Gay Couple Loses Louisiana Fight to Be Named on Birth Certificate

As reported by Leslie Fenton (whose story about adopting her own son I blogged about here):

It was muggy late summer New Orleans, hurricane season 2010. Families all over the Gulf Coast packed their evacuation bags for a quick getaway on a moment's notice. My wife's all-consuming morning sickness had started to subside. She was three months pregnant, and we had a decision to make: Could we safely let our child be born in Louisiana? We knew about the case of Oren Smith and Mickey Adar, two dads who adopted a little boy from Louisiana in 2006 and have been fighting ever since to get the state to issue them an amended birth certificate. Louisiana, like most states, will issue an amended birth certificate to reflect the names of adoptive parents so the child has a definitive record of parentage for everything from insurance to inheritance rights. But the Louisiana Registrar refused to issue one to this child, on the theory that Louisiana does not recognize "unmarried couple" adoptions. At the time we were deciding whether to move, Oren and Mickey had just won their latest round in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, but the state was appealing to the full bench. If they lost, the legal landscape for families headed by same-sex couples in Louisiana would be grimmer than ever.

* * *

Late Monday night, the court handed down a 70+ page opinion siding with the Louisiana Registrar. The crux of Smith and Adar's claim is the Full Faith and Credit Clause (FFC) of the U.S. Constitution, which compels states to give recognition to the court judgments of other states. This provision in the Constitution is one of the lynchpins of federalism itself: Residents of the separate states can freely move between them without fear that their valid legal documents will become useless the moment they cross a border line. In recent years, anti-gay legislators have succeeded in carving out what is essentially a Gay Exception to the FFC in the form of the Defense of Marriage Act, which allows states to deny valid marriage documents from other states if the happy couple consists of two men or two women. Even the President of the United States has announced that DOMA is unconstitutional, and yet states persist in holding fast to the Gay Exception. For the record, no state has ever insisted on a Murderer Exception, or a Domestic Violence Perpetrator Exception, or even a Pedophile Exception to the FFC when it comes to marriage.

But on Monday, the 5th Circuit majority upheld the Gay Exception in Louisiana, where the repugnant Registrar refused to add both dads to their baby's birth certificate. The circular reasoning in the legalese-heavy ruling goes something like this: The Registrar has "acknowledged" the out-of-state ruling by admitting it exists, and has therefore fulfilled the state's responsibilities under the FFC even though she refuses to issue an official document reflecting this acknowledgment. As the dissent point out, the majority's decision goes much further. It ignores the federal courts' responsibility to enforce FFC and, most alarmingly, asserts that individuals have no private right of action to enforce FFC. In other words: Don't even think about trying this with your East Coast marriages, gays. Too bad, so sad, kid. Next time, try getting adopted by a straight couple. Louisiana will put both their names on your birth certificate even if they beat you half to death.

You can read the 5th Circuit opinion here.

And this is what I said in an earlier post about the law suit:

I've posted before about why I hate the so-called "amended birth certificate" that states issue for adopted children. I consider them government-sponsored lies.

* * *

But once we allow amended birth certificates for adopted children, listing the names of their adoptive parents, then who cares the sexual orientation of the parents? If an amended birth certificate doesn't mean that the folks listed actually gave birth to the child, who cares whether the parents were in fact biologically capable of giving birth to the child?

Amanda of the Declassified Adoptee posted an insightful comment in response:

I think that these issues are more arguing about the rights of those who are adopting, rather than promoting the rights of the children who are being adopted.

Yes, all people deserve to be treated equally. We can either argue that gay and lesbian adoptive parents have the equal right to be on the birth certificates of adopted children as heterosexual parents are.

or

We can instead argue that adopted children have the equal right to have one birth certificate with factual birth documentation upon it, as the non-adopted do.

Well said.

DON'T let this be you!

Here's an "Ask Rene" letter at Good Enough Mother (a parenting but not adoptive-parenting site):

Hi Rene,

Our daughter Kelly is adopted – but she still doesn’t know. Now that she’s getting older (she’s almost 15) we’re wondering when – and even if – we should tell her.

We always planned on telling her but my husband and I kept putting it off – and now we’re wondering if it’s in her best interests to tell her. Kelly can act out and be dramatic and we’re worried this will devastate her.

We have one other daughter, Shelly, who is 13 and our biological daughter. The two girls fight constantly and if this comes out we think it might create an even bigger rift between them.

