Before 1970, “intercountry”
was the more typical term for the adoptions of children born in
foreign countries by U.S. citizens. Today, these placements are
called international adoptions.
After World War II and during the early Cold War, the adoption
market globalized as wars, refugee migrations, famines, and other
disasters made the plight of dependent and orphaned children abroad
more visible to Americans. U.S. service personnel stationed around
the world were on the front lines of this movement. Soldiers and
sailors sent to Europe during the war, Germany and Japan after 1945,
and eventually Korea, Vietnam, and elsewhere in Asia produced significant
numbers of children in those countries. The story of these half-American
waifs, many of them mixed-race and sometimes cruelly stigmatized
in their countries of origin, attracted attention in the United
States.
These children of crisis resurrected the language of rescue and
the religious impulses that had characterized the era of the orphan
trains and pointed in the direction of special
needs adoptions, which had similar humanitarian overtones. After
1945, international adoptions mobilized Lutherans, Catholics, and
Seventh Day Adventists, among others, and inspired the formation
of such organizations as the League for Orphan Victims in Europe
(LOVE) and the American Joint Committee for Assisting Japanese-American
Orphans.
As with the earlier phase in adoption history, benevolence was
compatible with self-interest. Some Americans were delighted to
discover a baby boom in West Germany, where thousands of healthy
children had been abandoned by irresponsible fathers or men who
had never been told of their children’s existence. Military
families stationed abroad were the first to adopt these children
but the mass media quickly spread the news to Americans at home.
The story of the Doss family, popularized by The
Family Nobody Wanted, was first described in a 1949 Readers’
Digest article entitled “Our 'International Family'.”
During the 1950s, proxy adoptions, which
allowed U.S. citizens to adopt in foreign courts in absentia, were
the most widely publicized means of international adoption. They
gained ground after 1955, when an evangelical couple from rural
Oregon, Bertha and Harry Holt,
adopted eight Korean War orphans. The Holts went on to arrange scores
of adoptions for other Americans who shared their fervent belief
that children could be brought from Korea to America with divine
guidance.
Child welfare professionals hated this type of adoption, not because
it was religious but because it lacked regulation. U.S.
Children’s Bureau Chief Katherine Oettinger argued that
children adopted from abroad were more likely to suffer abuse, neglect,
and disruption because their adoptions circumvented minimum
standards. “All of us respond to the idea of rescuing
helpless children from the dragon of deprivation,” she agreed,
but “problems in adoption are infinitely harder to resolve
in an adoption which spans the ocean.” Between 1953 and 1962,
Americans adopted 15,000 foreign children.
International adoptions often amounted to transracial
adoptions since they brought Asian children into white American
families. Directly at odds with matching,
these adoptions paved the way for domestic transracial
adoptions by making family formation across racial lines a conspicuous
social issue for the first time. Pearl
S. Buck was perhaps the most important public champion of parentless
children of color born within and without the United States. She
insisted that love made families—not race, religion, or national
background. Outcome studies of
international adoptees also prompted new thinking about the need
for cultural sensitivity to such issues as language and national
heritage. Concerns about whether foreign adoptees might bring about
an American future with more interracial dating and marriage were
common and urgent, indicating that earlier concerns about eugenics
had not disappeared.
Like domestic transracial adoptions,
international adoptions raised basic questions that Americans have
still not answered in spite of the dramatic recent increase in international
adoptions. Is love enough to make a family? Does belonging have
a color or a nation?
|