China’s recent decision to end intercountry adoption has evoked a range of responses in the adoption community. As historically has been the case, the focus is almost exclusively on adoptive parents, rarely interviewing or quoting adult Chinese adoptees nor Chinese birth parents.

The National Council on Adoption, whose members are adoption agencies and adoption attorneys, has been vocal about the closing, though only from the perspective of the prospective adoptive parents who may not be able to adopt from China, despite having referrals of children. From NCFA’s Action Center:

“Urge Congress to ask State Department get clarity from China on in-process adoptions. 

Families in the process of adopting from China recently received the devastating news that the country is ending all intercountry adoptions. Hundreds of U.S. families who were matched with a child and approved to adopt from China have patiently waiting for years – with China having suspended adoptions due to the COVID pandemic. After such a long wait, and significant financial and emotional costs, these families are being given very little information on the future of adoption in China. Children and families deserve better. (Emphasis in original.)

Contact your U.S. representative and senators today and urge them to encourage the U.S. Department of State to ask China for clarity on in-process adoptions and to resume intercountry adoption.”

NCFA has not, as far as I know, called for any support for Chinese adoptees who may be struggling with China’s decision, nor any statements about how adoption agencies will assist with searches and reunions for Chinese birth/first families.

The plight of the prospective adoptive parents has, as usual, permeated national and global news reports, most of which mention only prospective adoptive parents. I understand the sadness of the prospective parents, many of whom have waited for years. I am not dismissing their emotions.

I would though argue that this event–China’s ending of international adoptions–deserves far more depth in media coverage.

If we are ever going to have genuine critical thinking on adoption policy, adoptees and their birth parents must be included equitably in these media reports and in policy-making.

Washington Post: “China shut down foreign adoptions. This family doesn’t want to give up.” No Chinese adoptees or birthparents are quoted.

New York Times: “China Stops Foreign Adoptions, Ending a Complicated Chapter.” A Danish-Korean adoptee is quote, along with non-adopted Chinese scholars and researchers. No Chinese adoptees or birthparents are quoted.

New York Times: “An Era of Chinese Adoption Ends, and Families Are Torn Over Its Legacy.” Adoptive parents and Chinese adoptees are quoted in the article; Chinese birth parents re mentioned.

CNN: “China is ending foreign adoptions of its children. That leaves hundreds of American families in limbo”

The Guardian: “China says it is ending foreign adoptions, prompting concern from US–US diplomats seeking clarity for hundreds of families in the process of international adoption.” No Chinese adoptees or birthparents are quoted.

Chinese adoptees have been speaking out, and they have a variety of perspectives. I wrote about some of them here.

One article not included in my post is a New York Times opinion piece by Cindy Zhu Huijgen, described as “a Dutch journalist based in China and a former adoptee.” (I don’t know what “former adoptee” means here.) She wrote I Was Adopted From China as a Baby. I’m Still Coming to Terms With That. An excerpt: “On Sept. 5, at the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s daily press briefing, conflicting emotions swirled inside me as I nervously raised my hand to ask a government spokeswoman about reports, then still unconfirmed, that international adoptions would be stopped. When she announced that what had essentially become a legalized form of child trafficking was indeed now over, it felt cathartic.

But any relief I feel is tempered by knowing that China’s government will probably never fully acknowledge the system’s abuses. I’m still angry — at the fraught legacy of the adoptions, at the enduring focus on prospective parents’ feelings instead of the children’s and when people imply that I should be grateful for having been adopted.”

Hearing from adopted adults and from birth/first parents is critical to reframing adoption and to thinking critically about it. Then genuine change can occur, and the needs of vulnerable children and families can be met in a transparent, effective, fair way,