Are we taking the easy way out by staying silent? Or does Kelly have a right to know? And if we do tell her – how should we handle it?
Yours

Adoptive Mom, Maryland

ARRRRGGGGGGGG!  Why do people DO this?!  Is there ANY expert alive today who hasn't said a MILLION times, you MUST tell your children they are adopted.  And it's BEST to tell them FROM THE BEGINNING.  Because when you don't, you end up having a 15-year-old who doesn't know and who will NEVER trust you again and who WILL act out and has every reason to because you've now made it a HUGE EFFING DEAL when it didn't have to be, or you end up with a 15-year-old who DOES know because she heard it from Great-Aunt Mildred who didn't realize what IDIOTS her parents are and figured she knew, so now she DEFINITELY doesn't trust a thing her parents say and it is ANY WONDER that she's acting out?!

Sigh.

I think Rene gave appropriate advice.  The only thing I would add is that it might be a good idea, if you've waited this long, to have a family therapist on speed dial! And I do mean a FAMILY therapist, because these parents have some serious issues about adoption if they haven't been able to talk to Kelly about hers for 15 years and probably need therapy worse than Kelly does. Poor Kelly.

Zoe Got Her Answer!



Remember when Zoe sent a question to Mei Magazine for Dr. Amanda Baden to answer?  Well, her question and answer appeared in the Spring 2011 issue and she's thrilled!

The answer is long, so I won't reprint it here. But I thought Dr. Baden did a great job of carefully addressing each issue in Zoe's short letter.  She covered the "do my birth parents think about me?" issue, the "I have mixed feelings about my adoption" issue, the "I sometimes find it hard to explain my mixed feelings to my parents" issue, the "I have fantasies about my birth parents issues," all in two pages!

Zoe is still processing all of the information, but is just tickled pink that her letter was answered, and in print.  Between that and her "celebrity" profile in Mei Magazine's last issue, she feels like quite the star!

What AM I?

In adoption circles, we're familiar with that sometimes irritating question, "What ARE you?" directed at mixed-race and non-mixed-race adoptees alike.  But what about the adoptees who, because of no information about their origins or hidden information about their origins, have to ask the question of themselves -- "What AM I?"  Two items I've come across recently poignantly raise this issue.

First, this article in the Guardian about the "Gatwick baby," a 10-day-old baby found at Gatwick Airport who is now 25 years old and searching for his roots:

Because he was found at an airport, Steve always wondered if his background was non-British. Some of his adoptive relatives speculated that he had an Irish, or even a Russian, look. Poignantly, among his treasures, he has the lists of arrivals and departures into Gatwick on the day when he was found. He could have come from almost anywhere on the planet.

Then he heard of a way to check out his background. "I heard there was a DNA test I could have which would give me some idea of my roots, placing me from somewhere geographically, and maybe even linking me to specific family lines," he says.

He went to Edinburgh, to meet Dr Jim Wilson, a population geneticist at the university there, who analysed his DNA. He shows me a graph: what it reveals is that – contrary to his relatives' speculations – Steve's forebears were probably of English or Scottish descent. Wilson has also done a Y-chromosome check, tracking the male bloodline from that – and the results show that his father's family are more likely to come from the east of Britain than the west.

Finally, and in many ways most fascinating, was that Wilson fed Steve's DNA into a global databank containing the genetic profiles of millions of individuals. These were people hoping to find family matches for either genealogical or medical reasons. From this, he identified a number of individuals who are Steve's seventh or sixth or even, in one case, fifth cousin.

For many people, establishing information so vague and remote wouldn't mean much. Steve felt as if he had been given pure gold. "You've got no idea how it feels to know nothing about what nationality you are, or where you come from," he says. "This is worth so much to me. It places me somewhere, it gives me a place to say I'm from. I'm European; I'm maybe from England. I link in somewhere, even if I only have a vague notion of where. There are people somewhere on the planet who are my very, very distant relatives. And all of it matters."

Second, this aptly titled article, I Might Be Hawai'ian, by Kevin Minh Allen, adopted from Vietnam after the war that "expanded the possibilities of my parents’ whereabouts and identities to near endless proportions:"

When I landed in Honolulu, Hawai’i to attend the Asian Adult Adoptee Gathering & Film Festival in October 2008, my first thought was that I wanted to see the beach. I like to think that when I was born a tropical hormone was injected into my blood stream, making me pine for salty water and cracked coconuts. When the #19 bus to the hotel district arrived, I heaved my two full backpacks onto my back and walked into the air conditioned cabin. Luckily, I got a window seat, so I could stare out at the scenery and take in everything I saw. As the bus wound through its elongated route, I marveled at the various people who boarded and exited the bus. I have a bad habit of staring, but hopefully I wasn’t too conspicuous when I watched the many faces of Hawai’i standing, or sitting, before me. Old and young, men and women, shuffled by and an odd feeling crept up behind my eyes making me suddenly wonder if I could very well be looking at one of my own blood relatives.

