Latoya shared this quote with her readers on Racialicious and I wanted us to take some time to discuss it on Anti-Racist Parent:
It is beautiful that people can open their lives to human beings of any background, but I think that all of us – every human being – runs the risk of being commodified in a hypercapitalist culture. For example, I feel that as a biracial person I have more social currency now that we have a biracial president. So when we think about which bodies have currency, it’s an interesting question.
One of the writers [whose piece] didn’t make it into One Big Happy Family wrote about how the process of adopting a child from another country made her more aware of human trafficking. Ultimately, she had to question whether her child had been put up for adoption or was stolen. If we look at plunging fertility in developed nations and raging underdevelopment and poverty in others, we can see how children can become the ultimate product.
Many people don’t realize that there are more human beings in slavery today than ever before. The discussion of transracial adoptees should be part of a growing awareness about the modern slave trade, but I think the glamourization of them in popular culture often does not lend itself to a deeper dialogue.
— “All In the Family: A Q + A with author Rebecca Walker”, Bitch Magazine, Fall of 2009, interview by our Racialicious contributor Nadra Kareem
Also, hear Carmen, atlasien and I discuss this quote in this week’s edition of Addicted to Race.
Any citation for the claim that there’s now more people in slavery than ever before? How far back are you checking?
And I’d argue that the commoditization of human beings isn’t necessarily down to capitalism – isn’t that pretty much what feudalism is about? _Dead Souls_ (Nikolai Gogol) is a great example of that.
I thought the comments over at Racialiscious took a quick turn into a rather negative criticism of international adoption in general. Hopefully here we can have a more productive discussion here, because I do think it’s important.
In regards to the question, I’m not sure I would agree that the glamourization of international adoption is hindering a critical look at child slavery. In my experience, people who are advocates of adoption tend to also be very interested in eradicating child slavery and trafficking. I’ve noticed that the churches and non-profits that highlight “orphan care” are the very same organizations doing a lot of education and fundraising for child-trafficking issues. It would seem to be that people who have a heart for children’s rights would be equally concerned about children being institutionalized in orphanages and group homes, and caring about children being forced into slavery. I’ve certainly seen lots of characterizations of adoptive parents as being so desperate for a baby that they would ignore these issues (as I was seeing in the comments where this was posted originally), but I have not seen those stereotypes to be true within adoption circles. In the communities I am a part of, it is usually the adoptive parents who are circulating news stories and raising awareness about child slavery.
@ Kristen, I was wondering what the comments would be like here as opposed to Racialicious. I find myself to be a major contrarian (sp?) when it comes to this issue, as I really can see both sides. Seeing it as a black and white issue (no pun intended) just doesn’t fly with me. I agree, there are many, many parents who have transracially adopted that are well aware of the issues and try their very best to do what’s right by their child. There are also a lot of APs that are clueless. But, lets face it, if you were totally clueless why would you be on a site like Anti-racist Parent or Racialicious? I do think that adoption in general (maybe TRA in particular) is simplified and glamorized in the media.
Perhaps I am trying too hard to read between the lines here, but does Ms. Walker equate IA with “slave trade”? That makes me furrow my brow a bit. Or should I be more literal and assume she is speaking of human trafficking, a very real problem?
I do wonder sometimes about solutions. I understand the need to criticize and reform adoption as an institution. But what to do? How do we, as individuals, make the choice to adopt an ethical one, from an anti-racist and pro-human rights point of view? I learn a lot from these discussions and, over time, it has made me question whether I should ever adopt (something I always assumed I would do, as my mother’s family was formed via adoption). What type of adoption would be “right” for me to undertake? As a person in a interracial relationship, I already face criticism from people (on both sides) who know nothing about me and my family. Do I really want to subject myself to more of that? Not really.
And I have to say, in this whole TRA debate I do get the not so subtle inference that “white people can’t raise children of color” and I have to say, that really burns. I do believe people have the right to say it and the right to feel that way. But what about when the white parent is their biological parent? Should white people just keep to their own, lest they potentially ruin the lives of POC? I’m not sure where this leaves me…and it makes me feel like an outsider in both white communities and communities of color.
Two citations for Dersk:
From E. Benjamin Skinner’s recent book “A Crime So Monstrous: “Two hundred years after the birth of Abraham Lincoln, there are now more slaves than there were at any point in human history.”
Also, the UN stated earlier this year that it appears to be worsening. A good article outlining their findings is here:
http://www.rferl.org/content/UN_Says_Human_Trafficking_Appears_To_Be_+Worsening_/1492561.html
@ Kristen: You wrote “I’ve certainly seen lots of characterizations of adoptive parents as being so desperate for a baby that they would ignore these issues (as I was seeing in the comments where this was posted originally), but I have not seen those stereotypes to be true within adoption circles.”
I think that there are lots of adoptive parents who are reading up and trying to do the right thing. But just last week, on an adoptive parent forum I frequent, a woman posted almost exactly what you wrote above. Basically, she said because she is infertile, she has no other options for a baby, and so would we please stop talking about corruption in international adoption. Also, see this ap’s response as quoted here http://resistracism.wordpress.com/2009/09/21/well-thats-big-of-you/
It’s not all of us, but I don’t want to estimate the number of APs who ARE willing to turn a blind eye.
