“I am now officially non-existent” The impact of the discovery of illegal adoptions on the lives of adoptees in the Netherlands MSc Victimology and Criminal Justice Bente van Ruremonde ANR: 624744 First supervisor: prof. Conny Rijken Second supervisor: mr. Rachel Dijkstra Word count: 16.484 Acknowledgements I want to express my appreciation to all participants in this research for frankly sharing their moving and extraordinary life stories: Lauren, Sanne, Amanda, Fernando, Nova-Lilly and Shirona,1 you all have my most sincere gratitude. I would also like to thank my peer feedback group for their assistance and support throughout this research period. Finally, I would like to thank my supervisor, professor Conny Rijken, for her support in the past half year, for believing in this project and for her guidance and close involvement in this research. 1 To ensure their anonymity and security, some names in this document have been changed, except where explicit consent for using real names has been given. 2 Table of contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4 §1.1 General introduction ..................................................................................................... 4 §1.2 The history of intercountry adoption in the Netherlands ............................................... 7 §1.3 Identity formation and belonging in the context of adoption ......................................... 9 Chapter 2. Theoretical framework ...................................................................................... 12 §2.1 The legal basis of ICA ................................................................................................ 12 §2.1.1 The best interest of the child? .............................................................................. 12 §2.1.2 The principle of subsidiarity ................................................................................. 13 §2.1.3 The informed consent of birth parents ................................................................. 14 §2.1.4 The prohibition of unjustified financial gain .......................................................... 16 §2.2 The right to identity ..................................................................................................... 17 §2.2.1 Child Laundering .................................................................................................. 18 §2.2.2 Identity formation, belonging and narrative .......................................................... 19 Chapter 3. Methodology ...................................................................................................... 21 §3.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................... 21 §3.2 Ethical considerations ................................................................................................. 22 Chapter 4. Analysis .............................................................................................................. 23 §4.1 “It was all just an illusion” ............................................................................................ 23 §4.2 “Everything stayed the same and yet things completely changed” ............................ 26 §4.2.1 “It was a matter of supply and demand” ............................................................... 26 §4.2.2 Birth mothers ........................................................................................................ 27 §4.2.3 Adoptive parents and the adoptive identity .......................................................... 29 §4.3 The prospective impact of illegal adoption ................................................................. 30 §4.3.1 Narrative identity and belonging .......................................................................... 30 §4.3.2 Starting a family ................................................................................................... 33 §4.4 “In illegal adoption, everybody loses” ......................................................................... 34 §4.4.1 Experiences of victimhood ................................................................................... 34 §4.4.2 Agency ................................................................................................................. 35 Chapter 5. Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 37 §5.1 Main findings .............................................................................................................. 37 §5.2 Limitations and weaknesses ....................................................................................... 39 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 40 Jurisprudence and legislation ............................................................................................ 43 Appendices ........................................................................................................................... 44 Appendix A: statement of integrity ...................................................................................... 44 Appendix B: Code tree ....................................................................................................... 45 Appendix C: Ethical clearance ............................................................................................ 46 3 Chapter 1. Introduction §1.1 General introduction Ever since the 1980s, the topic of intercountry adoption (ICA) has been represented negatively in the Dutch national news. The first international criminal investigation on illegal intercountry adoption practices was conducted by the Dutch national police in 1981. The investigation concerned adoptions of Brazilian babies to the USA and several European countries and focused on state misappropriation (‘verduistering van staat’ (Dutch Criminal Code, Art. 236(1)). This investigation, better known as the Brazil Baby Affair, showed that the human right to identity was violated in many cases: ‘negotiators’ knowingly falsified birth registrations, thereby creating new, false identities and erasing babies’ original identities2 (Baglietto 2016, 86; Nuytinck 2019, 1). One of the Dutch victims of the Brazil Baby Affair took his case to court in 2017 on the grounds that important information about his adoption had been withheld from him for years. The court initially rejected his claims, but in 2018 he received monetary compensation for non-material damages.3 Brazil was not the only country that was called into question. In 1983, the current affairs program Tros Aktua showed that there were also serious concerns regarding adoptions from Sri Lanka. More recently, in 2017 and 2018, the Dutch investigative journalistic television program Zembla aired three in-depth broadcasts on fraud in intercountry adoptions. Around the same period, news articles on illegal adoption procedures in the Netherlands increasingly came to public attention. Headlines such as “Adopted children taken from their parents without permission” and “Adoption files full of errors and counterfeits” started to appear in national newspapers and illegal adoption became a topic of discussion in mainstream media. Zembla built a special file on adoption fraud, which contains articles and broadcasts on (victims of) adoption fraud from May 2017 up to December 2019. Eventually, these investigations led to the formation of an external governmental research committee. On 1 May 2019, the committee was appointed to investigate the role and responsibility of the Dutch government in the international adoption of children from Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia and Sri Lanka in the period 1967-1998.4 This specific timeframe was selected because in 1967, the first European Convention on the Adoption of Children5 was enacted and in 1998, the Hague Adoption Convention came into force, as a 2 See also the Noordoven case. Last accessed February 3, 2020 <www.brazilbabyaffair.org/cases/solved-cases/casepatrick/> 3 GHDHA 14 November 2018, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2018:3107 4 Kamerstukken II 2018/19, 31265, 66 5 Available at https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001 68006ff60 Last accessed February 3, 2020 4 result of which the Central Authority was established.6 The commission will publish its report by 1 October 2020 at the latest. Even though it has taken until now for an official governmental committee to be appointed, the Dutch government already got involved in investigations concerning intercountry adoptions a few years prior. In 2016, the Dutch Criminal Justice and Youth Protection Council7 called for a stop to intercountry adoptions after finding that money plays a major role in the international adoption system and that the demand for children actually creates the supply. The recommendations of the Council were not followed: the government acknowledged that the system of intercountry adoption should be improved, but did not support a complete termination of ICA. Many of the adoptees that were adopted internationally have now become adults and are in search of their origins, biological parents or extended family. Their searches sometimes lead to findings of illegal practices concerning their adoption processes (Baglietto 2016, 10). Are we actually aware of the damage illegal