As mistaken as I could have been, it’s not a completely irrational suspicion. Being a mixed-race Vietnamese adoptee who was brought to America as an infant with very little identifying information has forced me to periodically reconsider my ethnic heritage.

In fact, it’s only recently that I’m acknowledging the real difficulty with accepting the presumptive and conclusive label of “Vietnamese/White” that appears on my Vietnamese passport. When I consider that Thai, Chinese, Filipino and Korean men, as well as Mien, Hmong and Montangard men, and even Native American and Latino American men, participated in combat operations and acted as support personnel during the Vietnam War, the “White” part of me starts to take a back seat. My naturally dark tan skin and curious indeterminate Asian facial features have started to point in many directions beyond the classic racial identifier, “White”.

Who knows. My mother could have been anything other than Vietnamese.

And of course, in America you don't have to be an abandoned child or a mixed-race international adoptee to face that question about race, ethnicity and identity.  You just need sealed adoption records and amended birth certificates that make it nigh-impossible to find out anything about your birth family.

But these two men speak eloquently to the centrality of that question for adoptees -- what AM I?

Student Guest Post: "Losing Isaiah"

by Paul Daly

I realize that I’m about sixteen years late on this, but I just came across “Losing Isaiah” on Netflix, and since I’m currently taking Adoption Law, I decided it would be worthwhile to watch it. It was certainly a moving film, and I found it really drove home the problems we’ve learned about in China, i.e. mothers abandoning babies. Growing up in an upper middle class, white family, I always viewed the world in black and white. It was very easy to see what was right and what was wrong. Only as I’ve grown older have I realized that, like it or not, the world is composed of varying shades of gray.


“Losing Isaiah” is a movie starring Halle Berry, who portrays a young, African American, drug addicted woman who abandons her baby in a dumpster. The baby is adopted by a white family who cares for him for the first two years of his life. Meanwhile, the birth mother gets herself clean and learns that her baby has been adopted. She sues for custody of Isaiah and the two sides engage in a heated custody battle, with the judge ultimately granting custody to the birth mother.

When Halle Berry’s character leaves her baby in the dumpster, I immediately thought of the films we have seen in Adoption Law that show Chinese mothers leaving babies on street corners, etc. My initial reaction was pure outrage. “How could someone do such a thing?!” I think it is easy for white people to distance ourselves from these sorts of events because we feel that it’s not our problem. Any time we see a film or hear a news story about people who abandon their children it is always about Chinese people, African American people, etc. We never think that we could ever make such a choice. I wonder how Caucasian attitudes toward adoption and the plight of these desperate people would change if someone made a movie about a white heroin addict who left her baby on a street corner in Fort Worth? It would certainly make people stop and think.

Student Guest Post: Shiloh Restored

by Kate Echols

Since I begin a course in Adoption Law this spring, I have been struck by the number of stories I am now exposed to that involve adoption. I feel that I am now able to see where adoption is occurring everywhere, and the stories are much more poignant to me. One of the most exciting and moving stories that I have recently discovered is one occurring in the lives of my friends Lali and Niji Stanley.


I met Lali and Niji through mutual friends when I attended an event at their home, a fundraiser for their non-profit organization called Shiloh Restored. I was immediately fascinated by the name and asked Lali to tell me all about her organization.

Shiloh Restored is a foundation to rescue baby girls from female infanticide in India. In 2007, Lali and Niji learned that there was still a major problem of baby girls being killed in many parts of India, due to cultural issues such as inability to care for the children. They immediately began traveling to India to view the situation for themselves, and in the spring of 2010 they founded Shiloh Restored. Lali and Niji have now created a plan to relocate to India to establish a home for the girls within the next two years. They are in the fundraising stages at the moment and are focused on being fully prepared to implement their plan overseas. They have a beautiful website with pictures, statistics, and updates on how people can get involved and support their mission. One of the most incredible parts of their mission is that not only do they hope to facilitate the adoption of these girls, but they are also committed to providing for their education through college for those who are not adopted. They have truly planned for their lives, both for the girls and for their own.

I am overwhelmed by seeing two people who have now devoted their lives and their hearts to this cause, to preventing a tragedy and creating an opportunity for joy. They are literally giving up their lives to move to India, although I would guess that they would both likely say that they have found their purpose, and thus it is no sacrifice. To see how two people can make such a change in the lives of children, to create a system to care for, educate, and hopefully facilitate the adoption of numerous children, is amazing. I am so glad to have met them at this time, as I am now so much more aware of the adoption issues in our world and have a very clear idea of exactly what will be entailed in their mission. Therefore I wish them the best and hope to support them however I can.

