rise in adoptions
from Guatemala to the USA (from 257 in 1990 to 3783 in 2005) and
the new potential of children from China and Russia.
Although the impact of China’s reduction from 2005 has been most
dramatic, in some countries the reduction in numbers can be traced
back to the first years of the 21st century. The rapid reduction in num-
bers from Romania and Bulgaria described earlier was no doubt influ-
enced in part by pressures from the EU as the two countries sought
membership, but the equally dramatic decline in Belarus and the steady
reduction in Russia seem to reflect a reaction in all of these countries
to poorly controlled adoption practices, reflected in a series of scandals
and increasing opposition from citizens of those countries, as previ-
ously discussed.
The sudden reversal in China is clearly a conscious move by the gov-
ernment through its central authority, the China Centre for Adoption
Affairs (CCAA). Concern had been building in China about the grow-
ing number of applications from single women (many in same-sex
relationships). The reduction in the number of children sent dates from
2006 when the CCAA announced new guidelines, including a require-
ment that prospective adopters must be a heterosexual couple who
have been married for at least two years (Bellock and Yardley, 2006;
Hilborn, 2007). This has effectively ended adoption by single women,
who accounted for up to a third of USA adopters in the late 1990s
(Selman, 2009a: 59).
Although China has taken a pragmatic stance, seeing short-term
value in placing children from overcrowded institutions and deriving
valuable revenue from the fee ($3000–5000) charged to all adopters,
many observers also note that the child welfare system is now much
improved, that there is clearly a large interest in domestic adoption and
that China is becoming aware of the negative image that continuing
international adoption can create. Similar considerations have led the
Korean government to move towards a long-promised ending of ICA
after 55 years, during which time Korea has been transformed from a
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 591
wartorn developing country with a population problem to one of the
richest countries of the world with one of the lowest fertility rates. In
Korea, unlike China, the demand for an end is led, in part, by returning
adoptees (Hubinette, 2006; Trenka, 2003), but there can be little doubt
that similar calls will arise from Chinese adopted girls if ICA continues
when they reach adulthood.
The future of intercountry adoption
Faced with the clear evidence of declining numbers and the growing
criticism of a system so open to abuse (Post, 2007; Smolin, 2007),
many feel that this may indeed be the ‘beginning of the end of wide-
scale ICA’ which Altstein and Simon (1991: 191) predicted more than
15 years ago. Others will point to the continuing growth in Ethiopia and
the revival of ICA from Cambodia and Vietnam as evidence that we may
be seeing a downsizing and reshaping rather than an end. The situation
of the many childless couples in the rich countries of the West hoping
for a child seems likely to worsen, so that many of those approved will
face a long wait and may never receive a child. In France, there have
been newspaper reports of as many as 25,000 families approved for
international adoption (Moreau, 2008), while the number of adoptions a
year fell from 4136 in 2005 to 3162 in 2007. There are similar reports in
Spain, the Netherlands and the Nordic countries (Selman et al., 2009).
The USA is facing a major shortfall in the number of children available
if the moratorium on adoptions from Guatemala continues. The global
economic crisis may lead to a reduction in demand or could result in an
acceler ation of market forces and an increased risk of trafficking.
Smolin (2004: 325) has pointed to the continuing evidence of child
traf ficking as a reason why ICA should end unless reformed, and
has suggested that history may label ‘the entire enterprise as a neo-
colonialist mistake’, just as it is now widely accepted that in the case of
the ‘shipment’ of poor children from England to Australia and Canada
‘a damning verdict is inescapable’ (Parker, 2008: 293) and that apol-
ogies have rightly been given to the ‘stolen generation’ of aboriginal
children in Australia.
Negative judgements and overgeneralizations would be hurtful to the
many thousands of people who have adopted children from overseas
and to many adoptees who recognize the positives in their experience,
knowing that without such intervention they might well not have sur-
vived. The counter-argument that ICA can be a global gift is particu-
larly compelling in the cases of the many children with special needs
who are now being adopted, and is backed by the growing body of
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
592 International Social Work volume 52(5)
research that indicates the potential of a new family for reversing the
impact of early deprivation (Juffer and Van IJzendoorn, 2009). Some
advocates of ICA, such as Bartholet (2005) and Wallace (2003), go fur-
ther and call for an increase in the numbers to meet the needs of chil-
dren in the developing world, seeing ICA as the most logical solution
to the problem of orphaned and abandoned children.
