Adoption: The secrets, lies and myths

O'Rourke M, McGettrick C, Baker R, Hill R et al., CLANN: Ireland's Unmarried Mothers and their Children: Gathering the Data: Principal Submission to the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes. Dublin: Justice For Magdalenes Research, Adoption Rights Alliance, Hogan Lovells, 2018

Adoption was once so prevalent in Ireland, that the amount of children adopted, as a percentage of children born out of marriage was 96.95%. In 2012 that same figure was 0.10%. Adoption had traditionally involved the placement of unrelated children with infertile couples. Adoption holds a unique position as writers of social policy legislate how people become a family. This study aims to act as a document of how adoption practice changed. It aims to document what was motivating that change in practice and it is for that reason that adoption social workers were identified as the key informants in a qualitative inquiry. Adoption social workers are both witnesses and participants of the radical change in adoption that is clearly evident in the statistical information. Crucially they know why such changes came about.

History of Education, 2011

's A Child for Keeps, based on her excellent doctoral study of the subject (1), is a welcome addition to the social history of 20th-century Britain. Despite the importance of child adoption in relation to a number of social and cultural concerns in this period-changing views on illegitimacy, constructions of parenthood and childhood, and the roles of the state and the voluntary sector, to name a few-this marks the first published book-length study of the subject.(2)

BC Studies: The British Columbian …, 2004

Canadians have regularly employed diverse strategies. In British Columbia, as elsewhere, many biological mothers and fathers have turned to sharing or giving up the care of offspring for intervals from a few days to forever. Parents and children have often attempted to set some of the terms of their separation. The history of adoption in British Columbia supplies one part of this complicated story of interrupted relations. This article takes up the issue of such negotiations in two main parts. In the first, it reviews the efforts of the BC state to determine the adoption of Canadian children over the course of the twentieth century. In particular, it outlines critical options and constraints confronting biological kin. The second section considers how birth parents, families, communities, and adoptees themselves have tried to negotiate the terms by which children have been exchanged. Their efforts profoundly influenced the experience of adoption. As this account demonstrates, both regulation and resistance have contributed to the diversity that is the hallmark of modern family life in British Columbia. "Interrupted Relations" is part of a broader study of English Canada's encounter with adoption. 1 Many issues, including international adoption * My thanks to Susy Webb, Lori Mcintosh, and Stephanie Higginson for their research assistance on British Columbia. I would also like to thank UBC'S Hampton Fund, the SSHRCC, and the Canada Council (Killam Program) for their generous support. As always, I owe much to

Journal of Women's History, 2006

Critically appraise how the adoption of children from a first world country, namely U.S.A. represents a challenge , especially as Ireland has a history of sending children for adoption overseas. Critically analyse the factors giving rise to this practice and comment on the absence of professional debate surrounding this practice.

Australian Feminist Studies, 2009

In 2004 the sociologist Rosemary Pringle remarked that the ‘climate of apology’ surrounding adoption in Australia, linked with understandable shame regarding past adoption practices and the ‘stolen generation’ of Aboriginal children, meant that it had become ‘almost impossible’ to endorse adoption as a policy option (Pringle 2004). In 2004, this was an apt call for all the reasons outlined astutely by Pringle. Then in 2005 and 2007 two reports of the Australian House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Human Services, the first on inter-country adoption (Overseas Adoption in Australia: Report on the Inquiry into the Adoption of Children from Overseas) and the second on the impact of illicit drug use on families (The Winnable War on Drugs: The Impact of Illicit Drug Use on Families), challenged Pringle’s position. The two inquiries, both chaired by the Honourable Bronwyn Bishop MP, advocated adoption not only as a viable social policy option but also as the preferred or ‘default’ placement option for certain children; and both reports attempted to reverse what they described as an entrenched anti-adoption bias in Australian child welfare and placement policy. In this paper, we examine these recent developments in Australia with some regard to parallel developments in adoption legislation and policy in the United Kingdom and the United States, and we describe these developments as ‘new adoption’. By this, we do not mean the reform movement pushing for open modes of adoption which emerged in the 1980s and which, in many jurisdictions, including several states in the United States and in the Australian State of Queensland, is still underway.3 By ‘new adoption’, we refer to more recent developments in adoption policy and practice, appearing most notably in the United States through the Adoption and Safe Families Act (1997), and in the United Kingdom as initially framed in the paper Adoption: A New Approach (Secretary of State for Health 2000) and enacted in the 2002 Adoption and Children Act (ACA). In both administrations, adoption is reframed actively by the state as a solution to the chronic problem of children in long-term state or ‘out-of-home’ care.

