Intercountry adoption (ICA) began after World War II, but opinions differ regarding how the practice has been described and classified in the literature. Alexandra Young examines how various researchers have interpreted its history and proposes a new analysis of the phases in its development. The beginning of ICA was strongly influenced by humanitarian ideals and a desire to help children dislocated by war and natural disasters. During the next period, the motivation changed and it became a solution that satisfied the needs of both developing and developed countries for finding families for children. As the number of children available in developed countries declined, a market mentality evolved in relation to the availability of children. This was followed by the current phase when sending countries are developing domestic solutions for children needing families, leading to a fall in the number of children available for ICA. This article examines this history and discusses factors that have influenced past and present policy and practice.
DickensJ, ‘The paradox of inter-country adoption: Analysing Romania's experience as a sending country’, International Journal of Social Welfare11: 1, pp 76–83, 2002.
7.
FeigelmanWSilvermanAR, ‘Preferential adoption: A new mode of family formation’, Social Casework: The Journal of Contemporary Social Work60: 5, pp 296–305, 1979.
8.
GaileyCW, ‘Race, class and gender in intercountry adoption in the USA’, in SelmanP (ed), Intercountry Adoption: Developments, trends and perspectives, London: BAAF, 2000.
9.
Hague Conference on Private and International Law, ‘Hague Conference on Private International Law: Final Act of the 17th Session, including the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption’, International Legal Materials32, pp 1134–46, 1993.
10.
Hague Conference on Private and International Law, 2006; www.hcch.net/index_en.php (accessed 7 February 2009).
11.
HarveyIJ, Australian Parents for Vietnamese Children: A social-psychological study of intercountry adoption in Australia, North Ryde, NSW, Australia: School of Behavioural Sciences, Macquarie University, 1980.
12.
HoksbergenRAC, ‘Intercountry adoption coming of age in the Netherlands: Basic issues, trends, and developments’, in AltsteinHSimonSJ (eds), Intercountry Adoption: A multinational perspective, New York, NY: Praeger, 1991.
13.
HoksbergenRAC, ‘Changes in attitudes in three generations of adoptive parents: 1950–2000’, in SelmanP (ed), Intercountry Adoption: Developments, trends and perspectives, London: BAAF, London, 2000.
14.
HoksbergenRACTer Laak, ‘Changing attitudes of adoptive parents in Northern European countries’, in BrodzinskyDPalaciosJ (eds), Psychological Issues in Adoption: Research and practice, Westport, CT: Praeger, 2005.
International Social Services, Proceedings of ISS Asian-Regional Correspondents and Staff Meeting, 6th–7th September, New York, NY: International Social Services, 1975.
17.
International Social Services and the International Reference Centre for the Rights of Children Deprived of their Family, ‘Diversification of the countries of origin and an increase of the age of the adopted children against a background of intercountry adoption that continues to be tense’, Monthly Review 7–8, Geneva: International Social Services (ISS) and the International Reference Centre for the Rights of Children Deprived of their Family (IRCRCDF), 2008.
18.
KaneS, ‘The movement of children for international adoption: An epidemiologic perspective’, The Social Science Journal30: 4, pp 323–39, 1993.
19.
KirtonD, ‘Intercountry adoption in the UK: Towards an ethical foreign policy?’, in SelmanP (ed), Intercountry Adoption: Developments, trends and perspectives, London: BAAF, 2000.
20.
LovelockK, ‘Intercountry adoption as a migratory practice: A comparative analysis of intercountry adoption and immigration policy and practice in the United States, Canada and New Zealand in the post World War Two period’, International Migration Review34: 3, pp 907–49, 2000.
21.
BabelMF Lucker, ‘Intercountry adoption and trafficking in children: An assessment of the adequacy of the international protection of children and their rights’, International Review of Penal Law62: 3, pp 799–818, 1991.
22.
MassonJ, ‘Intercountry adoption: A global problem or a global solution?’, Journal of International Affairs55: 1, pp 141–66, 2001.
MillerHC, ‘Recent developments in Korean services for children’, Children18: 1, pp 28–30, 1971.
25.
O'HalloranK, The Politics of Adoption: International perspectives on law, policy and practice, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, 2006.
26.
PilottiF, ‘Intercountry adoption: Trends, issues and policy implications for the 1990s’, Childhood1: 3, pp 165–77, 1993.
27.
ResnickRP, ‘Latin American children in intercountry adoption’, in BeanP (ed), Adoption: Essays in social policy, law, and sociology, London: Tavistock, 1984.
SelmanP, ‘The demographic history of intercountry adoption’, in SelmanP (ed), as above, 2000.
32.
SelmanP, ‘Intercountry adoption in the new millennium: The “quiet migration” revisited’, Population Research and Policy Review21, pp 205–25, 2002.
33.
SelmanP, ‘Trends in intercountry adoption: Analysis of data from 20 receiving countries, 1998–2004’, Journal of Population Research23: 2, pp 183–204, 2006.
34.
SmolinD, ‘Child laundering: How the intercountry adoption system legitimizes and incentivizes the practices of buying, trafficking, kidnapping and stealing children’, Wayne Law Review52: 1, pp 113–200, 2006.
35.
Swedish Intercountry Adoptions Authority MIA, Adoption in Sweden: Policy and procedures concerning intercountry adoption, Stockholm: MIA Swedish Intercountry Adoptions Authority, 2005.
36.
TextorMR, ‘International adoption in West Germany: A private affair’, in AltsteinHSimonR (eds), Intercountry Adoption: A multinational perspective, New York: Praeger, 1991.
37.
TizardB, ‘Intercountry adoption: A review of the evidence’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry32: 5, pp 743–56, 1991.
38.
WeilR, ‘International adoptions: The quiet migration’, International Migration Review18: 2, pp 276–95, 1984.
39.
YoungA, Families of Choice: A qualitative study of Australian families formed through intercountry adoption, Sydney: Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Sydney, 2009.
40.
ZiglerE, ‘A developmental psychologist's view of Operation Babylift’, American Psychologist31: 5, pp 329–40, 1976.
