Interesting article here from New America Media. It raises some good points, but I think it clouds the issue with crap at the same time.
The first commenter, Channah, basically wrote what I was thinking and I responded with another comment (from nekogrrl) after her/him.
In addition to my rant there, here's this:
International adoption provides a solution for what? Less than 1% of children at risk and in care in Ethiopia? Hardly a large amount.
I'm not saying the article writer was criticizing the process, but why do people keep questioning why PAPs don't just use the money they would spend on an adoption to sponsor the child or other children, allowing them to stay within the country, in care or with any remaining members of their birth family? As if this is the solution. As if it's black & white like that.
If it were that simple, why not ask why EVERYONE doesn't send $20K or so to sponsor a child?
It is not the responsibility of PAPs to save the world. And besides that, how would that solution allow a childless person/couple to parent a child in need of a family? And why should those unable to conceive be denied the opportunity to parent? And for people like me who have not tried to get pregnant but want to parent a child already in care and at great risk - why should we be denied that privilege? Why should that child be denied the opportunity?
These are all potentially sensitive questions that can cause great debate, but that's not my reason for bringing them up. I just wish people outside the adoption community would JUST THINK and see that adoption is never easy nor cut-and-dried - no matter how you look at it. It's not a perfect solution in any situation. It's just one solution that makes immediate and positive impact where other initiatives sometimes can not. And it's a solution that Ethiopia and other countries recognize as such.
[edit: Oh God, I hope no ministry staff are monitoring my blog - I'll never see a referral. But that's a whole other topic ...]
