MUMBAI: A 16-year-old Swedish girl who befriended a 19-year-old on

social media and flew to Mumbai to live with him without her parents'

knowledge, was found in Cheeta Camp, Trombay, by the city crime branch

and handed over to her parents on Friday.

Her father, who took her custody from Dongri's Children Welfare Home,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan should make his stance clear in the adoption row, said social activist Medha Patkar. Speaking to the media after meeting Anupama Chandran and Ajith here on Saturday, she demanded to know the stand of women’s organisations in the issue.“The bad experiences faced by Anupama cannot be justified. She’ll continue her fight on the issue. The women’s organisations in the state should take a firm stance in the matter,’” said Medha.

She met Anupama at the YMCA hall along with social workers and solidarity committee members. Terming the developments unfortunate, Medha said government agencies should function as per the law.

“Government agencies are bound to act as per the law and Constitution. Protecting the rights of the mother and child are also part of the same. However, that didn’t happen in this case,” she said.

Medha Patkar offered her support to Anupama and asked her to go ahead without fear. J Devika explained the controversy and the stand taken by the government and the child welfare committee in the issue. Dr Asad, C R Neelakandan and S Mini also spoke on the occasion.

While this was inspired by the abortion debate engulfing our country again, it’s actually about love; more so than I realized when I started writing.

The Supreme Court’s been hearing arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health and the pro-choice crowd is predictably losing it’s collective mind. The same faulty arguments about abortions becoming illegal if Roe falls, misrepresentations of the public’s support for “abortion rights” and falsehoods about pro-life positions only being held by the religious and/or those on the right are being trotted out again. That’s nothing new, but now there’s a new approach that’s incredibly dangerous and needs to be called out before it can gain traction.

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett is actively pro-life and has two adopted children. This renders the standard (but false) line about how pro-life people only care about babies until birth but not after as moot in her case, so they’ve taken a worse approach to press the attack on her. They’re claiming that people like Barrett (but not people like Buttigieg for some reason) are monsters for advocating for adoption.

The argument: Adoption is hard, painful and leaves people feeling broken with a sense of loss; that it creates a level of human suffering. That is true, but, even though she’s being painted that way, Justice Barrett has never argued that relinquishing custody of a child was simple or painless. She just doesn’t advocate terminating a life as a rational solution to avoiding future pain. Yes, adoption can be traumatic for both mother and child, but that doesn’t justify the narrative that adoption is a problem while abortion is a solution.

It’s actually the natural progression of the “compassionate” pro-abortion argument that an unwanted child is better off being aborted because, if a child isn’t wanted, their life will be hard and not worth living. They use prettier words, but the sentiment is just as harsh, no matter how you say it. Human life is precious, no matter the circumstances of its creation, but this argument creates the false concept that “wantedness” equals worth.

Birth parent Sue cringes in pain any time she hears a baby cry at her work in a Sydney shop. She chose her child’s family in an open adoption at nine months. It didn’t have the secrets of closed adoptions, but it has been the “most traumatic experience of her life”.

As the Christmas trees go up, the heartache spikes for anyone affected by adoption, even those raised in the happiest of adoptive families, say counsellors from the Benevolent Society.

Whether those adopted as children are now 71, like Ken Doyle of Orange, or 22 years old like Claudia from Gymea in Sydney, big family celebrations make them wonder about what could have been.

They also feel guilty for having these thoughts because of how much they love their adoptive families - and don’t want to hurt their feelings.

“Especially coming up to Christmas, big events, birthdays, you do tend to think about it more, wondering what life may have been like if I hadn’t been adopted, but then I feel guilty because I am so fortunate to have such loving family,” said Claudia, who asked for her surname to be withheld.

The Flemish government is to tighten its rules on adoptions from other countries, Wouter Beke (CD&V), minister for the family announced.

The decision comes following a devastating report issued in September alleging widespread human trafficking being carried out under the cover of intercountry adoption. The report was written by a panel of independent experts who had been working on the question since 2019.

“This is something that all parties involved have been saying for many years we have to tackle,” Beke said at the time. And he sketched out the basic principles of the “ambitious reform” needed to intercountry adoption, including multi-parenthood, strengthening partnerships with countries of origin, building bridges between foster care and adoption, and focusing on aftercare and counselling.

Beke also suggested a two-year hiatus for all international adoptions to allow the necessary reforms to be passed. However that proposal was shot down by N-VA, arguing that while reform was needed, a revolution was going too far.

Today, Beke presented his new proposal to parliament: a set of six strict selection criteria designed to weed out bad adoption prospects. Countries that do not apply the criteria will simply be scrapped from the list of acceptable candidates.

It seemed like a fairy tale ending: a poor Chinese couple who spent 14 years searching for their lost son are finally reunited with the boy as his kidnappers face justice. But it’s not that simple. As Sun Zhuo is reunited with his birth family in Shenzhen, he’s faced with the prospect of the family he knew as his own being sent to prison.

In 2007, then 4-year-old Sun Zhuo was abducted from the southern city of Shenzhen, setting his biological parents on a desperate search that would last 14 years. Sun Haiyang, his father, offered a 200,000 yuan reward for clues and changed the name of his steamed bun shop to advertise it. His story won national attention, and was adapted into a 2014 movie called “Dearest.” He has become an iconic figure in the field of anti-trafficking, and his account on microblogging service Weibo, named “Sun Haiyang Looking for Son,” has over 116,000 followers.

