Intercountry adoption ideally back to zero, says minister
During the committee debate that took place in the House of Representatives last week, Minister for Legal Protection Franc Weerwind said that he wanted to 'ideally reduce the number of intercountry adoptions to zero'. Despite pressure from the COC, prospective adoptive parents and several MPs, he also insisted on phasing out intercountry adoptions from the US. Although Defense for Children believes that intercountry adoption should end as soon as possible, we are pleased that the minister spoke out loud and clear during the debate and emphatically put the best interests of the child (and no other interests) first.
US adoptions
The minister agrees with the Central Authority that the adoption relationship with the US should be terminated. He emphasizes the strict application of the principle of subsidiarity from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Hague Adoption Convention. The core of this principle is that it is in the best interests of the child to be cared for and raised as much as possible in its own country and culture. This means, says the minister, that a child is only eligible for intercountry adoption if the country of origin does not see any possibilities to safely take the child in itself.
The US, which has not ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, has a different adoption system and also interprets the principle of subsidiarity differently. There is no question of a last resort: the US has ample opportunities to safely care for children itself. This is evident from, among other things, the country analysis. The US has long waiting lists for prospective adoptive parents and young children are the most sought after domestically. That is why the country is adopting (more) children from abroad. At the same time, the US is giving (fewer) children, especially babies, up for adoption. This cannot be reconciled with the principle of subsidiarity and the difference in interpretation is, as the minister rightly points out, unbridgeable. In addition, according to international publications, abuses have been reported in the American adoption system.
Adoptions from Portugal and Bulgaria
During the committee debate, the minister also indicated that he would like to make it possible again to adopt children from Portugal, if the Netherlands receives a request to do so from the Portuguese authorities. This would concern children that are difficult to place: especially older children with special needs and siblings or triblings. However, Portugal, like the US, is a country that both adopts and puts children up for adoption. Given the (required) strict application of the subsidiarity principle, resuming the adoption relationship therefore raises questions. Apparently there is not enough suitable alternative care available for these children in Portugal. That is why care is outsourced to other countries, with the result that all ties of these somewhat older children with their own country are permanently severed.
The continuation of the adoption relationship with Bulgaria is still under investigation. As far as we are concerned, that relationship is permanently discontinued. In Bulgaria, adoptions usually involve children from Roma families. Given the deep-rooted discrimination against the Roma community, this entails an increased risk of malpractice, the RSJ also writes. In addition, the country is working hard on de-institutionalization (in 2021, 133 of the 137 residential institutions for children had already closed their doors) and building a system for smaller-scale alternative care. Investing in improving youth care in Bulgaria, so that children can grow up in their own country, is more in the interest of Bulgarian children than resuming the adoptive relationship.
Risk of wrongdoing
As the Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Youth Protection (RSJ) has already written, continuing with intercountry adoption, from any country, will be accompanied by the knowledge that the risk of abuse cannot be completely ruled out. The minister recognizes and accepts this, he said during the committee debate. Defense for Children considers accepting this risk irresponsible, given the far-reaching consequences. Together with CoMensha and ICDI, fourteen interest groups of intercountry adoptees and various experts, we advocate a permanent adoption stop. In our view, every child who becomes a victim of abuse or otherwise suffers from intercountry adoption is one too many. The money associated with setting up the new system can, partly in view of the an sichcosts associated with intercountry adoption, can be better used to improve the youth protection and foster care system in countries of origin.
Interest of the child
We are pleased that with the decision to permanently stop adopting children from the US, the minister has made it clear that the interest of the child to grow up in their own country outweighs the interest of prospective parents. In doing so, he puts an end to the doubts that have arisen in response to an article by NU.nl, namely: does the minister actually put the best interests of the child first or does the interest of parents with an unfulfilled wish to have children prevail in practice? By indicating that the number of intercountry adoptions should ideally go back to zero, the minister takes a position that is in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is not clear when the Netherlands will stop intercountry adoptions completely, but we will monitor the announced phasing out and, if necessary, put it on the agenda.
.