Kid-Free Saturday Night

Both Zoe and Maya had sleep-overs on Saturday night.  Yahoo, a kid-free evening!  Doesn't happen all that often.  I'm afraid I didn't take full advantage of it -- went shopping for Zoe's Oompa-Loompa costume (her class is doing Willy Wonka as the school play this year), and that's about it.

Then at 9:30, the phone rings.  Caller-ID says it's from the house where Maya is.  I'm thinking it'll be the mom saying Maya wants to come home or isn't feeling well. . . .  Nope, it's Maya, calling to say night-night and I love you! 

At 10:30, the phone rings again.  This time it's Zoe, calling to ask if I think Maya is OK, and to say night-night and I love you!

Hmmm, I think kid-free nights are over-rated. . . .

Colorblind Parenting More Harmful Than Helpful

USAToday article reports on the Council on Contemporary Families, including Adam Pertman's new book and this research on transracial adoption:

Research by Gina Samuels, an associate professor in the School of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago, has focused on identity development among transracial adoptees.

Samuels, a multiracial adoptee who has worked in child welfare, has found that the goal of being "colorblind" that white parents often espouse may not be the best approach for white parents to take with their kids of other races.

"Colorblindness actually creates discordance," she says, because parents set their child up to believe that race doesn't matter — until the kids find that often race is an issue in the real world and they haven't been prepared for it.

Her study of multiracial adoptees, "Being raised by white people: Navigating racial difference among multiracial adopted adults," was published in 2009 in the Journal of Family and Marriage. She found that "colorblind" parenting may actually be more harmful than helpful to kids.

The article reports that about 40% of adoptions in America are transracial; among children from other countries adopted by American parents, 84% are transracial or transethnic.

Domestic Adoption is the New Black

Babble, reporting on the new trend in celebrity adoption:

Domestic adoption is becoming the new international adoption in celebrity circles. For a while it seemed all of the A-List stars were travelling overseas in order to adopt a child. Angelina Jolie has children adopted from Cambodia, Ethiopia, and Vietnam. Meg Ryan adopted daughter Daisy from China. Madonna adopted son David and daughter Mercy from Malawi. These days the stars are looking closer to home when it comes time for adoption.

Latest to adopt domestic is Mariska Hargitay.

Student Guest Post: Resources for Kinship Care

by Christina Weber and Emily Brooks


This semester we have been exploring issues regarding adoption law. Recently, we read an article by Jill Duerr Berrick, titled When Children Cannot Remain Home:  Foster Family Care and Kinship Care. This article illustrated the differences in children being placed in kinship care versus non-kin care. Also, the article highlighted the differences with two groups in financial incentives, case worker care, and child protection. Overall the statistics show that kinship care receives less financial incentives and that kinship care is better for the child’s safety and well-being.

The financial resources and case worker care available to kinship care are limited and hard to find. Since 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that kinship foster care should receive the same financial resources as non-kin foster care. In reality, kinship care does not receive anywhere close to the same resources that non-kin care receives. Specifically, case workers are less likely to contact kinship care; as a result they receive less support and fewer services.

Kinship care is statistically safer for children than non-kin care. Namely, researchers have discovered that non-kin foster parents are twice as likely to have confirmed reports of maltreatment. There can be many explanations for this statistic, but kinship care provides family support that non-kin care cannot. Kinship care preserves family ties which is very important to the stability of children. Consequently, states should take more action in providing resources for kinship care. Case workers should give as much attention and resources to kinship care as they do non-kin care. Statistics show the benefits of kinship care, so the states should acknowledge these benefits by providing more services.

Would Government Shutdown Affect International Adoption?

Here's what one adoption agency is telling its clients:

Unfortunately, it appears that the Department of State and USCIS will be affected if a shutdown occurs. Information that we received from a recent meeting held at the Department of State indicated that furloughs will affect many staff who work with adoptions at DOS, USCIS, and embassy and consulate offices around the world. Embassies will be officially “closed” during the shutdown, meaning that embassy staff will not be able to serve the public during this time. If this happens, delays in processing paperwork and completing adoptions are likely.

* * *

In the event of a shutdown, here’s how we think [adopting]families will be affected: Families currently building their dossiers could see delays in paperwork processing of USCIS approvals and document authentications. Families who are preparing to travel could likely see delays in receiving Embassy/Consulate clearance and appointment dates. Families who are already in-country would likely not be able to receive a US visa for their adopted child and experience delays in returning home until the government re-opens.

