Oped»
Rethinking adoption
APR 24 -
It is completely understandable: What woman doesn’t want to cherish motherhood? Sarojini, my childhood friend, is no exception. When Sarojini and her spouse, Madan, have a fight, you would swear they are about to break up. Sarojini recently called me from Biratnagar and burst into tears as she shared her agony. Last week they had a get together to mark their 16th marriage anniversary. Everything went smoothly, except people passing sarcastic remarks on Sarojini’s infertility. Sarojini is a well-educated, independent and successful professional, yet she could not face the sarcasm, which eventually pushed her into a profound depression. She still recounts the early days of her marriage when she was in her twenties. “Those days I relied heavily on contraceptive pills to prevent unwanted pregnancy as I was busy doing my studies abroad. Later, as a matter of fact, those pills had a severe side effect and now I simply can’t conceive.” Both Madan and Sarojini are fond of kids, but not too keen on the option of adopting.
Domestic adoption has not found resonance in Nepal yet. The majority of couples would rather spend thousands of rupees and take the many risks associated with test tube babies rather than accepting an orphan as their child. As they say, blood is thicker than water. There is a strong inclination towards having children of your own among Nepali couples.
While speaking with colleagues, friends and relatives who have been deprived of the joys of parenthood, they all echoed similar sentiments - they could not opt for adoption fearing the resulting social exclusion. Adoption in Nepal is still taboo. The system of adoption, however, has prevailed since ancient times in the Indian sub-continent. Even Raja-Maharajas used to adopt male children as their heirs in the absence of a biological son. Childless middle-class couples often preferred children from families within their own clan that were economically weak and unable to support their children for adoption rather than considering the option of adopting unrelated orphans.
Nepali couples willing to adopt a child legally have to fulfill a long list of requirements. For example, the couples have to submit medical certificates to prove their infertility, together with their marriage certificates, character certificates, details of economic status including land papers and bank balances, copies of identification, letters of consent, etc. Moreover, the age difference between the to-be adopted child and foster parents should be no less than 35 and no more than 55 years. Even after furnishing all the required documents, the need to register the adoption case at the relevant Land Revenue Office (LRO) poses another hassle whereby couples have to face a host of routine but unnecessary questions. As of now, there exists no agency with the sole objective of promoting domestic adoption in Nepal.
Though domestic adoption is considered a better option for children than inter-country adoption as it allows the adopted children to grow up in their own country and within their own culture, only a few childcare institutions are engaged in promoting domestic adoption. Upon inquiring about the possibility of domestic adoption with a few centres based in the outskirts of Kathmandu and Pokhara, it was revealed that the constitutions of their organisations do not support domestic adoption. Hence, the irony is: orphanages being operated by Nepali people in Nepal to ensure better future for Nepali kids are not allowing eligible Nepali parents to adopt Nepali children.
A study published in the Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, states that 80 percent of unrelated infant adoptions were triggered by infertility of parents. Other reasons have included the mature thought of avoiding contributing to population growth by not reproducing and rather raising parent-less children, preventing the passing on of inheritable diseases to future generations, being conscious about the health concerns related to pregnancy and childbirth, attempting to recover from the emotional trauma of death or divorce from a spouse, and late marriages. Given the lack of empirical studies on issues of adoption in Nepal, it would only be a guess to say what the major motivation behind domestic adoption is here. This information gap has worked as a double-edged sword: it makes it hard to frame the appropriate supply-side interventions since the problems are not documented.
The ambiguity surrounding inter-country adoption and Nepal’s take on it is well explained by the November 2009 report of the permanent bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law special mission to Nepal. The report urged the Government of Nepal (GoN) to delist those international adoption agencies that have been refused accreditation in their own countries as an initial gesture towards curbing the trafficking and sale of children.
In the absence of national adoption law, adoptions were carried out with the help of dodgy ethics of orphanages working in Nepal, and as a result, not only were orphaned children’s rights being abused but adoptive parents were also being cheated. Realising this, the Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare (MoWCSW) - the Ministry overseeing international adoption - suspended adoptions by foreigners effective May 8, 2007. The suspension was lifted on Jan.1, 2009 with the announcement of new terms and conditions for intercountry adoptions. Despite this development, there seems to be no visible progress in terms of efficient decisions on the applications of hopeful foreign parents.
Those international adoptive parents who meet the procedural requirements are forced to wait indefinitely to embrace their new family members. The usual dilly-dallying of Nepal’s concerned authorities emanating from lack of transparency and accountability does nothing more than deny orphans the opportunity to enjoy a better life with adoptive families.
One year after signing the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, Nepal has yet to take concrete actions towards honouring the signatories’ commitments. The state should initiate efforts to carry out a review of the Child Rights Promotion and Protection Act in coherence with international standards rather than trying to downplay the Hague Conference Mission report.
Whatever action the government takes should be in the best interest of to-be adopted children and upholding the core concept of adoption - which is ensuring that the treatment of unrelated children is at least equivalent to biological children of the adoptive parents. The MoWCSW should not just aim at maximising revenues from the adoptive parents and adoption agencies in the form of fees and charges, but rather properly monitor and evaluate the overall adoption process.
On the other hand, engaging media and exiting community groups like Aama Samuha (mother’s group) in promoting domestic adoption and raising awareness would be instrumental in eliminating the social taboo about adoption. Only moves like this will encourage couples like Sarojini and Madan to become real trendsetters in Nepal.
Upadhyay_b@yahoo.com
Posted on: 2010-04-25 08:52
Headlines
Advertisements
