Inter‐country adoption in Australia: Examining the factors that drive the practice and implications for policy reform

Abstract

The article presents the findings of an international literature review conducted to examine the factors that drive inter-country adoption rates within both sending and receiving countries. The authors then consider the implications of these findings for inter-country adoption policy reform in Australia. The evidence in the literature highlights a distinction between the factors that drive ICA in sending and receiving countries. Factors that drive the practice in sending countries relate to structural forms such as socio-economic and political conditions. In contrast, it is the growing demand for a child from infertile couples that drives the practice in receiving countries. The article then considers the challenges of domestic policy reform undertaken to increase numbers of inter-country adoptions in a context of global decline. K E Y W O R D Sadoption policy, inter-country adoption, international adoption | INTRODUCTIONThis article presents the findings of a literature review conducted to identify the factors that drive inter-country adoption (hereafter ICA) 1 rates in both sending and receiving countries, and examines the implications of these findings for Australian policymaking. 2

If fetuses are persons, abortion is a public health crisis

“…In wealthier countries, demand exceeds supply and has been driving international adoptions in recent years. 54 Additionally, Fiona Hilferty and Ilan Katz argue that abortion is only one reason for the reduction in children available for adoption-improved economic conditions, contraception, delayed childbearing, increased infertility, and better welfare have all contributed. 55 This shift has occurred both in countries receiving international adoptions and those supplying them.…”

Changing nature of adoption and need for post-adoption services: Intercountry adoption practice in Taiwan and Australia

“…From the 1970s onwards, greater access to family services and changes in public attitudes toward unwed mothers led to fewer domestic adoptions. In 1998 Australia ratified the Hague Convention, which requires intercountry adoptions to be managed through approved Central Authorities, which are state or territory government intercountry adoption programs, providing information and support for families wanting to adopt a child from overseas (Hilferty and Katz, 2016). After peaking in 2004-2005 at 434, the overall number of intercountry adoptions in Australia has steadily declined over the past 25 years in parallel with global trends (Selman, 2012).…”

“…In recent years, intercountry adoption practice has changed significantly due to the decline in numbers globally (Selman, 2012). Reasons for this pattern include sending countries' declining mortality rates, rising living standards, and policy support for domestic adoption (Hilferty and Katz, 2016;Mignot, 2015;Selman, 2012). This overall decline is reflective of the Hague Convention, which stipulates that intercountry adoption should only occur in the child's best interest and where other forms of permanent family care in the country have been exhausted (AIHW, 2019).…”

‘I’m the centre part of a Venn diagram’: belonging and identity for Taiwanese-Australian intercountry adoptees

“…In parallel with observed global trends among receiving countries (Selman, 2012), intercountry adoptions in Australia peaked in 2004 at 434 and have steadily declined to a low of 57 in 2018–2019 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2019). This continuing decline is attributable to improvements in the economic and social development of sending countries as well as the tightening of adoption procedures in sending and receiving ones, in line with widespread implementation of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption (Hilferty and Katz, 2019).…”