Arkansas Supreme Court Strikes Down Adoption Ban for Unmarried Couples

In 2008, Arkansas voters approved a ballot initiative that prohibited adoption and foster care placements with any unmarried couple, gay or straight, who cohabited. As the Wall Street Journal notes, though:

“The intent behind the [Arkansas] law was to try to prevent gay and lesbians from adopting or serving as foster parents,” said Garrard Beeney, a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell who represented couples challenging the law. “This is another step in the direction of striking down laws based on stereotypes and advancing efforts to place children in loving homes.”

A unanimous court held that the law violated constitutional privacy rights:

“The choice imposed on cohabiting sexual partners, whether heterosexual or homosexual, is dramatic,” Justice Robert Brown wrote for the court. “They must chose either to lead a life of private, sexual intimacy with a partner without the opportunity to adopt or foster children or forego sexual cohabitation and, thereby, attain eligibility to adopt or foster.”

You can read the judicial opinion here.  The court's decision is carefully based on the Arkansas Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution, which pretty much insulates it from appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

So in less than a year, we see courts striking down Florida's and Arkansas' ban on gay adoption!

Student Guest Post: Review of First Person Plural

Review:  Deann Borshay Liem's First Person Plural

by Steve Harris

The candid first person account given by Deann’s adoptive American family about their decision to adopt her and the events of her life after coming to America are poignant and the personal nature of their interviews draw the audience into their family; it feels like being a silent participant in their conversations. Mrs. Borshay explains how they came to adopt Deann: she saw a program describing the conditions of children in Europe and Asia after the Korean war and her heart went out to the orphans on TV. The Borshays donated money to support a child at the Sun Duck orphanage in Korea and they were placed in contact with the young girl their money ostensibly went to support.


After years of letters between the family and Cha Jung Hee, Mrs. Borshay decided to adopt the little girl and gave her the American name Deann. Through family movies, we watch little Deann grow into a young woman. Her childhood appeared idyllic and as she grew she forgot everything about her old home in Korea. Even the Korean language was lost to her. Still, she was plagued by the ghosts of memories of her former life.

She tried to discuss her memories with her mother at a young age, that her birth mother was still alive and that she had brothers and sisters in Korea, but she was told she was simply dreaming. Her mother had no idea that the Korean orphanage had switched children, and Deann was remembering her life not as the orphan Cha Jung Hee, but as Ok Jin, no orphan at all. Instead, Ok Jin was given to the orphanage by her living family who hoped that in giving her up, she would receive a better life than they could provide. Deann tells the story of the adoption agency representative in Korea telling her not to admit who she really was until she was old enough to take care of herself. Still, by adulthood, she had forgotten all about Ok Jin.

Deann decided as part of her self-discovery to move away from her adoptive family. She went to Berkeley and during this time of introspection she began to remember all of the things she had suppressed since her childhood. She was depressed as she contemplated the loss of her heritage and biological family in a country she no longer remembered. In order to uncover her past she investigated her adoption papers. She found two pictures, each labeled Cha Jung Hee, but only one of them was her. The other was a girl she did not recognize. She contacted Sun Duck orphanage and through it she was able to reach her South Korean family.

Ok Jin’s biological family was still very much alive in South Korea. When Deann learned about them she yearned to know them and, through them, herself. It was the revelation that her biological family still lived that ignited the feelings she had long suppressed: feelings of loss and being a misfit and of an important part of her life that she knew was there but just couldn’t see.

Deann had mixed feelings following her discoveries and shared them with the audience freely letting us feel her confusion, grief and joy. Deann’s struggle to discover herself is tangible and disturbing as she describes her feelings of guilt about seeking out her Korean family and her inability to discuss her Korean family with her American family. The documentary explores the feelings of fear her adoptive family felt about possibly losing their daughter and Deann’s feelings that connection to her birth family was an important part of her identity.

Deann was able to travel to her biological family’s home and visit with them twice. When Deann first reunited with her Korean family her description of the experience focused on her physical similarity to her family. This emphasis suggests to me an underlying insecurity that she must have felt her whole life. Even though her adoptive family loved her there was no denying that she was different from them. Deann’s face revealed a feeling of contentment when she met her biological family: finally she had a family that looked like her!

The deeper differences between Deann and her biological family were readily apparent and, though she was ecstatic to meet them, her enthusiasm was tempered by some of the barriers she encountered. Not speaking Korean, having forgotten it as a child, made reconnecting with her family more difficult but no less sweet. She felt love for the strangers she met because she knew they were hers in a way that had been denied her throughout her life.