As for the quote itself, I’d feel much better discussing in the context of the entire article, which doesn’t seem to be available free of charge. What particular argument the author is making about IA and human traficking is not quite clear to me…
I would love to see the whole article, too. I was hunting around for it and from what I can guess from the tagline on Bitch’s website, it doesn’t look like an article on adoption, but rather one exploring nontraditional families, with this quote tagged on the end. Anyone know for sure?
The quote raises my eyebrows, too, because the author is implying that international adoption and child slavery are closely related. I wonder if the author meant to say child trafficking? Because they are not the same thing. I do believe that non-ethical adoptions can sometimes result in child trafficking (like in the post Julia referenced). But I do not think international adoptions lead to child slavery. I don’t think most people who are in the child slavery business are going through the trouble of getting a homestudy, filing a 1600-A, etc. Rather they are kidnapping and smuggling children into slavery, which is not the same thing as adoption.
The trouble with the above quote, for me, is that it implies so much without really getting into the issue. If I said something like, “the growing respect for the step-father role is hindering a deeper discussion about child molestation”, I think we could all see that I was trying to imply something about stepfathers, you know?
@Julia, maybe I am underestimating this. I guess because I know so many AP’s personally and haven’t ever seen someone like this. In my experience, the people who are willing to turn a blind eye to corruption are the ones who only want white babies from private domestic adoption.
@Montclair Mommy, I hear you on the “white people shouldn’t raise children of color” thing. It does have some big implications beyond adoption, and to me sort of insinuates that everyone should stick to their own culture within dating & family, which is always an interesting notion to me in circles where people are trying to fight racism. I’m sorry that it makes you feel like an outsider. That sucks. If you do feel a desire to adopt, I hope you won’t let the judgement stuff deter you. There are still ethical ways to adopt, and certainly children who need family. In my experience, the judgement in the real world is significantly less than the judgement online. You just develop a thick skin and avoid circles where the anti-adoption or anti-transracial sentiment overwhelms.
@Kristen – Thanks for the links – just wasn’t sure if they were comparing to, say, ancient Rome when 25% of the entire population were slaves (would be interesting to know ratios for this sort of thing as well as absolute numbers).
I found the article a bit insulting in its rhetoric. I wonder if people would prefer that the three brothers my Dutch friends adopted still slept in a corral in Brazil and didn’t know what tables and chairs were for?
And geez, those comments – as far as I could tell, people were saying both that interracial adoption is wrong and that it’s wrong that white couples would want to adopt white babies. Yeesh.
I’m sure it’s my own experience on this subject that makes me feel the comments on Racialicious were mostly pretty balanced. I would disagree that there was a lot of adoptive parent bashing. I’ve seen much, much worse. On the other hand, I’ve seen much much more defensiveness and righteousness by adoptive parents than what I saw for the most part on that thread. This is an emotional topic for a lot of people.
However, I just really, really have to repeat again (I made the same argument on the Racialicious post about the exact same mentality) about the comment “I wonder if people would prefer that the three brothers my Dutch friends adopted still slept in a corral in Brazil and didn’t know what tables and chairs were for?”
This is the exact type of statement that just really drives me crazy. Why is the “they’d be dead otherwise” or “they’d be feral and uncivilized” always the answer to any critique about adoption?
Can’t we all agree that there are times when adoption is appropriate and times when it is not, and what we all need to do is become educated about the problems that are INHERENT in adoptions (whether domestic, foster, international, whatever) so that we can be as ethical as possible?
Rebecca Walker adopted her former partner’s child. Then, later after they split up, she had a biological child. To understand Walker’s quote we need to understand more of the context. She is not the first or only person who has made the “international adoption/slavery” connection. It’s a provocative statement and I’m not sure exactly how she means it. I feel she has often written and said provocative things. Maybe she is referring to the very real problem of trafficking. Whenever there is a demand for children in countries, there is often an underground or illegal business in buying or kidnapping children for profit. It’s an ugly truth. I am not saying that all children adopted internationally are bought or kidnapped but we can not ignore the fact that many have been. I belive that in the vast majority of the cases, the adoptive parents are not to “blame” for this in the sense that they are not making the illegal transaction of their own volition. However, do we need to look at whether the “demand” for children for adoption creates or increases a black market for children for adoption? Absolutely.
I have absolutely no interest in placing blame on adoptive parents. But I absolutely have little “sympathy” for those who want to just ignore or dismiss the very real problems that surround international adoption.
