Serious questions about rightness of international adoption

[Choosethisday]

I am an elder at my church. Over the last couple of years or we have become more involved with a large, well known, multi million dollar a year "ministry" that promotes and arranges international adoptions. The interest in international adoption, (IA), has seemingly increased interest in missions overall, although most of the interest does seem to be associated with less mature believers and their other actions seem to reflect this imaturity. The other elders and myself were pleased to see this because our church was/is not doing well, at least numbers wise. At first I was also in favor of this because intuitively it seemed like an answer to the orphan crises in the world and might have been helping our church even if the maturity wasn't readily apparent. However, as I researched this issue I came to a different conclusion. I now believe that IA as usually practiced is actually detrimental to the cause of orphans. And while I have tried to not be confrontational about my views I now have a number of the members of our church angry at me for not being on board on this issue and even some of the other elders question my judgement. Good examples of my reasons and logic for being opposed to IA is found at the website voiceofthefatherless.org . However, as I was coming to this view, just to be sure I was not too far out, I vetted my thoughts with several people I respect including indigenous and non-indigenous missionaries. These all agreed with my premises and logic. Even so, during my many years as a believer I have found that I really need to be careful when I find I am outside the mainstream on an issue because I often was wrong. And the stakes here are important enough that I don't want to be wrong. I have agonized in prayer and have thought a great deal about this I still think my position correct. Even so I am trying to keep a low profile on this issue but my conscience is nagging at me because i really feel this to be an ethics issue and should be fought for. Also, because my wife and I are very interested and want to be active in missions we now find ourselves not able to support our own church's direction on missions. Because the church has steadily incresed it support of this "ministry" we can no longer financially support our chuch. This could even lead us to having to look for another home church so we can be involved in missions again. This, even though so many of the people there feel like family. So my questions are, are there any faults in my premises or logic? And even if there aren't should I just let this go or should I go with my convictions? I would appreciate any feedback, insights, or thoughts.

Link to personal profile page deleted per ToS. Members require minimum 20 posts. (didn't work, anyway)

 

[elizabethbraddock]

Why don't you just tell us your opinion instead of trying to shill your website?

 

[Choosethisday]

Your rather aggresive reply is very much like those from some of the members of my church who either are considering adoption or have close family or friends who are. Instead of offering real advice or critiquing my logic they attack my motivations or intergrity. So, may I infer that you might be amoung that group? And if so please let me be very clear in stating that those who give of thesmselves sacrificiallyin adopting any children should be honored for their obedience to God's command to care for orphans. My contention is just that there are much better ways to do it that than IA. Also, I truly am at a loss as to what to do as it realates to my role at church. We truely love the people there yet find ourselves unable to support a major "ministry" direction of the church. But I do at least appreciate that you responded.

 

[handy]

I'm fairly well acquainted with adoption and the issues that come with it.

I too have some moral misgivings on international adoptions.

My sister goes to a church which is closely associated with the church of that group of people who got thrown into jail when they, with the very best of intentions, swooped into Haiti and started to take kids out of the country to be adopted here. Again, they had the best of intentions... but they essentially became child snatchers.

Unless the agency is very well established in a nation and is working with the full cooperation of the local governments AND... those local governments are fully trustworthy... there is just too much potential for children being stolen from loving parents and never seen again. Sadly, this happens way too often.

Plus, as I can attest to, there are plenty of children right here in the states who need homes. So many kids are doomed to the foster care program, never being able to be placed with a real family, because people would rather get that all important infant, rather than take on an older child.

If one adopts out of the foster care system, one is assured of understanding all the issues that prompted the child to be removed from their birth home and placed for adoption in the first place. As the adopted child grows older, understanding these issues becomes of paramount importance. Without being able to answer these questions, some adopted kids can struggle with life long identity issues.

 

[Mike]

My wife and I were foster parents before adopting two girls. We had a son by birth at the time. I can only give that perspective and possibly one by casually knowing families who have adopted internationally. There is something to be said about the cultural changes from one country to another, but I don't know how we can view God's Creation from His perspective and come to the conclusion that a need where you are at is greater than elsewhere. We put boundaries around our countries. God doesn't.

 

[handy]

Mike,

I think the need is great all over God's creation...