Meanwhile, Sun Zhuo was growing up with two older sisters in Shandong province, about 1,800 kilometers from Shenzhen, unaware that the couple raising him were not his birth parents.

Chinese police identified Sun, now 18, during a crackdown on child trafficking. The police arrested a total of nine suspects involved in abducting three children, including Sun Zhuo. His identity was later confirmed by DNA testing.

On Monday, Sun Haiyang finally met his son after 14 years, while the second family is facing potential criminal charges.

After a damning report about fraud in intercountry adoption, Flanders wants to check more closely with which countries it still cooperates. A risk analysis will be carried out for each country based on six criteria. Countries that do not meet this requirement will be removed from the list. Especially African countries with corrupt governments are targeted. "It is our absolute priority to exclude child trafficking and trauma."

At the beginning of September, the bomb exploded in adoption country. After a voluminous and damning report on human trafficking and fraud in intercountry adoption, Flemish Minister of Family Wouter Beke (CD&V) wanted to go through with it. Following the example of the Netherlands, he himself proposed an adoption break of two years. Ultimately, Beke was called back by coalition partner N-VA. A reform was allowed, a revolution was not.

Today, Beke put a new plan on the table: six strict selection criteria, so that the bad apples are thrown out of the basket. Countries that do not meet these criteria will be removed from the list. It is expected that a large number, read: especially African countries, will no longer qualify.

Traceability

The main requirement is traceability. Flanders must be able to trace through which steps it has been decided in the country of origin to proceed with intercountry adoption. “What we do not want is a process in which a home can decide for itself to take in a certain child and then indicate after a while that the child is eligible for adoption, without having followed a process within youth care”, says Beke. “Traceability is also important for adoptees looking for the story behind their adoption, and for prospective parents who want to make sure that the best interests of the child have been carefully considered.”

With which countries will Flanders still cooperate for adoption? The government decided this morning that potential partner countries will be subject to a risk analysis. Countries that fail will be deleted.

In 2019, stories about abuses with adoptions from Ethiopia woke up Flanders: some adopted 'orphans' later turned out not to be orphans at all.

As a result, an expert panel looked into the adoption process. They presented their report in early September. On their advice, Flemish Minister of Welfare Wouter Beke (CD&V) proposed a two-year adoption break to review the system. Minister Beke had to withdraw that proposal after criticism from coalition partners N-VA and Open Vld. But a system was devised to prevent fraud in the future.

In concrete terms, it will no longer be the adoption services but the Flemish Adoption Center (VCA) that will screen all partner countries. Six criteria have now been drawn up for this. Countries must first and foremost have signed and ratified the Hague Adoption Convention. That 2005 treaty makes adoption a right to protection for children, not a right to children for parents.

RECEPTION FIRST IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY

Joohee Bourgain, anti-racist and feminist activist, is the author of a book that deconstructs the myths and the colonial imagination on which the international adoption system is based.

A secondary school teacher, Joohee Bourgain is also an anti-racist and feminist activist. Author of International Adoption: Myths and Realities (Anacaona, 17 p., € 15), herself adopted from South Korea, she deconstructs the myths surrounding international adoption. In particular that of the orphan who must be saved from a life of misery, by linking this phenomenon to an asymmetrical power relationship between North and South. For her, abuses are intrinsic to the international adoption system, based on financial transactions around children and women's bodies.

What are the main myths surrounding international adoption?

The myth of abandonment, first of all: we will consider that abandonment is the sole cause of adoption. This myth must be deconstructed, because it tends to throw the responsibility only on the birth parents, and, suddenly, we do not see the whole system that results in a final separation from the birth family. This is why I prefer the term “separation” to “abandon”. There is a whole set of intermediary actors, in particular authorized bodies for adoption (OAA), economic, social, cultural factors ... In South Korea, for example, the "local patriarchy" discriminates against single women, who will be pressured to give up their child for adoption because they are considered incapable of raising him.

The idea is to equate adopted children with biological children

Mariya Abdi Ibrahim won another case at Europe’s human rights court in 2019 over the forced adoption of her son, which resulted in Norway changing some of its regulations around adoption.

STRASBOURG, France (CN) — Norway violated the human rights of a Muslim refugee from Somalia when authorities removed her child from her care and placed him with a Christian family, Europe’s top rights court held Friday.

The European Court of Human Rights found that placing Mariya Abdi Ibrahim's son with an evangelical Christian couple against her wishes violated her right to family life.

Ibrahim arrived in Norway at the age of 16, with her then 3-month-old son in tow. Originally from Somalia, she fled after the terrorist group al-Shabaab targeted her for being unmarried and pregnant. When her son was 10 months old, the Norwegian Child Welfare Services removed him from Ibrahim’s care, citing neglect and abuse. He was ultimately adopted by a Norwegian couple who are members of the Evangelical Mission Covenant Church and cut all ties with his biological mother.

In 2019, the Strasbourg-based rights court found that Norway hadn’t done enough to keep mother and son together. It found the country's actions violated the 1953 European Convention of Human Rights, which created the court and protects the civil and political rights of Europeans. That decision led to some changes in Norway's adoption regulations.