[Forgotten Children]⑨"Overseas Adoption Is Not Child Welfare"

Interview with Kwon Heejung, Director of the Single Mothers Archiving and Rights Advocacy Institute

"Overseas Adoption Requires Immediate, Not Gradual, Halt"

"Adoption Itself Is Family Dissolution... A Backward Nation in Child Rights"

Access to Birth Records... "Information Disclosure Should Be the Principle"

"Although the government is aiming for 'zero overseas adoptions' by 2029, as long as the relevant policies and legal protections remain in place, overseas adoptions will continue."

Kwon Heejung, Director of the Single Mothers Archiving and Rights Advocacy Institute, expressed regret over the prevailing social perception that continues to see overseas adoption as a form of child welfare. She strongly refuted the logic that 'family' is more important than 'nationality.' According to her, adoption is a separation from the birth family and an act that causes children to lose their identity and roots.

We met with her on March 23 in Seoul, where she has long advocated for the protection of the rights of overseas adoptees and the end of overseas adoption. She called for an immediate halt to overseas adoptions, not a phased reduction. She argued that even though the current government is pursuing zero overseas adoptions by 2029, as long as related policies and legal grounds remain in effect, overseas adoptions will persist.

She also criticized the Korean government's complacent response. She identified the 'profit structure' of overseas adoption as the reason why it has been left unaddressed for decades. In the past, overseas adoption was considered a beneficial policy as it secured foreign currency and reduced the national budget required for the care of children in need. Kwon sees that the intergovernmental overseas adoption cooperation system, which was based on this profit structure, still remains.

Kwon has served as the inaugural secretary-general of the Korean Unwed Mothers Support Network since 2008. Since 2024, she has led the Single Mothers Archiving and Rights Advocacy Institute, working to advance human rights for unwed mothers and to sever the practice of adoption. She believes that ending overseas adoption begins with providing practical support for pregnant women in various crisis situations. The following is a Q&A with Director Kwon.

Kwon Heejung, Director of the Single Mothers Archiving and Advocacy Research Institute, in an interview with The Asia Business Daily. Photo by The Asia Business Daily

-Why has overseas adoption persisted?

▲There has always been higher demand than supply for overseas adoption, and the Korean government has actively responded to the adoption demand of receiving countries rather than prioritizing child welfare. The profit structure was also problematic. In 1972, the overseas adoption fee was as high as 600 dollars. Considering that Korea's per capita Gross National Product (GNP) at that time was 320 dollars, it was a significant amount. The intergovernmental cooperation system in place at that time still has an influence. Currently, the fee per overseas adoption is reportedly between 30,000 and 50,000 dollars. While European countries are halting or reducing overseas adoptions, there remains substantial demand, particularly from North American countries.

-Why were the deaths or annulments of adoptees not properly recorded? How was this possible?

▲This was because the government maintained a management method that relied on post-reporting by agencies. The profit-generating structure that benefited both the government and adoption agencies may have rendered government oversight of private adoption agencies ineffective, which could be related to omissions in statistics. Above all, since the operation and finances of adoption agencies are linked to the scale of adoptions, it is possible that negative cases were not reported.

-Last year, Korea sent 24 children overseas.

▲This is because the United States continues to accept many overseas adoptees. In 2022 alone, the United States adopted 1,500 children from abroad. There is also a certain connection to the culture of some evangelical Christian groups in the U.S. that view adoption as a form of missionary work.

The number of children in need of protection domestically has also increased. During the process of supporting pregnant women facing economic, psychological, or physical difficulties, 107 children had their parental rights relinquished. It appears that some of these children were designated for overseas adoption. The public perception that overseas adoption offers a better environment than domestic adoption is also problematic. A change in the way society views adoption is necessary.

-Why have European countries halted overseas adoptions?

▲Overseas adoptees in various European countries raised concerns about discrepancies between birth records and adoption documents, as well as allegations of child abduction or forced separation. The Netherlands formed its own investigative committee and confirmed, in cases involving Korea, Brazil, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and others, issues such as document falsification, lack of parental consent, and errors in identity records in past overseas adoptions. The Netherlands completely halted overseas adoptions in 2021, and changes have also occurred in Denmark, Norway, and Switzerland.

-Isn't it more important for a child in crisis to have a family rather than a nationality?

▲This is a dangerous logic that justifies family dissolution. If 'family' is important for a child, we must ask whether the state and society support birth families so they can protect their children. If policy interventions and emotional support systems are not strengthened, and children are simply separated from their families in an attempt to solve the problem, the country will remain backward in both welfare and child rights.

-There is a growing demand for adoptees' right to know their origins.

▲In the United Kingdom, Australia, and some states in the United States, adult adoptees can access their birth records through certain procedures without the consent of their birth parents. This reflects a growing recognition that when the rights of adults and children come into conflict, greater weight should be given to the rights of the child. In the UK, the 1975 Children Act recognized the right of adult adoptees who turn 18 to access their birth information.

-But there are also demands to protect the privacy of birth parents.

▲Separation from the birth family is not the child's responsibility. In the UK, there is a system that allows birth parents to register if they do not wish to be contacted by their adopted children. Likewise, adopted children can register if they do not wish to be contacted by their birth parents. In Korea, information disclosure should be the general principle, but detailed measures should be established based on a balance of interests.

-Is revitalizing domestic adoption a viable alternative?

▲Domestic adoption is not an alternative to overseas adoption. Adoption is a secondary measure that can be chosen only when all possible support has been provided to the birth family and raising the child is still impossible. Expressions such as 'revitalizing domestic adoption' or 'promoting adoption' are inappropriate, considering the rights violations experienced by birth families who lose their children and by children separated from their birth families. If domestic adoption is truly necessary, it is important to ask how it can be conducted in a more ethical way that respects the rights of both birth families and children.

-Can open adoption be a solution?

▲To preserve the positive aspects of adoption, there must be a full transition to open adoption. In Western countries, most contemporary adoptions are open, allowing for ongoing contact with birth parents. In Korea, the current system of secret adoptions, where the child is deprioritized, will inevitably continue to produce victims. The social reluctance toward openness should be addressed through education. Open adoption also reduces conflicts during the child's development.

-Children of unwed mothers are being adopted domestically and internationally.

▲It cannot be simply attributed to unwed mothers; rather, policies should address what support is needed for pregnant women in various crisis situations, including unwed mothers. Regardless of whether a mother chooses to raise her child or opt for protected birth, a universal and comprehensive support system that guarantees equal support for all choices must be established first.

-The Truth and Reconciliation Commission is currently investigating the history of overseas adoption.

▲Although the activities of the second Truth and Reconciliation Commission recognized the state's failure in management and oversight, this has not led to an official apology, institutional measures for redress, or actual compensation. In clarifying the facts of the harm done, we need to move away from an excessively evidence-centered approach. Overseas adoption should not be treated as a private harm that the individual must prove, but rather as a historical and collective event resulting from state mismanagement and policy failures.

Kwon Hee-jung, Director of the Unwed Mothers Archiving and Advocacy Research Institute, being interviewed by The Asia Business Daily. Photo by The Asia Business Daily

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.