Deann felt conflicted about her families as though she had to choose one or the other. To that end she wanted her families to meet so she could reconcile the familial duality in her mind and resolve the conflict she feels about which of the two families was her “real” family. She asked her American parents to join her on her second trip to Korea to meet her biological family. Her American parents were wary of the trip and what implications it might have for their family relationship with Deann, but they were willing to go for Deann’s peace of mind and to support her as she worked through her issues.

When the two families met, I saw the joy in her biological mother’s face at seeing pictures of her lost child in a photo album created by Mrs. Borshay. I realized watching their bittersweet meeting that this woman lost her baby all those years ago and I felt pain for the mother who lost her child. It was particularly poignant when her biological mother told Deann that she merely gave birth to her and that she should love and respect her adoptive parents as her real parents which Deann responded to ambivalently.

Deann felt like a visitor instead of part of the family on her second trip. She had an epiphany – she wants to have a close relationship with her Korean family but in order to have that relationship she might have to admit that she already has a family and a “real” mother in America. She should stop clinging to what might have been and instead build relationships grounded in what is. Deann was never able to mourn what she had lost with her American parents, which also affected her relationship with them. In the end she felt closer to her American parents as a result of her self-discovery. Her mother’s fears that she would not feel as close to her after the visit to Korea were allayed when Deann told her she was her real mother.

Deann’s story reveals many of the difficulties and feelings likely experienced by many international adoptees. It is easy to see how growing up knowing that you are different from everyone around you as the adopted kid or the foreign kid might cause the conflicts and crises in adopted children. First Person Plural is the story of a woman’s effort to understand her origins, her life and how to move past many of her most difficult feelings. Her experience is hopefully a heartening realization for her and potentially for other similarly situated adoptees. Deann’s story teaches that despite the feelings of loss and abandonment, adopted children can find a place for themselves in the dual worlds of their biological origin and their adopted family and be enriched by both.

Student Guest Posts Coming!

Some of you know that I'm a law professor, and that I teach Adoption Law. I'm teaching it this semester, and I'm trying something new. I've asked my students to write posts for the blog!  So in the next few weeks you'll see posts from my students sprinkled in among my posts.  I'll mark them "Student Guest Post," so you'll know what's what.  I've told them they can submit a post on their own or as a group, and I've told them I'll identify them however they want me to -- anonymous to full names.

Please be supportive of these new bloggers -- but being supportive doesn't mean you can't disagree with them!  Most importantly, I know they'll appreciate comments.

China: One-Child Policy v. One-Child Preference

Great New York Times article about China's one-child policy, arguing that more Chinese are choosing to have only one child for economic reasons unrelated to the policy:

Under China’s family-planning regulations, most couples are barred from having more than one baby. Wang Hong and her husband, Zhang Jingfeng, are among those who were granted a second chance — and decided against it.

Instead, they have marshaled their resources behind their gregarious 9-year-old son, devoting two-fifths of their yearly income of 20,000 renminbi, or about $3,000, to send him to private school.

“I have to create good circumstances for him,” said Ms. Wang, 33, whose sparsely furnished home is heated by a wood stove. “If I had another child, what would our living circumstances be like?”

Ms. Wang’s reasoning underscores an argument voiced with growing insistency by demographers who want China to abandon its one-child restrictions: like the couple in Yicheng, they argue, most Chinese want only one child anyway.

* * *

But as calls for a relaxation of the policy intensify, and official hints of looser restrictions increase, so do concerns that the one-child culture is now so ingrained among Chinese that the authorities may not be able to encourage more births even if they try.

A growing body of research suggests that much of the decline in Chinese fertility over the past three decades is not a result of the one-child policy and its various permutations, but of the typical drop in birthrates that occurs as societies modernize.

* * *

The trend appears to be the same in Jiangsu, a coastal province north of Shanghai. Researchers interviewed nearly 4,400 women who were eligible to have two children. Fewer than one-third of the mothers with one child said they either wanted or might want a second, according to a 2009 study published by the journal Asian Population Studies.

In Shanghai, so many eligible couples have decided against a second child that in 2009, population workers started making home visits to try to change their minds. Cai Yong, a demographer at the University of North Carolina, said that Shanghai’s and Beijing’s fertility rates were both estimated at 0.7 per woman — fewer than one child per couple, and half what many demographers estimate is the national childbearing rate.

All this suggests that there may not be much China can do to manipulate the number of births.

I can testify that this is consistent with what my students and other faculty members at Xiamen University told me in 2007. They believed that the only road to financial prosperity was to limit their families to one child.  The one-child policy didn't come into it.  Of course, these were urbanites, and the answer might still be different in rural China.

