Friday, December 4, 2009

The "Gift Child" in International Adoption

I read this article, Placing the "Gift" Child in Transnational Adoption, by Barbara Yngvesson, when it was published in 2002, but just found it online. It's a densely acdemic article, but very thought-provoking and an interesting read:

In this article I focus on discourses of freedom and exclusive belonging that structure the conventions of giving in transnational adoption, and I examine state practices for regulating the production and circulation of children in a global market economy. I argue that while the gift child, like the sold child, is a product of commodity thinking, experiences of giving a child, receiving a child, and of being a given child are in tension with market practices, producing the contradictions of adoptive kinship, the ambiguities of adoption law, and the creative potential in the construction of adoptive families.

* * *
In spite of efforts to reconceptualize the physical movement of a child between persons or nations as placement rather than gift, the gift child remains a powerful and persistent image in adoption discourse. I suggest that the reason this is so is related in part to the ambiguity of the concept-the difficulty of interpreting what gifts signify about the relationship (or absence of a relationship) between donor and receiver, an ambiguity that resonates with the experience of the adoptee, the adoptive family, and, in some cases, the birth family. Ambiguity, in turn, is a function of the traces gifts bear of their passage in the world-their movement from and to someone and someplace, however vague the identity of the donor may be. By contrast, "placement" conveys a sense of grounding and permanence that is at odds with the experience of being adopted, of giving in adoption, or of adopting, verbs that imply a transformation of belonging and identity.

* * *
In what follows, I examine the concept of the adopted child as gift and explore the difficulties of an interpretation of such gifts as "freely given." Building on Marilyn Strathern's discussion of giving relationships as "enchaining" giver and receiver, rather than freeing them, and drawing on the experiences of agencies, orphanages,
adoptive parents, birth parents, and adoptees, I argue that the enchainments of
adoptive kinship open up our understandings of family and identity, and the ideas about exclusive belonging these understandings assume. Practices of adoptive kinship that seek to counter the alienation of the child and the divisions of the adoptive family by imagining placement to be a consequence of voluntarism by a birth mother or of "choice" by prospective adoptive parents obscure the dependencies and inequalities that compel some of us to give birth to and give up our children, while constituting others as "free" to adopt them. By examining the ways in which the gift of a child always leaves a trace and implies the potential for a return, I suggest how an adoptee's lived experiences of being given away may transform our understandings of personhood, identity, and belonging in an adopted world. However freestanding the child is "made" by adoption law, he or she can never be free of the "implicate field of persons" in which he or she was constituted as legally adoptable.


Mei-Ling said...

"However freestanding the child is "made" by adoption law, he or she can never be free of the "implicate field of persons" in which he or she was constituted as legally adoptable."

This is a brilliant statement.

AdoptAuthor said...

Once again I appreciate your research abilities and thank you.

Viewing an adopted child as a gift - or as some do a gift from God (gag!) is very much akin to calling an adopted child "chosen" in that both are ichy and sugar coat the reality that for adoption joy there is a tragedy and a loss.

In feminism, interestingly enough, there is a concept of theory known as "gifting economy." I did a wee bit of research on it before presenting at the ARM (feminist) conference in Toronto to see how it applies to adoption.

In an article by Susan Petrilli and Allison V. Scott I further found the phrase: “forced giving” which seemed to describe the adoption from the perspective of the relinquishing mother who is convinced that it is unselfish and loving to give away their child to others who are more deserving.

I was grateful that when I connected with my daughter' adoptive family they never thanked me for their "gift" because I would have had to bite my tongue trough and through to keep from telling them that that she my loss, not their gift.