Social Policy and Society

Whilst dominant social norms relating to families shape the lives of all people, this can have particularly negative effects upon non‐traditional families. This is especially the case in terms of adoption, where a focus solely on the adoptive family can often result in the ‘disappearance’ of the birth family. This paper explores the location of birth families within adoptive families by first examining a sample of children’s storybooks aimed at adoptive children living with lesbian or gay parents, as but one example of how policy makers may come to identify dominant cultural norms that circulate about birth families in the context of intercountry adoption. A number of key tropes are identified across these books, namely the ghostly presence of birth families, and the representation of birth parents as deviant (thus warranting the removal of their children). Given the negative impact such representations can have upon adoptive children as well as birth parents, the paper then moves to discuss the work of Trinh (1987) and her elaboration of the notion of the ‘inappropriate/d other’. Moving beyond the autonomous self of liberal humanism, and towards a recognition of the interdependency of all people, Trinh’s work allows for an account of intercountry adoption that recognises the incapacitating effects of dominant discourses of family. The paper concludes by applying Trinh’s work to the development of policy recommendations that may help to counter the types of representations of birth families identified in the children’s storybooks.

2015

My heartfelt thanks go to my supervisor, Dr. Mary Hawkins. Throughout this thesis and in particular the last gruelling months, her patience, support and guidance has been immeasurable. Her pragmatism, strength of character and ability to ground me has kept me going when the death of my mother and other very difficult family events threw me off my path and almost jeopardised the completion of this study. Magnanimous in her generosity she has been truly inspirational. I thank my Associate Supervisor, Dr Stephen Janes, whose encouragement and advice was timely and for his ongoing support of my research. I would like to thank the many participants who contributed their time and narratives. I know it was not easy to invoke such traumatic memories, but because of your courage the history of adoption in Australia is substantially richer. I am grateful to the many organisations and groups around Australia that supported my project and advertised via their email lists, newsletters and by word of mouth for participants for my research study. I owe much to Judy McHutchison whose 1986 Thesis first awakened me to the illegality of the acts perpetrated against myself and the other mothers who had their newborns forcibly taken for the purpose of adoption. I have built on her research, as have many others who have worked to expose the past human rights violations and re-establish the primacy and sacredness of the bond between mother and child; irrespective of marital status, colour or situation. I would like to thank Ms Sheila Simms who gave me access to the Women's Hospital Crown Street Archives and to the other professionals who willingly gave of their time and spoke openly and frankly about the institutional abuse meted out to the unwed mothers with whom they came in contact. I owe much and am truly grateful to Dr. Geoff Rickarby, who is not only a long time friend and a fellow activist, but has supported many mothers in their darkest hours. His candour and courage in speaking out when no-one believed or wanted to listen to the way unwed mothers were mistreated not only saved lives, but contributed to changing the abusive culture that existed within the institutions. I truly appreciate Mr. Pat Rogan's, former MP for East Hills, friendship and unwavering support since 1994. Without Pat's assistance and that of his assistant Ms Margaret Como, mothers would never have succeeded in gaining a State Inquiry into Past Practices in Adoption (NSW) (1998-2000). This was the first time a government formally acknowledged that the phenomenon of Forced Adoption existed and that it was both unethical and illegal. This was not only the beginning of a revolution to bring justice and peace to many mothers and adoptees and their affected family members, but the Inquiry vi provided a wealth of data for future research. Thanks to my dear friends who have patiently supported me and waited for my return to 'normal life' and be available to once again enjoy their company. I would like to thank my trauma specialist Ms Mirjana Askovic for her unwavering support over the last two years, without her assistance I would not have finished my project. Sometimes an angel appears when you need her the most. I would like to thank my parents from whom I learnt much and hopefully they from me. I only wish my mother was still alive to see the completion of my project, which had been a source of healing for us both. Finally love and thanks to my children, their partners and my grandchildren, just for being who you are. vii Volume I