However, given the fact that there are many, many stories of people in other countries who had their children snatched away... or completely misunderstood that they were agreeing to give their children away forever (and this stories crop up with some regularity) as well as the fact that if people want to adopt there are many children right here in our own country whose background is far more verifiable.

You said, "...but I don't know how we can view God's Creation from His perspective and come to the conclusion that a need where you are at is greater than elsewhere."

I agree, and I also would add that we can't come to the conclusion that a need elsewhere is greater than the need where one is at either.

Too often, and this was the mentality that the church my sister is closely associated with got caught up in, well meaning people look at these third world countries and think they'll ride in a la "knight in shining armor" and "rescue" the poor child from a life doomed to poverty and despair. That is looking at the need of a kid in Ukraine as being more important than the kid in the foster care home down the street. The people in Roberta's sister church just got caught up in emotion and set out to "rescue" kids... without considering the fact that perhaps the children didn't need to be permanently taken away from their home and family, they just needed temporary help.

 

[Mike]

Choosethisday, I might have misunderstood your objection to I.O.

Dora, I agree that resources in a church's budget are often hyper-focused on cultures abroad, and if this church is putting too much emphasis on adoption abroad, that's something to consider. I believe local or international adoption is the right decision if someone is personally Led to go that route.

I've heard Christians come down on anyone who chooses to adopt from another country, and I guess that's what I was gleaning from the OP. Needs can be greater at home or in another country, but a prayerful decision to respond to either can be the right thing to do.

 

[elizabethbraddock]

Your rather aggresive reply is very much like those from some of the members of my church who either are considering adoption or have close family or friends who are. Instead of offering real advice or critiquing my logic they attack my motivations or intergrity. So, may I infer that you might be amoung that group? And if so please let me be very clear in stating that those who give of thesmselves sacrificiallyin adopting any children should be honored for their obedience to God's command to care for orphans. My contention is just that there are much better ways to do it that than IA. Also, I truly am at a loss as to what to do as it realates to my role at church. We truely love the people there yet find ourselves unable to support a major "ministry" direction of the church. But I do at least appreciate that you responded.

I'm not trying to attack you, it was a valid question. You make a provocative statement about international adoption, but then you refer us to your website to read your opinion. This is a discussion forum: can't you just tell us what you think, and then we can debate the merits of that opinion, instead of trying to lead us to your personal website?

 

[Choosethisday]

Let me try to respond in the order the comments came in.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o></o>

Handy,<o></o>

I agree with you about the issues with so much of what otherwisewell-meaning people have done. The IA “ministryâ€our church is currently involved with has been promoting “mission†trips toHaiti. This “ministry†is hoping to develop contacts in some of the orphanages thereto help provide more orphans for their adoption business. So they have been active in encouraging tripsto Haiti. While the participants in these trips are no doubt sincere in theirdesire to help they are clueless about what little good and almost certain harmthey are doing for the cause of orphans. The have made two trips now to Haiti.The first time they worked around the orphanage and did minor repairs. And theyplayed with and hugged the orphans. The second trip they planned to fix some ofthe plumbing in the orphanage but they didn’t have the right supplies so theydid some painting and hugged and played with the orphans. When they came back theytold the story about how while they were there a man came by to drop off hischild because he could no longer afford to feed him. The orphanage took thechild in and our people encouraged him to continue looking for employment. Each of the people spent a minimum of $1700for the trip. With what only one of them spent the man with the child couldhave been employed for at least a year in working around the orphanage. I don’tknow how many of you have been through the Perspectives on the World ChristianMovement course but if you have you know a very basic tenant of missions andpoverty relief is that the best way to help a society, after the establishmentof the Gospel, is to help it develop its economy and workforce for the creationof jobs. I won’t go into it here but this tenant is so well established that itis beyond argument. So the best way to help there, and almost anywhere else, isnot the way we are doing it. <o></o>

Also, while we all want to hug orphans to make them feelbetter this really isn’t good for them unless it is an ongoing relationship. For a quick insight as to why this may be sotake a look here. http://alongsidehaiti.org/2010/11/when-helping-hurts-a-guest-post/<o></o>

Also, if you can’t take the Perspectives course there aremany really good books that give the basics of why so much of what we do isactually harmful. Perhaps the best to start with is When Helping Hurts, by Corbett and Finkkert. <o></o>

