Defining and Implementing Ethics in IA

The issue of ethics in IA is not new and therefore there are a number of documents which the discussion can draw upon. First and foremost these are the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, as well as the Hague Convention of 1993, to which we have already referred.

In addition, there are other documents that define ethical principles which must guide IA.  A comprehensive catalog of principle was published by the Swiss organization Service Social International (SSI) which was developed in collaboration with experts throughout the world. Similarly, the European umbrella organisation of adoption agencies euradopt has adopted a set of ethical principles which are similar to those of SSI.

The principles are likely to be universally shared - unless by those who reject IA in principle. However it quickly becomes clear that well-meaning principles are often out of touch with the real world. This concerns particularly the documentation of the origin of the child, social and medical reports, the attempts to place children in local communities, the prevention of abandonement and many more.

How can we strengthen the practice if agencies are willing to commit to ethical principles? For instance, public agencies such as social services, embassies and national courts could make stronger demands regarding the quality of the paperwork. They could demand more research on the family of origin, the identity of the parents and extended family, their consent and knowledge of the adoption. They could be more active as supervisory authorities if incorrect information in the course of adoption is known and initiate follow up procedures including compensation for mistreated families and children. They could hold the agencies to account on the basis of the principles they themselves defined and agreed to.

Also, agencies could be far more active. The ethical standards of Euradopt are reactive in nature; the organisation reacts only if scandals arise and the consequences are minimal. Agencies could set up due diligences processes including certification of ethical procedures, documentation on how they comply with the ethical principles in their work. They could document their post-adoption services and support structures.  They could publish annual reports, which document the measures on the implementation of ethical principles.

Adoptive parents in turn could demand ethical procedures and practices in the adoption process. They could choose their agencies not only on the basis of the duration of the proceedings (or the costs) but also with regard to the ethical standards of the agency. They could spread the word about more and less ethical agencies and inform other parents.

All three sides could tackle the issue head on and cooperate. They could share their experiences, awareness, name and shame those, who do not live up to ethical standards, report malpractice and thus spread the word in favour of ethical IA. They could sign voluntary pledges and proof of practices.  There are many ways. 

First published in German, May 22nd 2011.