However, even if we feel hesitant to accept the verdict of Smolin
(2004, 2006, 2007), rooted in a personal experience of adopting children
stolen from their birth parents, we must recognize that ‘in a perfect
world, without the gross inequalities which still reign on this planet
at the beginning of the new millennium, wide-scale ICA would not
exist’ (Van Loon, 2000: 1), and remember Altstein’s observation that
‘one over-riding question exists in relation to ICA. Is it moral and
humane to remove a child from his native society to be reared in a
culture other than his own?’ (Altstein, 1984: 202), and Hoksbergen’s
(1991: 156) hope that ‘culture and economic circumstances in all Third-
World Countries change to the extent that it will be the exception when
a child’s only chance for a satisfactory upbringing exists with a family
thousands of miles from its birthplace’. Until such time the imperative
is to seek to ensure that ICAs are only carried out with the vision of
the Hague Convention, with full consideration of the principle of the
best interests of the child, and a determination to press for more open
adoptions in which a child can retain links with and pride in his or her
country of origin and, where possible, his or her birth family.
Notes
US statistics on ICA are recorded by fiscal year, which begins on 1 October and ends 1.
on 30 September (Office of Children’s Issues, 2009; Selman, 2006: 185).
For more discussion on Korea see Bergquist et al. (2007), Hubinette (2006) and 2.
Selman (2007, 2009b).
The UK has now imposed a moratorium on all adoptions from Guatemala.3.
References
Altstein, H. (1984) ‘Transracial and Inter-Country Adoptions: A Comparison’, in
P. Sachdev (ed.) Adoption: Current Issues and Trends. London: Butterworth.
Altstein, H. and R. Simon (1991) Intercountry Adoption: A Multinational Perspective.
New York: Praeger.
Andersson, G. (1986) ‘The Adopting and Adopted Swedes and their Contemporary
Society’, in R. Hoksbergen, Adoption in Worldwide Perspective. Lisse: Swets and
Zeitlinger.
Bartholet, E. (2005) ‘International Adoption’, in L. Askeland (ed.) Children and Youth in
Adoption, Orphanages and Foster Care. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.
BBC News (2000) ‘Rwanda Accuses Italy over Orphans’ (14 November). Available online
at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1022875.stm (accessed 9 March 2009).
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Selman: The rise and fall of intercountry adoption 593
BBC News (2001) ‘Rwanda’s Tug-of-War Children’ (12 April). Available online at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/africa/1271890.stm
(accessed 9 March 2009).
BBC News (2007) ‘Profile: Zoe’s Ark’ (29 October). Available online at: http://news.
bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7067374.stm (accessed 9 March 2009).
Bellock, P. and J. Yardley (2006) ‘China Tightens Adoption Rules for Foreigners’,
New York Times 20 December. Available online at: www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/
us/20adopt.html?em&ex=1166850000&en=015f107024876060&ei=5087 (accessed
9 March 2009).
Bergquist, K., M. Vonk, D. Kimand and M. Feit (eds) (2007) International Korean
Adoption: A Fifty-Year History of Policy and Practice. New York: Haworth Press.
Defence for Children International and International Social Services (1991) Romania: the
Adoption of Romanian Children by Foreigners. Geneva: DCI and ISS.
Duval Smith, A. and S. Rolley (2007) ‘Did They Plot to Steal Africa’s Orphans of War?’,
Observer (4 November): 28–9. Available online at: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/
nov/04/france.sudan (accessed 8 May 2009).
Hilborn, R. (2007) ‘May 1: Nine New Adoption Rules Start in China’, Family Helper
(1 May). Available online at: http://www.familyhelper.netnews/070501chinarules.html
(accessed 8 March 2009).
Hoksbergen, R. (1991) ‘Intercountry Adoption Coming of Age in the Netherlands:
Basic Issues, Trends and Developments’, in H. Altstein and R. Simon, Intercountry
Adoption: A Multinational Perspective. New York: Praeger.
Hoksbergen, R. (2000) ‘Changes in Attitudes in Three Generations of Adoptive Parents’,
in P. Selman (ed.) Intercountry Adoption: Development, Trends and Perspectives.
London: British Association for Adopting and Fostering (BAAF).
Hubinette, T. (2006) Comforting an Orphaned Nation: Representations of International
Adoption and Adopted Koreans in Korean Popular Culture. Seoul: Jimoondang
Publishers.
Juffer, F. and M.H. van IJzendoorn (2009) ‘International Adoption Comes of Age:
Development of International Adoptees from a Longitudinal and Meta-analytical
Perspective’, in G. Wrobel and E. Neil (eds) International Advances in Adoption
Research, pp. 169–92. London: John Wiley.
Kane, S. (1993) ‘The Movement of Children for International Adoption: An Epidemi-
ological Perspective’, Social Science Journal 30(4): 323–39.
Khabibullina, L. (2006) ‘Circulation of Russian Children in Europe (Case Study of
Transnational Adoption of Children from Russia to Catalonia)’, paper presented at the
Second International Conference on Adoption Research, University of East Anglia,
Norwich (17–21 July). Available online at: http://www.uea.ac.uk/swp/icar2/papers.
htm (accessed 9 March 2009).