Salon: Why I have to adopt my own son

At Salon, a well-written and compelling look at second parent adoption by one member of a lesbian couple:

I woke up that morning, thoughts racing, at 2:30 and again at 4:30. When I rolled out of bed at 6:00, I'd already been awake for hours, running through various judicial mishaps in my head. I drank less coffee than usual to avoid the jitters. I left for the Cook County courthouse 30 minutes earlier than necessary. Since I've been litigating family law cases for about five years now, I don't usually get this nervous before court. But that morning was different. That morning, I was the litigant.

Luckily, it's nothing serious. In fact, I wanted to file this case. Everyone else is delighted for us, but my wife, Ann, and I are just gritting our teeth until it's over. We can't help worrying that something will go dreadfully wrong, even though we're certain to get what we want in the end. But it's impossible to avoid white-knuckled anxiety when the stakes are so high: I'm petitioning the court to adopt my own son.

In addition to being terrified, I was overwhelmingly annoyed. I shouldn't have to do this. My wife conceived our son, Julian, through artificial insemination by an anonymous sperm donor. If I were a man, I'd be the legal father already. No one would have cross-examined me or performed a DNA test before allowing me to sign the forms for his birth certificate. But I'm not a man, so Ann and I can't get legally married and Julian is not considered my legal son. I have to go through the adoption process as if I were a stepparent, or relative caring for a neglected child. As if I hadn't married his mother almost five years before he was born. As if I hadn't woken in the middle of the night to his tiny feet kicking me from underneath my wife's skin. As if I hadn't been the first one to see his pinched, purple-lipped face emerging into the world, or the one who cut through the gristle of the cord that still bound his bloodstream to my wife's.

The article touches on a few things I've blogged about recently -- Why Second Parent Adoption is a Good Thing and Voiding Adoptions in North Carolina -- if you want to read more!

Psychology Today: Why Adoptees Need to Find Their Biological Parents

From Dr. Stephen J. Betchen, adult adoptee, at Psychology Today:

I can't speak for all adopted children but I can say—after interviewing several of them over the years—that many of us have trouble feeling completely comfortable wherever we are—no matter how welcomed we may be. At times our discomfort can manifest in distancing, indifference, or even rudeness, but we usually don't intend to insult anybody. We just seem to have an internalized nomadic notion that we don't belong anywhere in particular. Even when we do settle somewhere we often work our asses off to prove our worthiness—just in case anyone gets any ideas about putting us back up for adoption. While watching my oldest daughter play at a neighborhood park, I thought to myself: "Wow, she looks just like me. What a miracle!" Well, to me it was a miracle. It was thrilling and heart-warming, but it was also a little strange—I almost cried. For the next several months I had to work on emotionally claiming her as my own.

Some of us who were adopted in "closed states" (or states that don't allow for the free exchange of even the most vital information such as a health history) have a lingering fear that we might drop dead at any moment. I just love filling out the medical history questionnaire at a new doctor's office; the one that asks what diseases your parents suffered from. How about the question: What age was your father when he died? How should I know? The great state of so and so...won't tell me. Not knowing one's medical history is especially annoying to those of us adoptees who have biological children. What am I passing on? Will I be around for the weddings?

Go read the whole thing! He has some interesting things to say.

Qingming Festival

Monday marked the start of the 3-day Chinese Qingming Festival. The festival includes Tomb-Sweeping Day, where young and old alike visit the graves of their ancestors, to clean the graves, pray and present offerings.Thus, the festival is an opportunity for people to commemorate and honor their ancestors.

The festival also coincides with my dad's birthday, the first to pass since he passed away.  We managed to turn that day of sadness into something a bit more celebratory by talking about the customs of Tomb Sweeping Day, especially the tradition of burning paper replicas of things the deceased might want in the afterlife -- like money, houses and even iPads!  The girls remembered seeing people burning so-called "hell money" at Nanputou Temple (that's one of the furnaces there in the picture, above) when we were in Xiamen (and that served as the inspiration for our Mother's Day tradition of burning notes to their birth mothers).

We knew we couldn't actually burn anything (burn ban in Tarrant County!), but we came up with a list of things that we knew Grandpa would like.  Our list of paper things to burn -- Reece's Peanut Butter Cups, shrimp, coffee, a perfectly made vodka martini, a TV showing a Cowboys football game, country music CDs, books (Zoe wanted it to be a Kindle, no pun intended!) and, of course, a picture of his favorite girls, Zoe and Maya. I wish I'd thought of it at the time, but I think now we should also burn a paper replica (or maybe even the thing itself!) of Grandpa's favorite recliner!