The only immediate options for children in bad situations in poor countries aren’t first world adoption or third world misery. There are, for example, SOS villages internationally, including in Brazil http://www.sos-childrensvillages.org/Where-we-help/Americas/Brazil/Pages/default.aspx
SOS first aims to provide services to families so kids can remain with their kin. If this isn’t possible SOS supports in country foster homes with people of the same ethnic group so kids can remain in their cultures and get an education. They also work to strengthen the communities as a whole so that fewer families end up needing to relinquish kids in the first place. When the children grow up they are able to lead good, autonomous lives. I’d encourage anyone to go to the website and learn more about this wonderful organization that has been lauded by Nelson Mandel at its website or here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOS_Children%27s_Villages
There view on adoption can be found here: http://www.sos-childrensvillages.org/News-and-Media/News/Pages/SOS-Childrens-Villages-standpoint-regarding-adoption.aspx
Jae Ran, I do agree with you, that talk about child trafficking often results in adoptive parents becoming combative and defensive. I totally agree. It’s a tough conversation that is emotional on all sides. I think the trouble I had with the convo over at Racialiscious (and a reason AP sometimes go haywire on the topic) is the implied suggestion that any child with living birthfamily was an unethically adopted child. I would beg to differ, because I think that just as women have choice in reproductive rights, they should also have choices in regards to whether or not to parent. And if a birthmom chooses an adoption plan, she should be allowed that choice, too. Even if she is poor and not educated, she should be allowed that choice.
Now, the million dollar question in any adoption is whether or not the birthmom has made an informed decision, or if it has been swayed by an exchange of money or by coercion. I believe that happens. I believe it happens more than we want to think it does. But I don’t believe it happens in every international adoption, and I bristle when IA and child trafficking are used interchangebly.
What is hard about Rebecca Walker’s statement, though, is that she isn’t talking trafficking, she is talking child slavery. With adoptive trafficking, typically an adoptive parent has unknowingly taken a child that should not have ethically been adopted. The parent may bear responsibility for not having done their research, or for turning a blind eye, etc. But when you talk about child slavery, rather than calling out a systemic issue with how children become adoptable, you are instead implying that adoptive parents are signing up to bring children into their home for forced labor reasons. Two very different things – though both situations are tragic and need attention.
In regards to the “would you rather them die in an orphanage” thing, yeah, that does get thrown around a lot and I can see where it is abused as a way to shut down a valid conversation on adoption reform. However, I do think that a critical look at the systemic issues of institutionalization is a part of the discussion on adoption reform. Not talking about orphans in a discussion about IA would be like not talking about the uninsured in a discussion on healthcare reform.
I don’t know why this is such a hard subject to tackle, and I wish that adoptive parents and adult adoptees could have a better dialogue.
Kristen, I definitely agree that talking about institutions is a part of talking about adoption reform. The problem is, we are lumping in all institutions as one. There is a very big difference between some orphanages with little to no money or resources and inadequate staff, and others that have small care-giver to child ratios, education, resources, etc. The SOS villages that Moth mentioned above are kind of the model for how it can be done. Is it ideal? Maybe not. Is it a place where children are dying and abused? Not at all.
Not all orphanages and group homes are hell-holes, not all adoptive families are ideal either. Honestly, I know of many adoptive families with a large number of children – 8-10 kids or more. This is NOT a diss on large families, but tell me why a child adopted to a home with 10+ kids is better off than a child living in a group home with 4-6 kids? Because there is a “mom” or “dad” rather than a caregiver? Because one fits the idea of a “family” and another does not?
I don’t think that institutions are the way to go. A few years ago my state tried to reinstall “orphanages” and had most of the funding to do so. I was adamantly opposed.
One more thing. Kristen, I think you are right about the Rebecca Walker quote equating child slavery with international adoption. Slavery and trafficking are different things. There are some who do adopt for slavery, but that is very few. I just read a story about a man who adopted a Vietnamese girl over twenty years ago for the purpose of keeping her as his sex slave. But that isn’t the norm.
@Jae, I guess I was reacting more to the more extreme people who were categorically saying that international adoption and interracial adoption is just plain wrong (and in this case, I think the kids were being taken away from the mother by social services – don’t know the full story, but it was a pretty bad scene). Just seems to me that people with that attitude care more about ideological purity than the quality of kids’ lives.
Does anyone have any actual stats or estimates on the number of international adoptions that are somehow sketchy (kid laundering / kidnapping / whatever)? I did a bit of searching but could only find stats for the total number of international adoptions into the US and anecdotes for international adoption trafficking that wasn’t US-specific. It’d be very interesting to know the percentage of the total, to understand how big a problem it really is (as opposed to other kinds of child trafficking).
I wish we could see the whole article. It seems this discussion is a lot of guess-work and dancing around maybe-she-meant…
I’ve read Rebecca Walker’s autobiography, which is not terribly recent, but I wouldn’t put a whole lot of stock in her perspective based on what I have read. So especially since the main topic of the article doesn’t seem to have been adoption, this is a pretty provacative quote with little substance behind it.
I know this is an old post and the conversation is over, but I just want to chime in that it’s not OK to conflate international adoption with transracial adoption. They are not the same.
The words we use to describe an adoption have meanings. For example, an transracial adoption from fostercare is a far cry from a closed international transracial adoption which is a far cry from a second-parent transracial adoption which is a far cry from an open domestic transracial infant adoption.
It’s important to use the right words. When talking about international human trafficking, it’s NOT OK to target criticism at all transracial adoptions.