McGinnis, H. (2005) Intercountry Adoption in Emergencies: The Tsunami Orphans.
New York: Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. Available online at: http://www.
adoptioninstitute.org/publications/ (accessed 8 March 2009).
Moreau, F. (2008) ‘Attendent enfants desesperement’, Sud Ouest, 17 January.
Office of Children’s Issues, US Department of State (2009) ‘Total Adoptions to the
United States 2008’. Available online at: http://adoption.state.gov/news/total_chart.
html (accessed 9 March 2009).
Parker, R. (2008) Uprooted: The Shipment of Poor Children to Canada, 1867–1917.
Bristol: Policy Press.
Post, R. (2007) Romania – for Export Only: The Untold Story of the Romanian ‘Orphans’.
Amsterdam: EuroComment Diffusion.
Selman, P. (2002) ‘Intercountry Adoption in the New Millennium: “The Quiet Migration”
Revisited’, Population Research & Policy Review 21: 205–25.
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
594 International Social Work volume 52(5)
Selman, P. (2006) ‘Trends in Intercountry Adoption 1998–2004: Analysis of Data from
20 Receiving Countries’, Journal of Population Research 23(2): 183–204.
Selman, P. (2007) ‘Intercountry Adoption in the Twenty-first Century: An Examination of
the Rise and Fall of Countries of Origin’, in K. Nelson, E. Kim and M. Petersen (eds)
Proceedings of the First International Korean Adoption Studies Research Symposium.
Seoul: International Korean Adoptee Associations (IKAA).
Selman, P. (2009a) ‘From Bucharest to Beijing: Changes in Countries Sending Children
for International Adoption 1990 to 2006’, in G. Wrobel and E. Neil (eds) International
Advances in Adoption Research for Practice, pp. 41–69. London: John Wiley.
Selman, P. (2009b) ‘Intercountry Adoption; Research, Policy and Practice’, in
G. Schofield and J. Simmonds (eds) The Child Placement Handbook: Research, Policy
and Practice, pp. 276–303. London: BAAF.
Selman, P. (2009c) ‘Intercountry Adoption in Europe 1998–2007: Patterns, Trends and
Issues’, in K. Rummery, I. Greener and C. Holden (eds) Social Policy Review 21:
Analysis and Debate in Social Policy, pp. 133–65. Bristol: Policy Press.
Selman, P., E. Moretti and F. Brogi (2009) Statistical Profile of International Adoption
in the European Union, Report from ChildONEurope to the European Parliament.
Florence: Istituto degli Innocenti.
Smolin, D. (2004) ‘Intercountry Adoption as Child Trafficking’, Valparaiso Law
Review 39(2): 281–325. Available online at: http://works.bepress.com/david_smolin/3
(accessed 2009).
Smolin, D. (2006) ‘Child Laundering: How the Intercountry Adoption System Legitimizes
and Incentivizes the Practices of Buying, Trafficking, Kidnapping, and Stealing
Children’, Wayne Law Review 52: 113–200. Available online at: http://law.bepress.
com/expresso/eps/749 (accessed 28 June 2009).
Smolin, D. (2007) ‘Child Laundering As Exploitation: Applying Anti-trafficking Norms
to Intercountry Adoption Under the Coming Hague Regime’, ExpressO. Available
online at: http://works.bepress.com/david_smolin/4 (accessed 9 March 2009).
Trenka, J. (2003) The Language of Blood: A Memoir. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota
University Press.
Triseliotis, J. (2000) ‘Intercountry Adoption: Global Trade or Global Gift?’, Adoption &
Fostering 24(2): 45–54.
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (1998) ‘Intercountry Adoption’, Innocenti
Digest No. 4. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
US Department of State (2009) ‘U.S. Not Processing Guatemalan Adoptions’. US
Department of State Adoption Alert, 26 March. Available online at: http://adoption.
state.gov/news/guatemala.htm (accessed 26 June 2009).
Van Loon, H. (2000) ‘Foreword’ to P. Selman (ed.) Intercountry Adoption: Development,
Trends and Perspectives. London: BAAF.
Wallace, S. (2003) ‘International Adoption: The Most Logical Solution to the Disparity
between the Numbers of Orphaned and Abandoned Children in Some Countries and
Families and Individuals Wishing to Adopt in Others’, Arizona Journal of International
and Comparative Law 20(3): 689–724.
Peter Selman is Visiting Fellow in the School of Geography, Politics and
Sociology, Claremont Bridge Building Level 5, Newcastle University, Newcastle
upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK. [email: p.f.selman@ncl.ac.uk]
at BRANDEIS UNIV LIBRARY on June 18, 2010 http://isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from