Also, in talking about Haiti and so many places so much ofthe resources go to we need to consider this; about 90% of mission resources goto about 10% of the world’s people. This even in light of the fact that theseplaces are already largely saturated with the Gospel. For instance, the peopleof Haiti already self-identify as being about 96% Christian. We should helpmeet the physical needs there but the resources spent in “reaching out with theGospel†should really be used in less reached places.<o></o>

Mike,<o></o>

I think you now understand what I was trying to communicate. I am sorry if I didn’t come acrossclearly. My main point was not that some areas should be reached first becausethey have a greater need but that there are better ways of helping the mostpeople, in this case orphans. <o></o>

Elizabethbraddock,<o></o>

First, I am very sorry if I offended you. But you do remindme of others who have been aggressive toward me because of my position on IA.And honestly, please, if you see faults with my logic I would appreciate youshowing me where. However, to answer your question please consider, if one is trulyseeking candid feedback it is best to not identify with whatever you are askingto have critiqued. After coming to my views about IA but while still seekingcandid feedback about the site I put the word out to please take a look and critiquethe site. From the feedback it did not take long to realize that those who knewit was my site were not nearly as candid as those who did not know. I really am still open to being shown faultsin my premises or logic and if one has strong feelings about IA, either way,they are less likely to be candid about their thoughts if they associate itwith someone they know, even in such a place as a forum. So at the time it seemed better to notidentify with the site. Also, like any other work we do in our service ofChrist it is better, and I prefer, to have any rewards for the work to beeternal rather than worldly. <o></o>

In His service<o></o>

 

[Atothetheist]

What is wrong with adoption, what is wrong with international adoption? I was adopted internationally.

If I hadn't been adopted internationally, I would have been stuck in a poor imporvirished country, with horrible moral standards. Is this what you want to the poor kids who are not only given up by their parents, but to be born in a horrible, poor, rotting, sesspool of a country?

I am better off being here, and I know others that were in my situation are too.

 

[Choosethisday]

I hear the emotion in your words. So without trying to answer it here, please read the "word picture" on the site and see if your questions are answered.

 

[Atothetheist]

I hear the emotion in your words. So without trying to answer it here, please read the "word picture" on the site and see if your questions are answered.

Nope. Just tell me.

 

[handy]

Atothetheist,

I don't have anything against the idea of international adoptions and you are proof that it can be a positive thing.

However, it can also result in some pretty negative things as well.

Normally, I'm not a fan of Wikipedia for factual information but I read through the Wiki on the Laura Silsby case and it seems very factual. It is but one example of how well meaning people can do some very bad things because they believe they are "doing God's will by helping orphaned victims". Silsby is with the sister church of my sister's church and my sister is very well acquainted with all concerned and has first hand knowledge of all of this.

Here's the wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Life_Children's_Refuge_case

My sister knows all these people quite well and I believe her when she says that they were very well meaning and certainly had the best of intentions. Even Laura, whose legal troubles hardly ended with the Haiti debacle isn't an evil woman... foolish perhaps, but hardly evil.

But, it is a case in point of some of the issues that Choosethisday is bringing forth. These issues are important and we should discuss them.

 

[Choosethisday]

Nope. Just tell me.

To answer here I would be typing for hours. If you don't trust the site, which by the way is well cited, then start reading some of the material I recommended. Or just choose to not learn about what is really going on. Your choice.

 

[Atothetheist]

To answer here I would be typing for hours. If you don't trust the site, which by the way is well cited, then start reading some of the material I recommended. Or just choose to not learn about what is really going on. Your choice.

. All i wanted was to share my perspective acually being the recipiant of it.

If churches are doing illegal things inorder to aquire the children, then they should be stopped. Things should be done legally.

I am probably not going on the site.

 

[Choosethisday]

. All i wanted was to share my perspective acually being the recipiant of it.

If churches are doing illegal things inorder to aquire the children, then they should be stopped. Things should be done legally.

I am probably not going on the site.

I did not suggest that churches are doing anything illegal. In fact most of them likely sincerely believe they are doing God's will. They are likely just responding to a felt need as the other leaders at my church did. But please understand that there is an incredible amount of money in the IA business and these agencies spend a great deal of this money attempting to evoke emotions designed to get people to respond to them with an interest in IA. And many well-meaning people have been taken in by this. I really hope and will pray that you look into this whole business. You actually might be one of the best spokepersons for this type of thing. The site is far from the only place to get this info but please at least investigate the whole issue.