It is bizarre to try and navigate the fraught ideological world of international adoption….It is exhausting and confusing and crazy-making–especially when the silent issues of abortion and the many dangers to living children co-exist with the ICA questions….
I am tired of trying to make sense of people who focus obsessively on problems that arise in relation to adoption…If they dislike adoption on some deep philosophical ground, why don’t they just say so? For some, the biological relation is everything–it drives their perception and understanding of everything–They have bought into the idea that in international adoption, one person’s loss is another person’s “gain”–When they speak of culture, they are really speaking of biology…(since I doubt if they care whether some family moves their children around the world into a new culture zone–I mean, would they care???) No, it is the question of legally cutting off that first biological tie. And their deep sympathy, empathy with the adult problems that led to that circumstance…I want to talk tomorrow about the pending US legislation Families for Orphans Act, as it is profoundly symbolic…but I cannot help but feel I want to first send the message–Do not use anecdote as proxy for your opposition to international adoption….(Part of the reason for this is that we must present a “professionalized” version of our point of view–so finding instances in which there is corruption or other defect in international adoption allows us to denigrate everyone involved in that process…..It is easier and more congenial than simply saying, I do not like international adoption because I disagree with its ideological premises….) If you are opposed on fundamental grounds, just say so…Do not make instances of corruption or mistakes a proxy in your battle against the foundational premises of international adoption….