I hope you were also able to remember your lost loved ones, with joy rather than sadness, this week.  Happy Qingming Festival!

Tangled Up Adoption Talk

Tangled is out in  DVD now, which has thrilled the girls.  We loved it in the theater and I'm sure we'll watch it a million times on DVD.  But as this mom points out in a funny post, there are aspects of the movie that make a tangled mess of adoption talk:

In November, our family went to the theater to see Tangled. My parents were in town for Thanksgiving, so it was the six of us. Molley fell. in. love. She walked out of the theater in awe and full of amazement. It wasn’t her first theater experience, but to her, Tangled was magic. She loved everything – and I mean everything – about it. At the time, she was 27 months old.

She couldn’t stop talking about Tangled. On the way home, she was going on and on and on and then she said it: “Tangled has two mommies. One of her mommies is a mean mommy. The other is a nice mommy. I don’t like her mean mommy. Why is she mean, Mommy?”

“Well,” I said, “One of her mommies isn’t actually her real mommy. That mommy took her away from her real mommy…”

Oh hell. I stopped mid-sentence. If adoption is part of your life, you understand why this wasn’t going well. I looked at my mom, who was sitting in the back of our SUV with me. She looked at me. The kids were in their car seats, in the middle row. They couldn’t see our faces. I changed the subject.

There it is, the second mommy's dilemma.  How do we distinguish ourselves from the wicked witch who stole Rapunzel from her parents?  How do we explain it to a young child?  I've had to do it with my kids with other movies, and blogged about it here:

Maya and Zoe watched Ice Age 3 (which their oldest cousin Aaron bought them for Christmas) with their youngest cousin William while we were in Florida. They'd seen it before, and didn't have much of a reaction to it then. But one story line is that Sid the Sloth finds 3 dinosaur eggs, cares for them, hatches them, and cares for the babies. Then huge mama dinosaur comes and gets them back. Hilarity ensues.

Maya came to talk to me after the movie, and she said that when Sid took the eggs it was "like adoption, but it was also like stealing." Hmmm. So I asked how it was like adoption -- she answered it was like adoption because Sid was taking care of the babies but he didn't grow them in his tummy (discussion ensues about why men can't grow babies in their tummies).

So how was it like stealing, I asked. Because Sid took the eggs when the mama still wanted them, Maya finally explained, after some exploration that took us miles off course and then back again. I said I thought she was pretty smart to figure that out. Adoption happens when the mama can't take care of the baby and so AGREES that the other family should adopt the baby; but if the mama can take care of the baby, like the dinosaur mama in the movie, and hasn't agreed, then it is like stealing.

Very interesting to be talking to your six-year-old about human trafficking for purposes of adoption, without ever using those terms. . . .

So, have you talked with your kids about how adoption is and isn't like stealing? About trafficking for the purposes of adoption?

Adoption tax credit nets family $54,000 refund

From CNN Money:

The Wards couldn't believe the news when their tax preparer called to tell them they're getting a $54,000 refund this year.


Thelma Ward was speechless. She had to hand the phone to her husband so she could dance around the living room floor in shock.

* * *

So what's bringing this windfall? The federal adoption tax credit.

In the past few years, the Wards have expanded their already big clan of seven children by adopting five new kids. For each of these adopted children, they are eligible for a one-time tax credit of up to $13,170.

The credit has been around since 1997, but this tax season it is refundable for the first time -- which is the tax equivalent of hitting the jackpot.

A refundable tax credit lets you get the cash even if you owe no taxes. A non-refundable credit just offsets any taxes you owe, and then rolls anything remaining to the next tax year.

* * *

"When this was first coming through the tax reform legislation, we just kept looking at it going, 'Wow, this is really, really significant for people adopting,'" said Kathy Pickering, executive director of The Tax Institute at H&R Block. "It's not a large population who can claim it, but for those who do, it can really change their lives."


A typical private adoption runs about $30,000, so the credit was intended to help families by reimbursing expenses, such as court fees. But the tax law allows parents who adopt "special needs" children to receive the entire credit even if they had no expenses.

All of the Wards' foster children qualified as special needs, so Thelma was able to claim the full credit even though there were no adoption expenses. This is not unusual for foster children; about 80% of these kids are considered to have "special needs."

 What do you think? There's certainly nothing wrong with taking a legal tax credit. And there's no suggestion that this family is in it for the tax break. But I keep hearing this line from an article about why Kyrgyzstan officials are reluctant to lift their freeze on international adoption:  "Some people also assume that since American families that adopt receive certain financial benefits and tax breaks, they must be doing it less out of the goodness of their hearts and rather to supplement their income."