Recently, Chinese human rights lawyer Li Fangping submitted a proposal to the National People’s Congress Standing Committee and the State Council of the Chinese Communist Party, demanding rectification of the decision by the Ministry of Civil Affairs to terminate intercountry adoption without legal procedures, stating that this decision may violate the Adoption Law and Civil Code.
On September 5th this year, the Chinese Foreign Ministry confirmed that the authorities officially halted their international adoption program on August 28, 2024. In the future, except for foreign individuals adopting children within three generations of collateral consanguinity and stepchildren, no more children will be sent abroad for adoption. In other words, foreigners without a blood relationship will no longer be able to adopt Chinese children.
According to Radio Free Asia, on December 9, Li Fangping submitted a letter of suggestions to the National People’s Congress Standing Committee and the State Council through the Chinese National Petition Website, proposing that the Ministry of Civil Affairs correct the aforementioned decision, claiming that the decision violates the Adoption Law, Civil Code, and other relevant regulations.
Li Fangping emphasized that under current laws, the rights of foreigners to adopt children in China are protected by law, and terminating intercountry adoption is equivalent to abolishing these legal provisions, which should be modified or abolished through strict statutory procedures by the National People’s Congress or the State Council. This policy adjustment was implemented without prior argumentation, public discussion, or informing the public of the reasons for the decision, severely depriving citizens of their right to know.
Li Fangping also stated that although the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s response confirmed the policy adjustment, it did not elucidate the specific legal basis and procedural details. If not for questions from foreign media reporters, the public might still be unaware of this policy change. He directly pointed out that the implementation of such a ban without any transparent procedures had damaged China’s legal image.
He said, “Social adoption has been implemented since the early days of reform and opening up and is also a good cultural channel for people-to-people exchanges between China and the United States. Before the epidemic, the Ministry of Civil Affairs still highly recognized intercountry adoption, including stating that 95% of the adoptees were disabled children. However, it was immediately terminated after the epidemic, without evidence, reason, or compassion.”
Li Fangping mentioned that ending this system will have a negative impact on China’s foreign relations, especially Sino-US relations. He called on the Ministry of Civil Affairs to withdraw the ban and complete adoption procedures for matched families as soon as possible.
Since implementing the “one-child policy” in 1979, which enforced mandatory “family planning,” numerous baby girls were abandoned, and some of these abandoned infants were taken in by orphanages across the country. Starting from 1988, the Chinese Communist Party gradually relaxed its policies on intercountry adoption, allowing foreigners to adopt Chinese children. The number of intercountry adoptions increased significantly year by year, with Americans being the largest group of adopters, who also had to pay a substantial fee to the Chinese side.
In 2005, the Chinese Communist Party officially became a signatory to the “Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption.” According to Taiwan’s Central News Agency, the number of intercountry adoptions in China peaked that year, with over 13,000 children being adopted by foreign families, accounting for 25.49% of adoptions.
Now, the Chinese authorities’ policy change has sparked widespread attention and controversy both domestically and internationally.
It is reported that before the epidemic, over 300 American families had completed matching and adoption procedures with Chinese children, but due to the policy adjustment, the hopes of these families reuniting with the children have been dashed. Furthermore, 103 members of the US Congress have jointly written to President Biden, urging pressure on the Chinese government to ensure the completion of the adoption procedures for the already matched families.
Citing former legal adviser to the Inner Mongolia government, Du Wen, Radio Free Asia pointed out that the Adoption Law and Civil Code clearly define the legal status of intercountry adoption, and no administrative body has the authority to arbitrarily abolish or suspend its execution. The Ministry of Civil Affairs’ ban flagrantly violates the provisions of the Legislation Law concerning the amendment and abolition of laws, constituting a typical act of overstepping authority.
Du Wen further indicated that in recent years, Chinese administrative decision-making has been frequently influenced by nationalist sentiment. In the matter of intercountry adoption, the propagation of nationalism has led many to mistakenly believe that terminating intercountry adoption is a manifestation of national sovereignty, neglecting the fundamental rights of orphaned children and adoptive families.
Prior to the current segment, Associate Professor of Hakka Language, Literature, and Social Sciences at Taiwan’s National Central University, Zeng Jianyuan, previously told Epoch Times that this adjustment in international adoption policies is related to the nationalist agenda advocated by Xi Jinping after he came into power. Especially in recent years after the deterioration of US-China and China-foreign relations post the trade war, if the original policies continued, the Chinese Communist Party or its supporters would have considered it damaging to “national dignity.”
Zhao Lanjian, an independent commentator currently residing in the United States who has worked for many years in various media outlets in mainland China, expressed to Epoch Times that this change in policy by the Communist Party exhibits its weakness as a regime. It is akin to when, despite many people being in dire poverty and with 600 million individuals having a monthly income of only 1,000 RMB, the state exerted its national resources to chase after sporting accolades, a tangible sign of its weakness.
Zhao Lanjian stated that Chinese orphans who are internationally adopted thrive and grow positively, dimming the spotlight on the high-ranking officials of the Chinese Communist Party.
In 2021, Canadian Olympic athlete Maggie MacNeil won the gold medal in the 100m butterfly event at the Tokyo Olympics. She was born in Jiangxi, China but was abandoned by her birth parents, adopted by a Canadian couple, and nurtured with care. There are many similar examples of successful intercountry adoptions.
The adjustment of cross-border adoption policies has led to widespread attention and controversy both domestically and internationally.
(Previously Reported: Analysis: Why did the Chinese Communist Party stop sending children abroad for adoption?)
These viewpoints from experts, lawyers, and commentators shed light on the implications and reactions surrounding the Chinese government’s decision to cease international adoptions.