The issues facing the intercountry adoption community don't seem to be all that unique from similar issues of concern we see in the world on a daily basis. There is injustice, corruption, and fraud all around us. When we see it, hear about it, or experience it, we get hyped up, sign petitions, boycott, protest, gossip, call our congressional reps, blog, etc.
In the U.S., Barack Obama has been riding a 6-month wave of popularity as many people feel like he could be a breath of fresh air in leading us to change. None of us really have any idea if he'll be able to follow through on his mantra for change in Iraq, or US foreign policy, or the economy, but we do our best to listen to his speeches, read his website, follow the expert analysis, and make a determination of whether we think he is the right man for the job.
But we know very little. We may be seeking change because we're tired of President Bush, tired of Iraq, convinced we were misled about this or that, irritated with tax proposals that mostly benefit the rich....But unless we are an expert in economics, or have Department of Homeland Security clearance, our views are mostly based on what we read or what other people tell us or what we think might be the case. We probably don't have much factual basis to support our conclusions - which is fully okay - as long as we are willing to make this admission.
Back when there were still 6 or 7 legitimate presidential candidates, I took a 'find your candidate' test on the CNN website. Convinced that I knew which candidate best fit my political views, I was very surprised when the web app returned Hillary Clinton as the best match. But even after carefully thinking through each of the questions, and knowing that Hillary Clinton was the best match for my political ideologies, I would not have voted for her had she made it through as the Democratic candidate. If anyone else is like me, this could be representative of a reality that we may be prone to make choices based on public/private perception rather than a more honest conviction. This can be dangerous.
When it comes to adoption, we do our best to access the necessary information to make the most informed decision that we can. Maybe we were adopted, or we've traveled to a developing country, or volunteered in an orphanage, or know someone from church who adopted, or already have adopted children. Whatever it is, our perception has been shaped by our experience, but we still only know some of all there is to know. We just do our best to make the best possible decision with the information we have and the information we can access.
One day we may wake up to an article ranting about intercountry adoption as a form of neo-colonialism. The next day we may see news channels telling us that Angelina Jolie or Madonna has decided to adopt again and giving us all sorts of details about their seemingly fast-tracked adoption. Then we hear that Agency X was indicted on felony theft and fraud by check. Then someone asks us why we chose to adopt from Vietnam or Ethiopia or Guatemala when thousands of black and hispanic children are waiting for families at home. Then the US Embassy publishes an adoption warning citing concerns of irregularity in these areas.
Adoption has definitely become more commonplace in the mainstream media and op-ed pieces - even referred to as the latest fad. But it seems to me that the increased attention we are receiving is largely due to celebrity adoptions and the increased buzz caused from the growing number of blogs and independent commentary then it is from the perception of widespread fraud and corruption. Those issues are real, and it's not my intent to minimize them, but I think we're hearing more and seeing more because the changing forms of media are making everyone realize that adoption is a pretty regular thing.
And because adoption is no longer as much the phenomenon as it used to be, it is going to become more and more normal to find it protested and argued, and discussed and dissected on bigger forms of media. As world governments set policy, citizens will respond. As we respond we will be both united and divided. For many of us, we already see forms of this everyday. We check the "adoption" sites each morning. We support certain advocacy groups, appreciate certain blogs, and chat (sometimes not so cordially) away on the different online groups. We receive updates from our agencies and then run it by our online friends to make sure they are hearing the same thing.
But the attention from CNN, Newsweek, ABC, etc is definitely more than it was in previous years. I think we should prepare ourselves to see this continue as adoption becomes more politicized - and, unfortunately, probably more polarized. The attention will add accountability and increase the number of social workers, sociologists, economists, and public policy-makers discussing the orphan crisis facing our world (and perhaps how adoption - done right - should be considered in lieu of institutionalization).
Along with the benefits of the increased media exposure will come the challenges, however. More attention will lead to more noise which will lead to more misinformation which will lead to more uncertainty. Though this won't be any different from what we deal with on a daily basis when filtering through news stories and opinion pieces on other important social issues, it will require that we work harder to find the truth and readily admit that we won't always know all the details.
